Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

Возникла проблема при загрузке этого видео. Это может быть связано с временными проблемами сети или видео может быть недоступно.

На главную

34,547 ELEMENTS. 34 WARNINGS. 7 DUPLICATE ELEMENTS REVIT'S OWN SCHEDULE NEVER CAUGHT. One prompt, one live Revit model, one Claude session through the MCP connection. No plugins, no exported schedules to reformat by hand. Claude walked the model tree: rooms, families, sheets, every open warning, cross-checked counts against each... other, and came back with a full audit. Top flag: three fire-rated doors modeled without a fire rating parameter. The rest ranked below it, from code-adjacent to cosmetic. Still the read-only side of Revit's official MCP server, the part Autodesk shipped first, on purpose. Write access is on their own roadmap, through a separate server built specifically for it. Nothing here moved a single element. The model just got properly looked at, faster than a manual QA pass usually runs.show more

Solvaix

1,028 subscribers

27,861 просмотров • 5 дней назад •via X (Twitter)

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

Комментарии: 0

Нет доступных комментариев

Здесь появятся комментарии из оригинального поста

Похожие видео

19-year-old from china makes $9,000/month designing product sites and ships each one in an afternoon. here's his exact setup the whole thing runs on two tools that each do one job: > brief written by hand: 5 min > Moonchild builds the design system, then every screen from it: 20 min > MCP hands the design to Claude as real structure, not a screenshot: instant > Claude Code reads those exact tokens and builds the live app: 20 min > second Claude session reviews the build for drift: 10 min total: about an hour. screen five still matches screen one. no agency, no dev, no design team the trick is MCP. the design tool passes Claude the actual colors, components and layout, so it builds from the source instead of guessing from a picture. full pipeline, every prompt, in the article above.

19-year-old from china makes $9,000/month designing product sites and ships each one in an afternoon. here's his exact setup the whole thing runs on two tools that each do one job: > brief written by hand: 5 min > Moonchild builds the design system, then every screen from it: 20 min > MCP hands the design to Claude as real structure, not a screenshot: instant > Claude Code reads those exact tokens and builds the live app: 20 min > second Claude session reviews the build for drift: 10 min total: about an hour. screen five still matches screen one. no agency, no dev, no design team the trick is MCP. the design tool passes Claude the actual colors, components and layout, so it builds from the source instead of guessing from a picture. full pipeline, every prompt, in the article above.

Ridark

19,477 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

HE DESCRIBED A SITE TO CLAUDE CODE AND WALKED AWAY FOR 8 MINUTES What came back looked like a studio spent weeks on it. The setup that made it work: > Two design skills installed - Claude stops using safe boring defaults. > Visual references instead of text descriptions. > One detailed prompt with the concept, Claude asks clarifying questions before building. First version already solid -> review pass, one batch of fixes, done. What used to take a designer and a developer and several weeks of handoffs now takes a single session and no coding experience. Full walkthrough in the article below ↓

HE DESCRIBED A SITE TO CLAUDE CODE AND WALKED AWAY FOR 8 MINUTES What came back looked like a studio spent weeks on it. The setup that made it work: > Two design skills installed - Claude stops using safe boring defaults. > Visual references instead of text descriptions. > One detailed prompt with the concept, Claude asks clarifying questions before building. First version already solid -> review pass, one batch of fixes, done. What used to take a designer and a developer and several weeks of handoffs now takes a single session and no coding experience. Full walkthrough in the article below ↓

slash1s

52,870 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

THREE 3090s ON ONE BOARD GIVE YOU 72GB OF VRAM AND KILL YOUR $200 CLAUDE CODE AND $200 OPENAI BILL people are pulling three used 3090s off ebay for around $2,100 total and stacking them in one tower to build a dedicated ai rig. that pools 72gb of vram for less than what a single rtx 5090 retails for alibaba shipped qwen 3.6 27b in april under apache 2.0. on realworldqa vision it scores 84.1 against claude 4.5 opus at 77.0. on ifbench instructions it lands at 76.5 against claude's 58.0 a single 3090 already runs qwen 3.6 27b with eight gigs of headroom. three of them in parallel handle larger models like deepseek r1 70b and qwen 235b without breaking a sweat a heavy ai user pays $200 claude code, $200 chatgpt pro plus $40 cursor and gemini. that's $5,280 a year and the rig pays itself off before month nine on $8 a month in electricity setup is one shell command for ollama, one to pull the model, one environment variable to point claude code at localhost. cli stays identical, nothing leaves the network, requests stop costing money bookmark this and read the article below

THREE 3090s ON ONE BOARD GIVE YOU 72GB OF VRAM AND KILL YOUR $200 CLAUDE CODE AND $200 OPENAI BILL people are pulling three used 3090s off ebay for around $2,100 total and stacking them in one tower to build a dedicated ai rig. that pools 72gb of vram for less than what a single rtx 5090 retails for alibaba shipped qwen 3.6 27b in april under apache 2.0. on realworldqa vision it scores 84.1 against claude 4.5 opus at 77.0. on ifbench instructions it lands at 76.5 against claude's 58.0 a single 3090 already runs qwen 3.6 27b with eight gigs of headroom. three of them in parallel handle larger models like deepseek r1 70b and qwen 235b without breaking a sweat a heavy ai user pays $200 claude code, $200 chatgpt pro plus $40 cursor and gemini. that's $5,280 a year and the rig pays itself off before month nine on $8 a month in electricity setup is one shell command for ollama, one to pull the model, one environment variable to point claude code at localhost. cli stays identical, nothing leaves the network, requests stop costing money bookmark this and read the article below

starmex

16,719 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

SOMEONE TURNED 33 PILES OF DEAD BOOKMARKS INTO A GRAVITY MAP CLAUDE REBUILDS ITSELF EVERY NIGHT - AND IT RUNS ON THE 80% OF CLAUDE NOBODY TOUCHES most people drive Claude Code like a chatbot with file access - type a prompt, watch it edit, move on. that's maybe 20% of the tool this is the opposite. she's not typing at Claude. she's running it - loops on a mac mini overnight, claude linking every node while she sleeps the gravity map in the video is just the 80% maxed out: 1 system that organizes itself, not a human babysitting a chat box the other 80% is a steering layer Anthropic shipped quietly on june 18 - 7 ways to instruct the model, and a stack of commands almost nobody opens /context to see your bloat. /clear between tasks. path-scoped rules, subagents, hooks - conventions that load themselves the exact second they matter i stopped typing at Claude months ago - now i configure it once and it shows up already running the work, 10x cleaner a prompt helps for 1 message. the steering layer pays you back every session, for life the people who learn it stop being users and become operators - everyone else is still arguing about which model is smartest the article below is the full map - all 4 layers, every file and command, start to finish

SOMEONE TURNED 33 PILES OF DEAD BOOKMARKS INTO A GRAVITY MAP CLAUDE REBUILDS ITSELF EVERY NIGHT - AND IT RUNS ON THE 80% OF CLAUDE NOBODY TOUCHES most people drive Claude Code like a chatbot with file access - type a prompt, watch it edit, move on. that's maybe 20% of the tool this is the opposite. she's not typing at Claude. she's running it - loops on a mac mini overnight, claude linking every node while she sleeps the gravity map in the video is just the 80% maxed out: 1 system that organizes itself, not a human babysitting a chat box the other 80% is a steering layer Anthropic shipped quietly on june 18 - 7 ways to instruct the model, and a stack of commands almost nobody opens /context to see your bloat. /clear between tasks. path-scoped rules, subagents, hooks - conventions that load themselves the exact second they matter i stopped typing at Claude months ago - now i configure it once and it shows up already running the work, 10x cleaner a prompt helps for 1 message. the steering layer pays you back every session, for life the people who learn it stop being users and become operators - everyone else is still arguing about which model is smartest the article below is the full map - all 4 layers, every file and command, start to finish

KingWilliam

12,305 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

this is f**king dangerous someone figured out how to make Opus 4.8 run on Fable 5's brain with one prompt access to the best model is never guaranteed. It disappeared once already this year. but you can use it forever. here's how: 1. ask Fable 5: "write the operating manual your replacement will run on" (procedures, failure modes, a 5-question self-test) 2. save the output as one .md file and drop it into a new Claude Project as the project instructions 3. switch to Opus 4.8 and now your everyday model runs off the smart one's method, no top-tier price save and bookmark this no matter what full extraction prompt is in the article below: ↓

this is f**king dangerous someone figured out how to make Opus 4.8 run on Fable 5's brain with one prompt access to the best model is never guaranteed. It disappeared once already this year. but you can use it forever. here's how: 1. ask Fable 5: "write the operating manual your replacement will run on" (procedures, failure modes, a 5-question self-test) 2. save the output as one .md file and drop it into a new Claude Project as the project instructions 3. switch to Opus 4.8 and now your everyday model runs off the smart one's method, no top-tier price save and bookmark this no matter what full extraction prompt is in the article below: ↓

Hamza Khalid

32,300 просмотров • 28 дней назад

A WEB STUDIO CHARGES $35,000 FOR AN ANIMATED SITE. THE SAME BUILD NOW COSTS $12 - CLAUDE CODE WRITES, HIGGSFIELD RENDERS. Every agency billing $100-149/hr is just three departments. Here's each one, collapsed into a single agentic session. SYSTEM 1 - THE MOTION STUDIO (Higgsfield) Cinematic clips pulled from 30+ generative models - hero shots, transitions, ambient loops. → This used to be a motion artist on retainer. Now it's a prompt. SYSTEM 2 - THE DEV TEAM (Claude Code) Scaffolds the site, writes the GSAP ScrollTrigger timelines and Lenis smooth-scroll, extracts frames, optimizes every asset. → A full scroll-driven build with zero hand-coded keyframes. SYSTEM 3 - THE DESIGN DEPT (baked-in cinematic layer) Six effects with no config: film grain, particles, vignette, glass cards, color tints, scroll pacing. → The polish that justified the invoice - now it ships by default. Three departments. One operator. One pass. What used to take a designer, a motion artist, and a developer through weeks of handoffs now runs in a single session - for a Claude subscription and a few dollars of Higgsfield credits. The studio was never the talent. It was the overhead. And the overhead just became three systems. Reply "web-site" to this post and I will send you the step-by-step Playbook 👇

A WEB STUDIO CHARGES $35,000 FOR AN ANIMATED SITE. THE SAME BUILD NOW COSTS $12 - CLAUDE CODE WRITES, HIGGSFIELD RENDERS. Every agency billing $100-149/hr is just three departments. Here's each one, collapsed into a single agentic session. SYSTEM 1 - THE MOTION STUDIO (Higgsfield) Cinematic clips pulled from 30+ generative models - hero shots, transitions, ambient loops. → This used to be a motion artist on retainer. Now it's a prompt. SYSTEM 2 - THE DEV TEAM (Claude Code) Scaffolds the site, writes the GSAP ScrollTrigger timelines and Lenis smooth-scroll, extracts frames, optimizes every asset. → A full scroll-driven build with zero hand-coded keyframes. SYSTEM 3 - THE DESIGN DEPT (baked-in cinematic layer) Six effects with no config: film grain, particles, vignette, glass cards, color tints, scroll pacing. → The polish that justified the invoice - now it ships by default. Three departments. One operator. One pass. What used to take a designer, a motion artist, and a developer through weeks of handoffs now runs in a single session - for a Claude subscription and a few dollars of Higgsfield credits. The studio was never the talent. It was the overhead. And the overhead just became three systems. Reply "web-site" to this post and I will send you the step-by-step Playbook 👇

ZEUS⚡️

173,324 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

Claude Code Desktop now opens a new window for each session This makes it much easier to visualize multiple Claude Code agents running in parallel My current stack depends on the task: - Ghostty: when starting a project. Bash commands, git, env variables, provider connections. All manual through the terminal with a Claude panel running alongside. - Claude Code Desktop: once everything is configured. GitHub connected, CLAUDE.md, Skills, subagents and Hooks ready. Claude Code runs on its own, no more terminal setup, just panels running and outputs to review. - VSCode: when I need to review code by hand. I use it less and less, but there are moments where I have to confirm Claude got it right. I usually open the Claude extension inside VSCode, but it lacks most of the CLI features so it's limited Solid update. Worth trying once your workflows are already set up 👇

Claude Code Desktop now opens a new window for each session This makes it much easier to visualize multiple Claude Code agents running in parallel My current stack depends on the task: - Ghostty: when starting a project. Bash commands, git, env variables, provider connections. All manual through the terminal with a Claude panel running alongside. - Claude Code Desktop: once everything is configured. GitHub connected, CLAUDE.md, Skills, subagents and Hooks ready. Claude Code runs on its own, no more terminal setup, just panels running and outputs to review. - VSCode: when I need to review code by hand. I use it less and less, but there are moments where I have to confirm Claude got it right. I usually open the Claude extension inside VSCode, but it lacks most of the CLI features so it's limited Solid update. Worth trying once your workflows are already set up 👇

Daniel San

38,726 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

FABLE 5 + HIGGSFIELD TURN A $35,000 ANIMATED SITE INTO A ONE-SESSION, $12 BUILD. HERE'S EXACTLY HOW. a studio runs this across four people and three weeks. you run it across one chat window and one afternoon. THE BUILD, STAGE BY STAGE: STAGE 1 - THE CONCEPT Claude reads your brief and scripts the scroll before a line of code exists - what the visitor feels at second 3, 15, 40. prompt: "read this brief. script the scroll beat by beat, then scaffold the project with GSAP ScrollTrigger + Lenis." STAGE 2 - THE VISUALS (Higgsfield) every hero shot, transition, and ambient loop comes out of 30+ generative models - matched to the story, not pulled from a stock library. prompt: "generate the hero sting and one b-roll clip per section. 3-5s, high-res, cinematic." STAGE 3 - THE MOTION (Claude Code) Claude writes the ScrollTrigger timelines and Lenis smooth-scroll, extracts frames, optimizes every asset. zero hand-coded keyframes. prompt: "wire the scroll: pin the hero, scrub the video, reveal each section on scroll. keep it 60fps on mobile." STAGE 4 - THE POLISH six cinematic effects baked in, no config: film grain, particles, vignette, glass cards, color tints, scroll pacing. prompt: "bake in the cinematic layer, then QA load speed, mobile breakpoints, and whether the scroll actually lands - rewrite what doesn't." CONNECT HIGGSFIELD (MCP): add it as a custom connector in Claude Code: mcp_servers: higgsfield: url: " one OAuth flow. Claude generates and pulls clips directly - no exporting by hand. THE MATH: → what a studio charges: $6,000-$35,000+ → what it costs you: a Claude sub + a few dollars of Higgsfield credits → what it takes: 4 people + 3 weeks → 1 operator + 1 session the pipeline was the moat. it just became four prompts. Follow me, comment "MATH" and I'll send you the full step-by-step Playbook. full breakdown in the article 👇

FABLE 5 + HIGGSFIELD TURN A $35,000 ANIMATED SITE INTO A ONE-SESSION, $12 BUILD. HERE'S EXACTLY HOW. a studio runs this across four people and three weeks. you run it across one chat window and one afternoon. THE BUILD, STAGE BY STAGE: STAGE 1 - THE CONCEPT Claude reads your brief and scripts the scroll before a line of code exists - what the visitor feels at second 3, 15, 40. prompt: "read this brief. script the scroll beat by beat, then scaffold the project with GSAP ScrollTrigger + Lenis." STAGE 2 - THE VISUALS (Higgsfield) every hero shot, transition, and ambient loop comes out of 30+ generative models - matched to the story, not pulled from a stock library. prompt: "generate the hero sting and one b-roll clip per section. 3-5s, high-res, cinematic." STAGE 3 - THE MOTION (Claude Code) Claude writes the ScrollTrigger timelines and Lenis smooth-scroll, extracts frames, optimizes every asset. zero hand-coded keyframes. prompt: "wire the scroll: pin the hero, scrub the video, reveal each section on scroll. keep it 60fps on mobile." STAGE 4 - THE POLISH six cinematic effects baked in, no config: film grain, particles, vignette, glass cards, color tints, scroll pacing. prompt: "bake in the cinematic layer, then QA load speed, mobile breakpoints, and whether the scroll actually lands - rewrite what doesn't." CONNECT HIGGSFIELD (MCP): add it as a custom connector in Claude Code: mcp_servers: higgsfield: url: " one OAuth flow. Claude generates and pulls clips directly - no exporting by hand. THE MATH: → what a studio charges: $6,000-$35,000+ → what it costs you: a Claude sub + a few dollars of Higgsfield credits → what it takes: 4 people + 3 weeks → 1 operator + 1 session the pipeline was the moat. it just became four prompts. Follow me, comment "MATH" and I'll send you the full step-by-step Playbook. full breakdown in the article 👇

ZEUS⚡️

47,041 просмотров • 22 дней назад

here's how the whole thing works. claude code doesn't care what's behind the API. it just sends requests and expects responses. so i pointed it at my own machine instead of anthropic's servers. llama-server runs the model locally. LiteLLM sits in between and translates the API format. claude code thinks it's talking to claude. it's talking to qwen on localhost. the setup: 2x 3090s, 38 layers on GPU, 10 on CPU. 128K context window. generation is only 7 tok/s but the tradeoff is worth it. 128K means the agent can hold an entire project in memory without losing context midtask. claude code alone loads a 17.5K token system prompt on every request. tool definitions, safety rules, agent behavior. that's your baseline before you even say hello. pushed as far as i could tonight. what surprised me most wasn't the speed. it was the iteration quality. first prompt gave me a working particle sim. second prompt, the model read its own 564 lines, understood the architecture, and added trails, explosions, gravity wells, bloom effects. no handholding. 4bit quantized. 45GB on two consumer cards. running a full coding agent autonomously. detailed article coming. full benchmarks, hardware breakdowns, engine debugging, code quality. everything from setup to what broke and why.

here's how the whole thing works. claude code doesn't care what's behind the API. it just sends requests and expects responses. so i pointed it at my own machine instead of anthropic's servers. llama-server runs the model locally. LiteLLM sits in between and translates the API format. claude code thinks it's talking to claude. it's talking to qwen on localhost. the setup: 2x 3090s, 38 layers on GPU, 10 on CPU. 128K context window. generation is only 7 tok/s but the tradeoff is worth it. 128K means the agent can hold an entire project in memory without losing context midtask. claude code alone loads a 17.5K token system prompt on every request. tool definitions, safety rules, agent behavior. that's your baseline before you even say hello. pushed as far as i could tonight. what surprised me most wasn't the speed. it was the iteration quality. first prompt gave me a working particle sim. second prompt, the model read its own 564 lines, understood the architecture, and added trails, explosions, gravity wells, bloom effects. no handholding. 4bit quantized. 45GB on two consumer cards. running a full coding agent autonomously. detailed article coming. full benchmarks, hardware breakdowns, engine debugging, code quality. everything from setup to what broke and why.

Sudo su

37,623 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

You don't understand... Higgsfield MCP + Claude just automated AI film making. Every single step you used to grind through to make an AI movie, you can now do 10x faster. Drop the script into Claude Opus 4.8 and say: "Here's my script. Break it into a full shotlist. Shot number, scene, shot type, camera move and the action in each frame." Now the whole film is mapped, shot by shot. - Pull your assets. Ask Claude: "From this shotlist, list every character, every location and every prop across the whole film." That's your build list. The stuff you would need to generate and give as references in next steps. - Build the character sheets. Higgsfield MCP is connected, so Claude has hands now to do stuff directly. It generates the images itself. Have the full body, back view and close up in the character sheet. One per character. Each sheet becomes the locked reference for that face. Same move for locations, generate the empty plate for each one before anyone steps into it. - Generate the frames. Feed Claude the references plus the shot and have it write and fire the Seedance 2.0 prompt. "Using the lead's character sheet and the alley plate, generate shot 4 in Seedance 2.0. Low angle, slow push-in, rain." Claude builds the prompt, calls Seedance 2.0 and the frame lands back in chat. Use a Seedance 2.0 skill to teach Claude how to prompt it properly. Now, there are 3 ways to make the shots. Pick one per scene. - Pure prompting. Fastest one. You describe the action in words and let Seedance interpret it. For consistency across a sequence, feed it a frame from the previous shot so the look carries. - Storyboarding. You hand it a panel and it matches that composition exactly. Way more control over how the shot is framed. The tradeoff is that it can introduce more cuts than you actually want. - Path Control System This is the latest technique Seedance 2.0 technique. Generate a still base plate of the scene. Draw a red line across it to mark the exact path of the movement, then describe what's happening. Seedance follows that line for the action. Also ask Claude to remove the red line when animating. This is the one for anything where motion has to land precisely. The output reads like real live action. - Lastly, generate every clip you need, then cut them together. Get it to Capcut for editing and audio design. And that's it. The pipeline that used to need a full crew and a studio can now run from one Claude chat. 2026 is gonna be wild

You don't understand... Higgsfield MCP + Claude just automated AI film making. Every single step you used to grind through to make an AI movie, you can now do 10x faster. Drop the script into Claude Opus 4.8 and say: "Here's my script. Break it into a full shotlist. Shot number, scene, shot type, camera move and the action in each frame." Now the whole film is mapped, shot by shot. - Pull your assets. Ask Claude: "From this shotlist, list every character, every location and every prop across the whole film." That's your build list. The stuff you would need to generate and give as references in next steps. - Build the character sheets. Higgsfield MCP is connected, so Claude has hands now to do stuff directly. It generates the images itself. Have the full body, back view and close up in the character sheet. One per character. Each sheet becomes the locked reference for that face. Same move for locations, generate the empty plate for each one before anyone steps into it. - Generate the frames. Feed Claude the references plus the shot and have it write and fire the Seedance 2.0 prompt. "Using the lead's character sheet and the alley plate, generate shot 4 in Seedance 2.0. Low angle, slow push-in, rain." Claude builds the prompt, calls Seedance 2.0 and the frame lands back in chat. Use a Seedance 2.0 skill to teach Claude how to prompt it properly. Now, there are 3 ways to make the shots. Pick one per scene. - Pure prompting. Fastest one. You describe the action in words and let Seedance interpret it. For consistency across a sequence, feed it a frame from the previous shot so the look carries. - Storyboarding. You hand it a panel and it matches that composition exactly. Way more control over how the shot is framed. The tradeoff is that it can introduce more cuts than you actually want. - Path Control System This is the latest technique Seedance 2.0 technique. Generate a still base plate of the scene. Draw a red line across it to mark the exact path of the movement, then describe what's happening. Seedance follows that line for the action. Also ask Claude to remove the red line when animating. This is the one for anything where motion has to land precisely. The output reads like real live action. - Lastly, generate every clip you need, then cut them together. Get it to Capcut for editing and audio design. And that's it. The pipeline that used to need a full crew and a studio can now run from one Claude chat. 2026 is gonna be wild

Rez Karim

10,951 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

The ChainGPT AI skill for Claude Code is one of the most complete Web3-AI dev environment on the market. Let me prove it. Open Claude Code with the installed skill, and you have direct access to: • Built-in wallets across 33+ chains • DEX trading, perps, and Hyperliquid execution • Smart contract generation and auditing • NFT generation across 22 chains • Real-time crypto news API • Fine-tuned crypto LLM with live on-chain data Every part of the Web3 stack, one prompt away. Here's what that looks like in practice. I built a real-time on-chain whale tracker in a single afternoon. It's called Whale Watch. → Pulls live swap data from Ethereum DEX pools → Filters every trade over $100K → Runs each whale through the ChainGPT LLM for a trader-grade live analysis → Routes the user into 1inch with the token pair pre-loaded if they want to follow the trade Real data. Real AI. Real action layer. The skill wrote the server. It hit the right APIs. It generated the UI. It debugged itself when something broke. The only thing I supplied was the idea and the polish. Open Claude Code. Ship something with ChainGPT AI this weekend! /plugin install ChainGPT-org/chaingpt-claude-skill

The ChainGPT AI skill for Claude Code is one of the most complete Web3-AI dev environment on the market. Let me prove it. Open Claude Code with the installed skill, and you have direct access to: • Built-in wallets across 33+ chains • DEX trading, perps, and Hyperliquid execution • Smart contract generation and auditing • NFT generation across 22 chains • Real-time crypto news API • Fine-tuned crypto LLM with live on-chain data Every part of the Web3 stack, one prompt away. Here's what that looks like in practice. I built a real-time on-chain whale tracker in a single afternoon. It's called Whale Watch. → Pulls live swap data from Ethereum DEX pools → Filters every trade over $100K → Runs each whale through the ChainGPT LLM for a trader-grade live analysis → Routes the user into 1inch with the token pair pre-loaded if they want to follow the trade Real data. Real AI. Real action layer. The skill wrote the server. It hit the right APIs. It generated the UI. It debugged itself when something broke. The only thing I supplied was the idea and the polish. Open Claude Code. Ship something with ChainGPT AI this weekend! /plugin install ChainGPT-org/chaingpt-claude-skill

ChainGPT

25,853 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

this is worth more than most five figure courses 16 claude agents audit an entire repo at once, a second fleet re-checks every finding on fresh context, and the whole thing runs off one diagram instead of a prompt i ran it against my own code and got back 11 endpoints where i never checked who was logged in, 3 of which the verifier threw out before they ever reached me this is Graph Engineering, the layer above prompting, and it runs on the agent you already pay for: - write your plan out, then ask one question at every "and then": does the next step actually read what the previous one produced - the seams that fail that question were never dependencies, so those jobs run at the same time - the arrows that survive are your real edges, and the longest chain of them is your floor that no number of agents shortens - want it faster, cut a false edge instead of adding a worker - fan the independent work out, one agent per item, no shared state between them - send every finding to a separate agent on fresh context, because a model recognises its own writing 73.5% of the time and grades it kinder once it does - make that verifier check a real signal like a passing test, never the worker's own word that it finished - shard the fleet across worktrees so parallel workers stop overwriting each other, one rule frozen into every worker: never git stash, never git reset - merge only what came back verified, into one report instead of twenty open chats the catch is the ceiling. at 95% independent work 16 agents return 9.14x rather than the 16 you would guess, and even 256 only reach 18.6x, because the merge and the verify stay serial however wide you fan coordination itself is free plain code and every agent underneath it is billed, so start at twenty files and widen once it works bookmark this, the whole method with all six ready-to-run graphs is written out in the article ↓

this is worth more than most five figure courses 16 claude agents audit an entire repo at once, a second fleet re-checks every finding on fresh context, and the whole thing runs off one diagram instead of a prompt i ran it against my own code and got back 11 endpoints where i never checked who was logged in, 3 of which the verifier threw out before they ever reached me this is Graph Engineering, the layer above prompting, and it runs on the agent you already pay for: - write your plan out, then ask one question at every "and then": does the next step actually read what the previous one produced - the seams that fail that question were never dependencies, so those jobs run at the same time - the arrows that survive are your real edges, and the longest chain of them is your floor that no number of agents shortens - want it faster, cut a false edge instead of adding a worker - fan the independent work out, one agent per item, no shared state between them - send every finding to a separate agent on fresh context, because a model recognises its own writing 73.5% of the time and grades it kinder once it does - make that verifier check a real signal like a passing test, never the worker's own word that it finished - shard the fleet across worktrees so parallel workers stop overwriting each other, one rule frozen into every worker: never git stash, never git reset - merge only what came back verified, into one report instead of twenty open chats the catch is the ceiling. at 95% independent work 16 agents return 9.14x rather than the 16 you would guess, and even 256 only reach 18.6x, because the merge and the verify stay serial however wide you fan coordination itself is free plain code and every agent underneath it is billed, so start at twenty files and widen once it works bookmark this, the whole method with all six ready-to-run graphs is written out in the article ↓

Argona

154,880 просмотров • 11 дней назад

Cancelled ChatGPT -> Built JARVIS -> Pays $0 -> it works offline + it's smarter than the $20/month version. No WiFi needed, no cloud, no API keys, no rate limits, no queues, no $20/month just to ask a server in Virginia for the weather. Just a local model running directly on the laptop hardware, voice activated, system integrated, controlling apps, answering questions, doing the work. Iron Man had JARVIS embedded in his suit, this guy has it embedded in his MacBook and it works on a plane, in a basement, on a remote cabin with zero signal. OpenAI is burning $700,000 a day on infrastructure to deliver something this guy runs for free. Anthropic charges $200/month for unlimited Claude access, microsoft built Copilot into every product they sell. This guy skipped all of it, downloaded a model and made his laptop the smartest device in the room. No subscription. No login. No internet. No data sent anywhere ever. The most powerful AI assistant on earth is now the one running locally on hardware you already own. ChatGPT charges you to think slower, he pays nothing and thinks alone, he made it himself.

Cancelled ChatGPT -> Built JARVIS -> Pays $0 -> it works offline + it's smarter than the $20/month version. No WiFi needed, no cloud, no API keys, no rate limits, no queues, no $20/month just to ask a server in Virginia for the weather. Just a local model running directly on the laptop hardware, voice activated, system integrated, controlling apps, answering questions, doing the work. Iron Man had JARVIS embedded in his suit, this guy has it embedded in his MacBook and it works on a plane, in a basement, on a remote cabin with zero signal. OpenAI is burning $700,000 a day on infrastructure to deliver something this guy runs for free. Anthropic charges $200/month for unlimited Claude access, microsoft built Copilot into every product they sell. This guy skipped all of it, downloaded a model and made his laptop the smartest device in the room. No subscription. No login. No internet. No data sent anywhere ever. The most powerful AI assistant on earth is now the one running locally on hardware you already own. ChatGPT charges you to think slower, he pays nothing and thinks alone, he made it himself.

Defileo🔮

154,009 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

Big win for open-source LLMs! DeepSeek V4 Pro holds the top open-weights score on SWE-bench Verified, in the GPT-5.5 range. GLM 5.2 leads the open-weight intelligence index and sits near the closed frontier on long-horizon coding. But this leaderboard number is a weak proxy for real performance. It comes from one task set, run through one harness, served at one precision. The same weights can even score differently across providers, since many hosts quantize activations to fp8 and drift the model off its reference weights. Real performance is determined based on whether a model can read a repo, make coordinated edits across files, run the tests, and recover when one breaks. By that measure, the top open models hold up, but only inside the right harness. The teams that actually put DeepSeek V4 into production pipelines as a frontier substitute got there through the harness they built around the model, not by picking a stronger model. If you want to see this in practice, Cline (64k+ stars) has actually built that harness around open models, tuned so they run at production quality. And it's tuned so that these LLMs can run at production quality, with plan and act modes, checkpoints, and terminal feedback. ClinePass is the new access layer on top of it. It runs a curated set of those models inside Cline, narrowed to the ones tested for coding-agent use, with 2 to 5x the standard rate limits and no separate provider accounts, keys, or billing to track. The video below shows the setup, and I worked with the team to put this together. It runs alongside custom keys and local models as well, not in place of them.

Big win for open-source LLMs! DeepSeek V4 Pro holds the top open-weights score on SWE-bench Verified, in the GPT-5.5 range. GLM 5.2 leads the open-weight intelligence index and sits near the closed frontier on long-horizon coding. But this leaderboard number is a weak proxy for real performance. It comes from one task set, run through one harness, served at one precision. The same weights can even score differently across providers, since many hosts quantize activations to fp8 and drift the model off its reference weights. Real performance is determined based on whether a model can read a repo, make coordinated edits across files, run the tests, and recover when one breaks. By that measure, the top open models hold up, but only inside the right harness. The teams that actually put DeepSeek V4 into production pipelines as a frontier substitute got there through the harness they built around the model, not by picking a stronger model. If you want to see this in practice, Cline (64k+ stars) has actually built that harness around open models, tuned so they run at production quality. And it's tuned so that these LLMs can run at production quality, with plan and act modes, checkpoints, and terminal feedback. ClinePass is the new access layer on top of it. It runs a curated set of those models inside Cline, narrowed to the ones tested for coding-agent use, with 2 to 5x the standard rate limits and no separate provider accounts, keys, or billing to track. The video below shows the setup, and I worked with the team to put this together. It runs alongside custom keys and local models as well, not in place of them.

Avi Chawla

44,124 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

An Anthropic engineer watched me trade from across the table at a WeWork in SF I had my laptop open. Four agents running. Green charts. Live trades scrolling. He was on a Zoom call. Muted himself. Walked over. "Are you running Claude against live prediction markets right now" I told him. Claude Code. Two repos. $25 a month. He pulled up a chair. "I helped build the model you're using. I've never seen anyone wire it to live trades like this" I showed him the dataset. 86 million trades. Every wallet. Every entry. Every exit. He stared at it. "We tested this internally. You give Claude a dataset and don't tell it what to look for. It finds the winning wallets. Then it finds WHY they win. Then it copies the pattern. We never shipped it because legal killed it" I told him I did exactly that. One weekend. Claude Code found the exit logic on its own. Top wallets exit before resolution 91% of the time. They capture 86% of expected value. Cut losers at 12%. Everyone else captures 58% and holds to 41%. "That's the exact finding from our internal eval. Except ours took a team of eight and four months" I showed him the scanner. Three commands. 500+ markets. No API key. Claude scores them all in 20 minutes. "You're using our model to beat markets we're not allowed to touch. On infra that costs less than my lunch" My setup: Claude API - $20/mo VPS - $5/mo poly_data - free polymarket-cli - free 214 trades. 74% win rate. +$9,400. 19 days. I showed him the full breakdown. Every repo. Every command. Every dollar. Copytrade here: He read it for five minutes. Then looked up. "If my manager sees this he's going to lose his mind. You just proved our model works in production and we've been sitting on it for a year" He DM'd me that night. "Take this down before someone at Anthropic finds it" Too late.

An Anthropic engineer watched me trade from across the table at a WeWork in SF I had my laptop open. Four agents running. Green charts. Live trades scrolling. He was on a Zoom call. Muted himself. Walked over. "Are you running Claude against live prediction markets right now" I told him. Claude Code. Two repos. $25 a month. He pulled up a chair. "I helped build the model you're using. I've never seen anyone wire it to live trades like this" I showed him the dataset. 86 million trades. Every wallet. Every entry. Every exit. He stared at it. "We tested this internally. You give Claude a dataset and don't tell it what to look for. It finds the winning wallets. Then it finds WHY they win. Then it copies the pattern. We never shipped it because legal killed it" I told him I did exactly that. One weekend. Claude Code found the exit logic on its own. Top wallets exit before resolution 91% of the time. They capture 86% of expected value. Cut losers at 12%. Everyone else captures 58% and holds to 41%. "That's the exact finding from our internal eval. Except ours took a team of eight and four months" I showed him the scanner. Three commands. 500+ markets. No API key. Claude scores them all in 20 minutes. "You're using our model to beat markets we're not allowed to touch. On infra that costs less than my lunch" My setup: Claude API - $20/mo VPS - $5/mo poly_data - free polymarket-cli - free 214 trades. 74% win rate. +$9,400. 19 days. I showed him the full breakdown. Every repo. Every command. Every dollar. Copytrade here: He read it for five minutes. Then looked up. "If my manager sees this he's going to lose his mind. You just proved our model works in production and we've been sitting on it for a year" He DM'd me that night. "Take this down before someone at Anthropic finds it" Too late.

Lunar

224,021 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

50% cheaper Claude inference with just one line of code change! - Remove → model="claude-opus-4-8" - Add → model="ship-like/claude-opus-4-8" I verified the cost saving in my own terminal by invoking the same Anthropic model with the same prompt. The underlying engineering by Ship is actually interesting, and the patterns can be used in any production LLM stack. Essentially, a trained model is a frozen artifact. Every request performs the same forward-pass, whether it extracts a date or refactors a module, because the compute decision was made at training time, before the request existed. Ship makes that decision at inference time instead. After seeing a request, it searches over executions, involving single models, cascades, ensembles, or harnesses with tools, and serves the cheapest one that will match the reference model's quality. This is not a basic router, because picking a cheaper model per query doesn't ensure the cheaper model preserves the original's behavior, like output shape, tool-call patterns, and refusals. Ship measures this equivalence directly. Outputs stay distributionally indistinguishable from the reference model, not token-identical, since two calls to the same model already differ, but they are indistinguishable in capability and behavior. Of course, some requests execute cheaply and some cost Ship more than the customer pays, but the price per request is still a flat 50% off either way, so the execution-cost variance moves off the application's bill entirely. The video below depicts the cost savings and output in my real invocation, and I partnered with the team to put this together.

50% cheaper Claude inference with just one line of code change! - Remove → model="claude-opus-4-8" - Add → model="ship-like/claude-opus-4-8" I verified the cost saving in my own terminal by invoking the same Anthropic model with the same prompt. The underlying engineering by Ship is actually interesting, and the patterns can be used in any production LLM stack. Essentially, a trained model is a frozen artifact. Every request performs the same forward-pass, whether it extracts a date or refactors a module, because the compute decision was made at training time, before the request existed. Ship makes that decision at inference time instead. After seeing a request, it searches over executions, involving single models, cascades, ensembles, or harnesses with tools, and serves the cheapest one that will match the reference model's quality. This is not a basic router, because picking a cheaper model per query doesn't ensure the cheaper model preserves the original's behavior, like output shape, tool-call patterns, and refusals. Ship measures this equivalence directly. Outputs stay distributionally indistinguishable from the reference model, not token-identical, since two calls to the same model already differ, but they are indistinguishable in capability and behavior. Of course, some requests execute cheaply and some cost Ship more than the customer pays, but the price per request is still a flat 50% off either way, so the execution-cost variance moves off the application's bill entirely. The video below depicts the cost savings and output in my real invocation, and I partnered with the team to put this together.

Akshay 🚀

63,725 просмотров • 16 дней назад

MARCUS CHEN STACKED 30 MAC MINIS INTO AN AI SERVER FARM. ONE $599 MAC MINI REPLACES YOUR $200/MONTH CLAUDE CODE BILL WITH $3 IN ELECTRICITY two months ago a developer posted his claude code bill on reddit. $170 in 10 days. someone replied "i bought a mac mini m4. haven't paid anthropic since." apple stores ran out of mac minis the same week the m4 chip has 120 gb/s memory bandwidth and unified memory architecture. cpu and gpu share one pool so the model loads once and both read from it. a $599 mac mini runs ai faster than a $1,500 windows pc with a discrete gpu since january 2026 ollama supports the anthropic messages api format. claude code connects directly to your local mac mini with one environment variable. same interface, zero api costs, $0 per request a heavy developer pays $459 a month across claude code max, chatgpt pro, gemini, cursor and copilot. that's $5,508 a year. the mac mini pays off in 3 months and runs on $3 in electricity after that uber rolled out claude code to 5,000 engineers and burned through their $3.4 billion 2026 ai budget in 4 months. the people who own the hardware in 2026 are going to look very far ahead in 2028 bookmark this and read the article below

MARCUS CHEN STACKED 30 MAC MINIS INTO AN AI SERVER FARM. ONE $599 MAC MINI REPLACES YOUR $200/MONTH CLAUDE CODE BILL WITH $3 IN ELECTRICITY two months ago a developer posted his claude code bill on reddit. $170 in 10 days. someone replied "i bought a mac mini m4. haven't paid anthropic since." apple stores ran out of mac minis the same week the m4 chip has 120 gb/s memory bandwidth and unified memory architecture. cpu and gpu share one pool so the model loads once and both read from it. a $599 mac mini runs ai faster than a $1,500 windows pc with a discrete gpu since january 2026 ollama supports the anthropic messages api format. claude code connects directly to your local mac mini with one environment variable. same interface, zero api costs, $0 per request a heavy developer pays $459 a month across claude code max, chatgpt pro, gemini, cursor and copilot. that's $5,508 a year. the mac mini pays off in 3 months and runs on $3 in electricity after that uber rolled out claude code to 5,000 engineers and burned through their $3.4 billion 2026 ai budget in 4 months. the people who own the hardware in 2026 are going to look very far ahead in 2028 bookmark this and read the article below

starmex

357,349 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

A SCRIPTER IS PLANTING ENTIRE ROBLOX FORESTS WITH CODE INSTEAD OF DRAGGING TREES ONE BY ONE Most builders still open Studio's terrain tool and hand-paint grass, then place every tree by clicking it into the world individually. He wrote a Luau script that reads the terrain height map first and scatters trees only where the slope and material actually make sense. Grass density shifts automatically too, thick near water, sparse on rock, without anyone painting a single texture by hand. He's running it through Studio's built-in Terrain Editor API, so the plugin handles the heavy terrain queries while his script decides what grows where. A biome that used to take a weekend of manual placement now generates in a single pass across the whole map. See how the placement logic actually works below👇

A SCRIPTER IS PLANTING ENTIRE ROBLOX FORESTS WITH CODE INSTEAD OF DRAGGING TREES ONE BY ONE Most builders still open Studio's terrain tool and hand-paint grass, then place every tree by clicking it into the world individually. He wrote a Luau script that reads the terrain height map first and scatters trees only where the slope and material actually make sense. Grass density shifts automatically too, thick near water, sparse on rock, without anyone painting a single texture by hand. He's running it through Studio's built-in Terrain Editor API, so the plugin handles the heavy terrain queries while his script decides what grows where. A biome that used to take a weekend of manual placement now generates in a single pass across the whole map. See how the placement logic actually works below👇

wast3

27,782 просмотров • 23 дней назад

I STOPPED REVIEWING MY OWN AGENT, SOMETHING ELSE DOES IT NOW I used to read every diff it produced and approve most of them, because an agent grading itself always says the work is good. -> Now a second model with different instructions tries to break the work first, and I only read what survived. Here is what is actually in the folder that took over the night shift: • the brief > CONTRACT.md -- what it may touch, and what it may never touch. > VISION.md -- the destination, so turn 47 still knows why it started. • the gate > judge/ -- a different model, never the one that wrote the code. > break-it.md -- it opens the page, clicks, screenshots, reports back. > -- no opinion, just zero or non-zero. > shift.yml -- 03:30 every night, laptop closed. • the memory > receipts/ -- one folder per night, dated and graded. > STATE.md -- where it stopped and what it escalated. > lessons.log -- the flaky test, written down once instead of rediscovered weekly. • the brakes > caps.json -- turn limit, retry limit, spend limit. > -- written on day one, used never. The generator decides what your loop can produce -> The judge decides what it refuses to produce. One of those is the part everyone builds -> The other is why most loops quietly fail. Bookmark it & Read Full breakdown below ↓

I STOPPED REVIEWING MY OWN AGENT, SOMETHING ELSE DOES IT NOW I used to read every diff it produced and approve most of them, because an agent grading itself always says the work is good. -> Now a second model with different instructions tries to break the work first, and I only read what survived. Here is what is actually in the folder that took over the night shift: • the brief > CONTRACT.md -- what it may touch, and what it may never touch. > VISION.md -- the destination, so turn 47 still knows why it started. • the gate > judge/ -- a different model, never the one that wrote the code. > break-it.md -- it opens the page, clicks, screenshots, reports back. > -- no opinion, just zero or non-zero. > shift.yml -- 03:30 every night, laptop closed. • the memory > receipts/ -- one folder per night, dated and graded. > STATE.md -- where it stopped and what it escalated. > lessons.log -- the flaky test, written down once instead of rediscovered weekly. • the brakes > caps.json -- turn limit, retry limit, spend limit. > -- written on day one, used never. The generator decides what your loop can produce -> The judge decides what it refuses to produce. One of those is the part everyone builds -> The other is why most loops quietly fail. Bookmark it & Read Full breakdown below ↓

slash1s

36,859 просмотров • 5 дней назад

HIGGSFIELD + FABLE 5 BUILT A FULL CLIENT WEBSITE. MY PART WAS 35 MINUTES. the old studio needed a designer, a dev, and someone for media. every hire ate the margin. now you personally touch exactly two stages - the models handle the heavy middle: → INTAKE (you · ~15 min) turn the client request into a tight spec: pages, brand, edge cases. judgment work - the part actually worth paying for. → DESIGN (Fable 5) brief in → design system out: layouts, components, responsive states. the week-in-Figma part, gone. → BUILD + MEDIA (in parallel) Claude Code writes the site - components, CSS, animations, CMS, deploy. Higgsfield MCP generates every visual - hero video, product shots, motion - from prompts, in the same chat. → QA + HANDOFF (you · ~20 min) review against the spec, deploy, notify. templated after your first few clients. two human stages, both fast. the slow, labor-heavy middle is the one you removed yourself from. you went from laborer to orchestrator. CONNECT HIGGSFIELD (MCP): add it as a custom connector in Claude Code: - mcp_servers: - higgsfield: - url: " one OAuth flow. Claude generates and pulls clips directly - no exporting by hand. THE MATH: → what you sell: a productized site + a monthly retainer → what it costs you to deliver: ~$750/month across every client → the margin isn't clever pricing - the cost of delivery fell through the floor while the value stayed the same. you pocket the spread. one operator, three tools, the whole studio. Follow me, reply "MCP" and I'll send you the full step-by-step playbook. full breakdown in the article 👇

ZEUS⚡️

27,534 просмотров • 12 дней назад