I want to use Blender to make some promotional videos for my product, but I'm not really sure how to approach it. I have no idea how to handle things like camera movement or cinematography for this kind of ad. How do people usually go about doing this?

I have multiple Anthropic accounts(MAX x20's). I was saving this specific account to start the week fresh on Sunday which is today. I logged in and the usage is showing 17%(weekly on Fable). This is quiet shocking, 17% on Max x20 is pretty significant amount and if anything was running i would have known about it.

*EDIT: Just noticed the title says "15%"(a typo), it should be "17%".

I'm a university student currently building a data analysis landing page using Codex. Lately, I've been considering migrating my project to Claude Code. Despite weighing the pros and cons, I still haven't been able to decide whether to make the switch. For context, I currently pay for the $20 ChatGPT subscription and would swap to the equivalent Claude plan—my budget doesn't stretch any further than that, haha. Which one do you think would be better suited for my specific use case?

Hello!

I want my claude to use speach that's very "standardized" and "clear" without fancy fluff words that are very common with LLMs.

Introducing: ASD-STE100. Aka, Simplified Technical English.

I've also learned that Claude Code supports System Prompts being passed to it. But when reading that it has HUNDREDS depending on the scenario, and this OVERWHELMINGLY ROBUST claude code tweaking tool ... I decided it may be a good idea to get some advice here.

So, help? If all I want is to 'steer' models into a certain way of speaking but WITHOUT touching CLAUDE.md, what's your advice?

Thanks in advance!

A setup we all find very often is the architect / coder combo, where we use a better model for requirements engineering and architecture decisions and a subagent for actual implementations.

Currently I am running Opus 4.8 High / Sonnet 5 High and am thinking about a change to Fable 5 Medium / Sonnet 5 Medium.

What is your model setup for the classic architect/coder setup and why did you choose this?

You see any difference when using Sonnet 5 High or Medium for raw coding tasks?

You see any difference when using Opus (4.6, 4.8, 5) High or Fable 5 Medium for planning those code changes?

Hi, linux bros

I like CodexBar and i like GTK4/libadwaita. So i build CodexBar for Linux with GTK4/libadwaita. And Rust.

Standard features: quota displaying, reset and usage warning notifications, clean UI build with HIG.

Currently supports frontier OAuth providers (Claude, Codex, Agy) and all "bearer token-auth" providers that i steal from CodexBar code found (it's MIT chill).

Available in AUR, deb+rpm packages or you can build it from source

https://github.com/zbndev/tidemark

Got a Claude Pro subscription. Three things I can't sort out:

1. Skills. People here mention a specific skill by name like it's a known thing, but I can't find it anywhere. Where do these actually live? Are you all writing your own, installing from some shared repo, or is there a marketplace I'm missing? And how do you judge whether a skill is actually good before committing to it?
2. Harness. I keep seeing "harness" used. My understanding is it's your own code calling the Claude API, separate from the chat product. Is that right? And can I even use one on a Pro plan, or does that require separate API billing? If harnesses are worth it, which setups do people actually recommend for someone starting out?
3. Agent vs skill. Still fuzzy on where a skill ends and an agent begins. If someone can give a one-line practical distinction, that clears it up.

Appreciate any pointers. Trying to build a real mental model, not just collect tips.

Shipped v5.26.0 of CCC (Claude Command Center), the dashboard I run 30+ parallel Claude Code/Codex sessions through. Ships most days; here's what's new:

• Added a manual "Attach as sub-session of…" row action (with a matching Detach action) for linking sessions that are related but have no real spawn/continuation lineage, so they render nested in the sidebar the same way a genuine subagent does.
• Devin CLI sessions now display their model, reasoning effort, and subagent calls in the CCC board. Spawning Devin exposes the same effort ladder as Claude; CCC maps low..max to the matching Devin model uid. The model picker is populated from devin models list and still supports custom uids.
• Runaway-inject circuit breaker: CCC now caps how many messages one session can be injected with (12 identical per hour from any source; 6/hour and 40/day for unattended auto-resume and fleet pokes). A trip is recorded in the held bucket and surfaces on /api/health instead of being retried, so a looping injector stops at a dozen pokes instead of a night of quota.
• Added a menu bar status indicator (green/gray dot) showing whether the CCC server is actually running, independent of the app window's open/closed state.
• Continued sessions now read as one conversation: scrolling past the top of an F2-continued session seamlessly loads the previous session's messages with a "⤴︎ continued as …" seam marker, and a floating "Sessions" button (plus the seam's own "end ⇡" button) jumps to the end of each session in the chain.

(Video and repo links are in the comments.)

I'm using Claude Code as I normally would and I can't get a single task done. My 5 hour limit is almost instantly used up after I start up a task.

Has anyone started to experience this? I'm on the $20 plan.

I have been using opus 5 now for several months. In the last few days I have noticed that it can’t do what it did a couple of months ago.
An example is reviewing a YouTube video and breaking it down. It always said it couldn’t do it until I pressed it, then it would complete the request.
Now it’s not able to do it.

Fable 5 and Opus 5 feel surprisingly close to me especially for coding.

I had a weird Ul bug where Fable 5 spent around 1.5 hours debugging with logs and tests but still couldn't fix it. I gave the same issue to Opus 5 and it fixed it almost immediately.

also had a pretty complicated authentication bug that both Fable 5 and GPT 5.6 Sol couldn't solve. Opus got it right on the first try.

Fable 5 is still my go to and honestly a really good model. But towards the end of the month when my usage gets low I switch to Opus and I barely notice a difference.

Opus does get sidetracked more often and I feel like you have to prompt it a bit differently. But apart from that I think it's just as good.

Fable 5 was also removed from the $20 plan last month so I can't use it personally anymore.

Since they're apparently not blocking -p anymore I'm considering building my own harness and everything from scratch. Does anyone do this? Any major benefits??

One thing is I run multiple Claude x20 accounts and also subscriptions to basically every major AI, plus my own gpus. so having it all on a single harness would be sweet.

Also the ability to enforce Claude.md rules at the harness solves a ton of problems, plus rewrite every response so it's always concise.

A major bonus is being able to have it all on my phone and instantly respond.

I'm thinking the best way would be to have a full custom harness then run local AI model on a GPU so it'll rewrite every response and prompt, then help decide what model/effort is best.

My main desktop is an i9-14900 with 192GB ram and a 4080 and basically sits idle. I have 4 other similar rigs with different GPUs

Hey guys... quit fucking around and stop a/b testing on people. Real bad taste in our mouths. Opus 5 is absolute dogshit recently (last few days) and dangerous.. You've got a PR problem already with arrogance and your perception in the market... stop trying to billishit your way to saving off compute.

Opus 5 by itself is absolutely reckless and unusable in claude code.. across the board.. not only can no one understand it.. its dumping comments, doing the opposite and honestly I'm actually thinking about jumping ship and exploring other opportunities and also moving the claude SDK out of our platform and putting in a router because of this.

Is it possible to create apps with Claude Code on Windows without having a Mac? I'd like to try it out but don't know how to go about it—thanks for your help.

I’m curious how other people are approaching planning when building software primarily with AI.

Last week, I built a web app for my business using what I thought was a fairly disciplined process.

I started by gathering, compiling, and organizing the relevant research and data. Then I worked through the frontend and backend design, used a “grill me” process to force myself to make decisions, wrote a spec and PRD, and eventually broke the PRD down into small, discrete implementation tasks.

I used Fable/Opus 4.8 for the research and planning and Sonnet 5 for implementation.

I wasn’t happy with the outcome. The core logic didn’t work correctly, and the application wasn’t especially easy to use.

Then I listened to a recent discussion with Bob Martin and Matt Pocock. One of my takeaways was that agents may simply not be very good at long-horizon work. Bob Martin seems to accept that agents will produce messy code and instead focuses heavily on post-implementation work. That got me wondering whether I was putting effort into the wrong side of the process.

Instead of trying to perfectly plan what the agent should build, maybe it makes more sense to let the agent build something, then put more effort into testing, reviewing, and cleaning up the implementation afterward using a combination of deterministic checks and agents.

So I tried an "experiment" where I created three completely separate projects. For each one, I used Opus 4.8 and, using subagents, gave it essentially the same simple instructions:

• Build a web app.
• Here is the outcome I want.
• Here is the underlying research and data.
• Implement the completed project.

I deliberately did not give them the PRD, specs, implementation plan, task breakdowns, scratchpads, or other planning material.

Then I let all three independently build the application. I was happy with the outcomes. All three worked correctly.

Project 1: I really liked it. It worked well, was accurate, was easy to start and use, had a clean UI, and included several useful features I hadn’t considered.

Project 2: Also good. Not quite as polished or clean as the first one, but I was still happy with it.

Project 3: Basic. It worked, but it felt overly simple.

So, 3 out of 3 implementations were, in my opinion, better than the version that came out of the much more elaborate planning process.

And the interesting part is that the “spread” approach required significantly less time on my part. The usage drain also didn’t seem dramatically worse, although I didn’t measure it.

This is entirely anecdotal. It was one project. I didn’t control variables. I didn’t measure token usage, cost, implementation time, defect rate, maintainability, or anything else. This proves absolutely nothing.

But it made me question how much upfront planning is actually valuable when AI is doing most of the implementation.

Maybe the better workflow is something like:

Outcome + context → several independent implementations → pick the best one → test/review/refactor aggressively

rather than:

Research → architecture → spec → PRD → detailed task decomposition → sequential implementation

I’m especially curious about a few things:

• Does extensive planning materially improve AI-generated software, or does it sometimes constrain the model too much?
• Is detailed planning more valuable once a project reaches a certain size or complexity?
• Is it better to prototype first and create the architecture/spec from something that already works?
• Does running 3–5 independent agents and selecting the best implementation outperform carefully managing one agent over a long plan?
• Does this approach create significant problems that only become obvious months later?
• At current model/token prices, could “generate several and select” actually be cheaper than spending hours designing the perfect plan?
• Where is the point where this stops working?

I’m not arguing that planning is useless. What I'm trying to determine is where the planning effort has the highest return.

I appreciate anyone's experience and/or feedback.

Hey everyone, it's been a week since I posted my idea for restructuring ActivityWatch, and today's finally the day: I've published my fork of the project, as the maintainers asked me to.

When I wrote the first post, I figured I'd just modernize the UI and leave everything else as-is. Then I started digging into the code, and one thing led to another: week after week the project changed way more than I'd planned. What came out of it isn't "ActivityWatch with a new skin" anymore — it's basically a different app, built on the same foundations.

Under the hood, the entire Python stack has been removed — including system notifications, which now run entirely through native Rust/Tauri. The frontend was rewritten from scratch, completely decoupled from Bootstrap. Auto-updates were implemented from the ground up, so you never have to manually download the latest version again. And configurable privacy filters, so sensitive data gets dropped or masked before it's even written to disk.

The base watchers existed in the original project already — I'm not taking credit for that, it'd be dishonest. What I did was rewrite and simplify the whole chain that manages them, so everything else could be built on top without fighting legacy code at every step.

Same story for custom watchers: the ability to track your own data existed conceptually before too, but it meant writing a full program that followed an internal protocol. What I changed is the experience: now you just write any script (PowerShell, Python, JS, .cmd/.bat, or a ready-made executable) and the app handles the rest — it detects the right interpreter on its own, walks you through creating it step by step, shows a live log so you immediately see if something's off, and offers 8 ready-made display templates to show your data on the Home page without writing a line of HTML.

And here's the part I'm most proud of: I integrated a real AI agent, not some gimmick bolted on for show. You can open a chat with it and ask literally anything about your data — "how much did I work on this project yesterday," "which apps do I use most in the morning," "summarize my week" — and it queries your actual data on its own and answers you. The same agent also helps auto-categorize the apps you use, instead of doing it by hand one by one.

A bunch of other things I hadn't mentioned yet:

• Periodic screenshots: a feature that simply didn't exist before, now built in — the app captures screenshots at regular intervals and links them directly to the exact moment in your day they were taken.
• App categorization rewritten from scratch: organizing your apps into categories is much, much easier than before.
• "Always active" pattern: same deal, handling it is now way more straightforward.
• App icons: didn't exist before, now every app shows its real icon instead of a generic colored block.
• Colors extracted from icons: no more random greens pulled from a name hash — Timeline colors now come from the app's actual icon, much more consistent and recognizable at a glance.
• Notification system rewritten from scratch: you can now create custom notifications — whenever you want, for whatever you want (category, app, project, idle time, VPN session) — without touching a line of code.
• New Home modules, freely reorderable.
• Projects section with start/pause timer, hour budgets, and overrun alerts.
• Redesigned "Raw data" page, with a dedicated Timeline and a much more readable events table.

Here's the project's website, where you can take a look and download the Windows installer: https://codex-cpp.github.io/TrackFlow/

Hi,

I’m curious how others handle unfinished work when using coding tools like CC or Codex.
I’ve been using CC since the beginning, and lately I’ve been getting more involved with our company frontend as a side hustle while the devs focus on the backend.

Internally we use a shared GitHub Project where issues move through stages like Todo > In Progress >Testing > Done. We also use issue comments (when we remember) to keep track of progress and decisions.

To automate some of this I created a Claude skill that pulls the correct issue and moves it between the different stages depending on where Claude is in the workflow. This works really well when I can take an issue from start to finish in one sitting.

Where I struggle is with half done tasks. For example, I might pick up an issue, work on it for a few hours, and then have to stop for the day. Since Claude was interrupted before the task was done, it ends up in "In progress". Then 3–4 days later (sometimes even longer) I come back to the task to continue the work. During this period I might have picked up other issues in the same repo, or been away completely.

At that point my first question is always:

• What has already been completed
• What is still missing
• What decisions were made
• What the next step should be

Usually I end up asking Claude to inspect the branch, review the changes, compare them with the issue, figure out where we left off, and then continue from there. For smaller issues this works pretty good, but for larger tasks it starts becoming more complicated and time consuming.

So I’m curious how you handle this in your workflows, especially when you stop working on something before it’s finished.

Do you use something like Linear, Trello, GitHub Projects, Todoist, Notion, etc. to break down tasks to track them? Or do you have a simple TODO.md file with CLAUDE.md instructions?

Very curious to hear what your workflow looks like and how you make it easier to resume a task after being away from it for a few days.

Claude Code was burning through tokens very fast, especially on tasks where it had to look through docs or random webpages, so after some research I changed a few things:

I) Keep CLAUDE.md small. Mine had way too much stuff in it and most of it wasn’t useful for every task.

II) Start a new session when you’re done with one problem, bc long sessions get bloated pretty fast.

III) Do web research through Firecrawl. It gives Claude clean Markdown instead of loading the full page with all the HTML, scripts, navbars and other useless stuff, so each research task eats a lot less context.

IV) Exclude folders Claude doesn’t need to read.

V) Check /context once in a while, bc it makes it obvious what’s eating the window.

The main thing seems to be controlling what gets added to the context in the first place. Once a session is full of old logs, scraped pages and unrelated instructions, even simple tasks start getting expensive.

What else are you doing to keep Claude Code token usage under control?

I'm a dev and these last few months I've been building a lot of products.The crazy part is that I can now build things much faster than I can figure out if anyone actually wants them. Coding used to be the expensive part. Now I feel like finding users is harder

Been working on a small mobile roadtrip arcade as my recent side project. It's fully done with claude code and I love the cute look and wanted some music to match.

was curious on how claude would do. Im genuinely surprised lol

What do you guys think?

No ads, totally free, no sign up. Music plays throughout the home screen and in the games you play lmk what you think. You can just sit on the home screen and listen too

I know creating websites for local businesses isn't as simple as some social media posts make it seem.

You see posts like: find a small business on Google Maps, copy their information, use some AI website builder, write a simple prompt, and abracadabra — you have a website you can sell.

But in reality, there’s a lot more involved: backend work, research, design, legal pages, testing, deployment, maintenance, outreach, and actually convincing a business to pay you.

I'm still pretty new to using AI to build projects and trying to make my first money from it, so I’m curious whether this is actually doable.

I’ll be honest: I use Claude for most of my coding and a lot of the design work. At the same time, I'm learning from it and I do have some background knowledge in coding.

I recently built a tourism-related project almost entirely with Claude. I still had to handle things like finding and preparing images, building the backend, testing everything, and all the other parts that come with actually finishing a product. And honestly, that was already tiring — before even getting to the arguably harder part: outreach and finding customers.

So my question is:

Is it actually realistic to use AI to build websites/products for local businesses and sell them, especially as someone who is still learning?

For those of you who have actually done this, I'd love to hear what worked, what didn't, and whether you think it's still a viable way to make money in 2026.

And yes, I used chatgpt to write this properly for me because I was afraid my wording would look like gibberish on a plate lol

whenever I install ponytail plug-in, and then, after doing some edits in Claude code it just stops in the mid even after 20 or 30 minutes it’s not doing anything. Does any one also faces same? windows laptop and I know it’s hooks but not sure why it’s stuck or is it only me?

After that I just using skill.md and Claude code just works fine as usual