Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

ANTHROPIC LEAKED 8 RULES THAT GIVE ONE ENGINEER 8X FROM A SINGLE CHANGE the engineers built it so nothing adds up - it multiplies, and that's the 8x task → split → verify → score → write back one queue means you wait for every step in turn -...

noisyb0y1's profile picture

Noisy

24,620 subscribers

37,058 Aufrufe • vor 10 Tagen •via X (Twitter)

LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

ANTHROPIC LEAKED A SETUP WHERE ONE FILE STARTS 7 LOOPS THAT TURN A PROMPT INTO A WORKING BUSINESS AI engineer drops in 1 file - the other 95% of the work closes automatically without them. spec → tasks → code → tests → docs → release → monitoring → back into the spec you don't write tickets anymore - you write the thing tickets get derived from, and Opus 5 cuts the spec into 6 tasks by itself. a task that fails its test comes back to itself, not to you - and runs a second lap without a single notification. 6 lanes of code run in parallel and none of them wait on you - the critic filters the diff before you ever open it. every new production bug becomes a permanent line in the eval set - the system never steps on it twice. monitoring isn't the end of the line, it's the start of the next spec - those back edges are what make it a graph instead of a conveyor. and one place is left where you say yes - release, 5 minutes instead of 5 hours. save this and paste it into Claude Code - and you get 7 loops that run without you ↓
0:52

ANTHROPIC LEAKED A SETUP WHERE ONE FILE STARTS 7 LOOPS THAT TURN A PROMPT INTO A WORKING BUSINESS AI engineer drops in 1 file - the other 95% of the work closes automatically without them. spec → tasks → code → tests → docs → release → monitoring → back into the spec you don't write tickets anymore - you write the thing tickets get derived from, and Opus 5 cuts the spec into 6 tasks by itself. a task that fails its test comes back to itself, not to you - and runs a second lap without a single notification. 6 lanes of code run in parallel and none of them wait on you - the critic filters the diff before you ever open it. every new production bug becomes a permanent line in the eval set - the system never steps on it twice. monitoring isn't the end of the line, it's the start of the next spec - those back edges are what make it a graph instead of a conveyor. and one place is left where you say yes - release, 5 minutes instead of 5 hours. save this and paste it into Claude Code - and you get 7 loops that run without you ↓

Sprytix

65,797 Aufrufe • vor 8 Tagen

ANTHROPIC LEAKED A SETUP WHERE A $1.2M A-YEAR TEAM FITS INTO ONE FILE FOR $4 A DAY you hire nobody - you write one file, and $106,500 of salaries in it turn into $4 of tokens. architect → 4 builders → tests → critic → docs → scout → chief → back into the file the architect runs twice a day and decides everything - the priciest model on the sheet is the smallest line on the bill at $1.05. four builders cost $1.20 a day - and a fifth builder is one more number in the file, not one more quarter of recruiting. the tester asks does it run, the critic asks should it exist at all - $1.22 together for two roles a solo dev never fills. nothing reaches you that hasn't been rejected at least once. the scout and the scribe cost 40 cents - the exact two roles that get cut from every real budget. nobody hires a documentation engineer, and everybody wishes they had one. the chief at 14 cents is the only one who writes back into the file - without it this is a list, with it the list edits itself. hiring the eleventh is a paragraph: no req, no interviews, no ramp - and firing is one command. save this and paste it into Claude Code - and you get 10 roles for the price of one coffee ↓
0:41

ANTHROPIC LEAKED A SETUP WHERE A $1.2M A-YEAR TEAM FITS INTO ONE FILE FOR $4 A DAY you hire nobody - you write one file, and $106,500 of salaries in it turn into $4 of tokens. architect → 4 builders → tests → critic → docs → scout → chief → back into the file the architect runs twice a day and decides everything - the priciest model on the sheet is the smallest line on the bill at $1.05. four builders cost $1.20 a day - and a fifth builder is one more number in the file, not one more quarter of recruiting. the tester asks does it run, the critic asks should it exist at all - $1.22 together for two roles a solo dev never fills. nothing reaches you that hasn't been rejected at least once. the scout and the scribe cost 40 cents - the exact two roles that get cut from every real budget. nobody hires a documentation engineer, and everybody wishes they had one. the chief at 14 cents is the only one who writes back into the file - without it this is a list, with it the list edits itself. hiring the eleventh is a paragraph: no req, no interviews, no ramp - and firing is one command. save this and paste it into Claude Code - and you get 10 roles for the price of one coffee ↓

Sprytix

45,421 Aufrufe • vor 5 Tagen

you've never watched one prompt, turn into a finished thing while you did nothing you've watched Claude work, sure one step, your approval, the next step, you steering the whole way that isn't the same as handing off a job, coming back to a result that already checked itself sixteen agents on one task, tearing holes in each other's work until the answer holds, summary waiting when you look up the work happened you just weren't the one carrying it
0:54

you've never watched one prompt, turn into a finished thing while you did nothing you've watched Claude work, sure one step, your approval, the next step, you steering the whole way that isn't the same as handing off a job, coming back to a result that already checked itself sixteen agents on one task, tearing holes in each other's work until the answer holds, summary waiting when you look up the work happened you just weren't the one carrying it

Lagosaur

26,218 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

THIS GUY CONNECTED HIS AI AGENTS TO HIS OBSIDIAN AND BUILT A BRAIN THAT LEARNS ON ITS OWN. HERE'S HOW TO BUILD IT Obsidian is just markdown files sitting in a folder. That turns out to be the perfect memory for an AI agent, because an agent can read and write those files directly. He wired his agents into the vault so they pull context from it, do the work, and write what they learned back. The notes aren't the point. The loop is, and it gets sharper every cycle How to build it: 1. Point an agent at your vault. The fastest way, no plugins, no API keys: open a terminal and run npx obsidian-mcp /path/to/your/vault. That exposes your Obsidian folder to Claude as a tool it can read, search, and write to. Add it to your Claude Code or Cowork config and restart 2. Confirm it can see the brain. Ask it: "list the notes in my vault and summarize what's in them." If it reads them back, the connection is live. Now it starts every task with everything the vault already holds instead of from zero 3. Give each agent one job and a write-back rule. Tell it: "research this, then save what you found as a new note in /brain with links to related notes." One agent researches, one summarizes, one plans. Each writes its output back into the vault 4. Close the loop. Add one line to every agent's instructions: "read /brain before starting, write your result back when done." Now each task leaves the vault richer, and the next run reads that before it works. It compounds instead of resetting 5. You only steer. Review what the brain produces, point it at the next thing. The agents handle the reading, writing, and connecting The edge isn't better notes. It's a brain that feeds itself, so the work gets sharper every cycle instead of starting over Bookmark this
0:24

THIS GUY CONNECTED HIS AI AGENTS TO HIS OBSIDIAN AND BUILT A BRAIN THAT LEARNS ON ITS OWN. HERE'S HOW TO BUILD IT Obsidian is just markdown files sitting in a folder. That turns out to be the perfect memory for an AI agent, because an agent can read and write those files directly. He wired his agents into the vault so they pull context from it, do the work, and write what they learned back. The notes aren't the point. The loop is, and it gets sharper every cycle How to build it: 1. Point an agent at your vault. The fastest way, no plugins, no API keys: open a terminal and run npx obsidian-mcp /path/to/your/vault. That exposes your Obsidian folder to Claude as a tool it can read, search, and write to. Add it to your Claude Code or Cowork config and restart 2. Confirm it can see the brain. Ask it: "list the notes in my vault and summarize what's in them." If it reads them back, the connection is live. Now it starts every task with everything the vault already holds instead of from zero 3. Give each agent one job and a write-back rule. Tell it: "research this, then save what you found as a new note in /brain with links to related notes." One agent researches, one summarizes, one plans. Each writes its output back into the vault 4. Close the loop. Add one line to every agent's instructions: "read /brain before starting, write your result back when done." Now each task leaves the vault richer, and the next run reads that before it works. It compounds instead of resetting 5. You only steer. Review what the brain produces, point it at the next thing. The agents handle the reading, writing, and connecting The edge isn't better notes. It's a brain that feeds itself, so the work gets sharper every cycle instead of starting over Bookmark this

Yarchi

58,186 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

somebody just torched their entire career for us someone inside Anthropic wrote down exactly how they wire their AIs to work as a team instead of one at a time, every number, and let the whole thing walk out the door it's called Graph Engineering: you stop asking one AI to do the whole job and start running a crew. one plans, a few go and look, one checks the others for lies their own measurement: the crew came back with 96% of the quality at 46% of the price. same models, same question. they only changed who is allowed to talk to whom Anthropic raised $65,000,000,000 to figure this out. it costs you $0 run one tonight in a normal chat, 3 moves: 1. give it the job and make it write the plan before it touches anything 2. run each step in its own fresh chat so nothing bleeds into the next 3. in one clean chat at the end, make it check the work against sources and mark whatever it could not confirm save this, then open the piece below: how many workers a job actually needs, and where one more starts making it worse ↓
0:34

somebody just torched their entire career for us someone inside Anthropic wrote down exactly how they wire their AIs to work as a team instead of one at a time, every number, and let the whole thing walk out the door it's called Graph Engineering: you stop asking one AI to do the whole job and start running a crew. one plans, a few go and look, one checks the others for lies their own measurement: the crew came back with 96% of the quality at 46% of the price. same models, same question. they only changed who is allowed to talk to whom Anthropic raised $65,000,000,000 to figure this out. it costs you $0 run one tonight in a normal chat, 3 moves: 1. give it the job and make it write the plan before it touches anything 2. run each step in its own fresh chat so nothing bleeds into the next 3. in one clean chat at the end, make it check the work against sources and mark whatever it could not confirm save this, then open the piece below: how many workers a job actually needs, and where one more starts making it worse ↓

Argona

1,365,109 Aufrufe • vor 6 Tagen

ANTHROPIC LEAKED 6 RULES THAT RUN 8 LOOPS AT ONCE - AND ONE ENGINEER DOES THE WORK OF A TEAM one engineer with this system replaces an entire team - and costs the company 8 times less You → Opus 5 plan → Fable 5 ×8 execute → Fable 5 review → you: 5 min Opus 5 takes your intent and breaks it into subtasks - a bad plan multiplied across every loop gives the same number of disasters - the plan is the only thing you read carefully one repo - isolated worktrees for each loop - nobody stands on anyone's file - parallel PRs ship while you do nothing the agent runs the tests and fixes until green PR - a red build never reaches your eyes one CLAUDE.md for the whole fleet - without it you get different opinions from every loop and one merge hell the average engineer closes 3-4 tasks a day - this system closes a full sprint overnight with zero working hours Fable 5 pre-reviews every PR before it reaches you - you spend 5 minutes - your throughput is now measured in diffs read per hour bookmark and paste into Claude Code - your first fleet can start tonight
1:15

ANTHROPIC LEAKED 6 RULES THAT RUN 8 LOOPS AT ONCE - AND ONE ENGINEER DOES THE WORK OF A TEAM one engineer with this system replaces an entire team - and costs the company 8 times less You → Opus 5 plan → Fable 5 ×8 execute → Fable 5 review → you: 5 min Opus 5 takes your intent and breaks it into subtasks - a bad plan multiplied across every loop gives the same number of disasters - the plan is the only thing you read carefully one repo - isolated worktrees for each loop - nobody stands on anyone's file - parallel PRs ship while you do nothing the agent runs the tests and fixes until green PR - a red build never reaches your eyes one CLAUDE.md for the whole fleet - without it you get different opinions from every loop and one merge hell the average engineer closes 3-4 tasks a day - this system closes a full sprint overnight with zero working hours Fable 5 pre-reviews every PR before it reaches you - you spend 5 minutes - your throughput is now measured in diffs read per hour bookmark and paste into Claude Code - your first fleet can start tonight

Sprytix

37,766 Aufrufe • vor 21 Tagen

ANTHROPIC LEAKED A 4-AGENT SETUP THAT CUTS A CODEBASE AUDIT FROM 3 DAYS TO 20 MINUTES you point it at a repo and walk away - it comes back with what breaks, ranked, patches already tested. repo → map → 4 auditors → rank → fix → verify → report → back into the map the map cuts the repo by blast radius, not by folder - skip it and four agents audit the same three files and miss the one that ships broken. 4 auditors run in parallel with separate contexts - deps, secrets, dead code, hot paths, and none of them sees another's findings. rank is code, not an agent - sort by what breaks production, drop the duplicates, zero tokens. the fixer only opens patches for the top slice - a hundred findings nobody acts on is a report, not an audit. verify runs the suite on every patch and red goes back to the fixer - that patch only, never the whole batch. the back edge into the map is the whole trick - accepted findings become rules, so next week starts where this one ended. one human step in all of it: which fixes ship - 20 minutes instead of 3 days. save this and read the full graph engineering course below ↓
1:00

ANTHROPIC LEAKED A 4-AGENT SETUP THAT CUTS A CODEBASE AUDIT FROM 3 DAYS TO 20 MINUTES you point it at a repo and walk away - it comes back with what breaks, ranked, patches already tested. repo → map → 4 auditors → rank → fix → verify → report → back into the map the map cuts the repo by blast radius, not by folder - skip it and four agents audit the same three files and miss the one that ships broken. 4 auditors run in parallel with separate contexts - deps, secrets, dead code, hot paths, and none of them sees another's findings. rank is code, not an agent - sort by what breaks production, drop the duplicates, zero tokens. the fixer only opens patches for the top slice - a hundred findings nobody acts on is a report, not an audit. verify runs the suite on every patch and red goes back to the fixer - that patch only, never the whole batch. the back edge into the map is the whole trick - accepted findings become rules, so next week starts where this one ended. one human step in all of it: which fixes ship - 20 minutes instead of 3 days. save this and read the full graph engineering course below ↓

Hanako

134,481 Aufrufe • vor 4 Tagen

ANTHROPIC LEAKED A GRAPH WHERE ONE FILE WITH 7 ITEMS CUTS YOUR WORK FROM 8 HOURS TO 40 MINUTES AND TAKES 40 DECISIONS A DAY OFF YOU autonomy isn't a slider you drag to the right - it's a graph with 7 steps, and exactly one edge leads into each one. your approve is worth nothing until there's a description of what the output should be - otherwise you're approving something nobody defined. you can't run a batch without checkpoints, because one crash in the middle rolls back all 40 tasks at once. the agent already works without you, and until it writes down what it did there's nothing to check the report against. this is where the point of no return sits: past it the loop runs while you sleep. the approval didn't disappear - you moved it onto an evaluator that never gets tired and never lets one through. silence is only allowed when there's a list of what breaks it: money, deletion, anything leaving the system. the last one is the brake - a turn limit and a budget cap, whichever runs out first kills the run. you build the brake before the engine - an agent you can't stop isn't autonomous, it's just unattended. skip one edge and nothing crashes and nobody warns you - the system quietly settles two steps lower and keeps running. save this - 7 steps, 7 artefacts, zero ways to jump one ↓
0:58

ANTHROPIC LEAKED A GRAPH WHERE ONE FILE WITH 7 ITEMS CUTS YOUR WORK FROM 8 HOURS TO 40 MINUTES AND TAKES 40 DECISIONS A DAY OFF YOU autonomy isn't a slider you drag to the right - it's a graph with 7 steps, and exactly one edge leads into each one. your approve is worth nothing until there's a description of what the output should be - otherwise you're approving something nobody defined. you can't run a batch without checkpoints, because one crash in the middle rolls back all 40 tasks at once. the agent already works without you, and until it writes down what it did there's nothing to check the report against. this is where the point of no return sits: past it the loop runs while you sleep. the approval didn't disappear - you moved it onto an evaluator that never gets tired and never lets one through. silence is only allowed when there's a list of what breaks it: money, deletion, anything leaving the system. the last one is the brake - a turn limit and a budget cap, whichever runs out first kills the run. you build the brake before the engine - an agent you can't stop isn't autonomous, it's just unattended. skip one edge and nothing crashes and nobody warns you - the system quietly settles two steps lower and keeps running. save this - 7 steps, 7 artefacts, zero ways to jump one ↓

Sprytix

41,920 Aufrufe • vor 10 Tagen

ANTHROPIC LEAKED A FILE THEY SPENT 2 YEARS BUILDING WHERE 4 DEPARTMENTS CLOSE 90% OF YOUR WORK FOR $4 A DAY you do only 10% - the deciding, and the other 90% runs on different versions of Claude at a fraction of the price. research → marketing → sales → finance → back into the file research pulls in hundreds of sources and a handful survive - the cheap model filters, the expensive one reads only what got through. paying the top rate for a page you'll discard anyway is the commonest overspend there is. marketing is high volume with a low stake per item - so you generate 3 variants at once instead of one. one variant is a guess, three variants are a choice, and they cost the same. in sales the cheap model scores 400 leads and the expensive one writes only to the few worth it. a personal letter to a lead that was never going to convert is a paid guess. 6 of every 8 tasks in this file never need the priciest model - it answers at 5x the rate of the cheap one. and there's exactly one department where saving on the model makes no sense - unit economics, funnel, forecast. one wrong number here costs more than a full year of token savings. finance is the only department that writes back into the file - next month's marketing runs on rules analytics wrote, not you. overpaying is annoying, underpaying is expensive - route by the cost of being wrong, not the price per token. save this and paste it into Claude Code - 4 departments execute, you choose ↓
1:02

ANTHROPIC LEAKED A FILE THEY SPENT 2 YEARS BUILDING WHERE 4 DEPARTMENTS CLOSE 90% OF YOUR WORK FOR $4 A DAY you do only 10% - the deciding, and the other 90% runs on different versions of Claude at a fraction of the price. research → marketing → sales → finance → back into the file research pulls in hundreds of sources and a handful survive - the cheap model filters, the expensive one reads only what got through. paying the top rate for a page you'll discard anyway is the commonest overspend there is. marketing is high volume with a low stake per item - so you generate 3 variants at once instead of one. one variant is a guess, three variants are a choice, and they cost the same. in sales the cheap model scores 400 leads and the expensive one writes only to the few worth it. a personal letter to a lead that was never going to convert is a paid guess. 6 of every 8 tasks in this file never need the priciest model - it answers at 5x the rate of the cheap one. and there's exactly one department where saving on the model makes no sense - unit economics, funnel, forecast. one wrong number here costs more than a full year of token savings. finance is the only department that writes back into the file - next month's marketing runs on rules analytics wrote, not you. overpaying is annoying, underpaying is expensive - route by the cost of being wrong, not the price per token. save this and paste it into Claude Code - 4 departments execute, you choose ↓

Sprytix

24,874 Aufrufe • vor 3 Tagen

Anthropic engineer: "You're not supposed to watch Claude Code work. You're supposed to wake up and review what it shipped" in 22 minutes she builds the full workflow from scratch, step by step a routine that ships work while you sleep most developers have never seen Claude Code run without them watching watch the session, then save the guide below
21:33

Anthropic engineer: "You're not supposed to watch Claude Code work. You're supposed to wake up and review what it shipped" in 22 minutes she builds the full workflow from scratch, step by step a routine that ships work while you sleep most developers have never seen Claude Code run without them watching watch the session, then save the guide below

Anatoli Kopadze

36,192 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

context engineering vs graph engineering. every few months the list gets a new word and everyone treats it as a replacement for the last one. these two are not on the same list. one decides what the model sees this turn, the other decides what exists at all. the cleanest way to tell them apart is to ask what a single unit of work looks like. > context engineering is the window the window opens empty, every single time. you assemble what goes in it. the prompt, the docs, the history, the tool results. the assembling is the work. the window only grows. it never shrinks on its own, so eventually something gets dropped. usually from the middle. usually without telling you. then the turn ends and the window is thrown away. not archived, thrown away. the next turn opens empty again and you re-explain what you already explained. good context engineering is knowing what to leave out, not what to pack in. the unit of work is one window. > graph engineering is the structure the same material arrives from the same sources. instead of packing it into a window, you pull entities out of it, resolve the duplicates into one node, and write typed edges between them. nothing here is stored as text you hope to find again. it is stored as a thing with a name and its connections to other things. when the turn ends, the graph is still there. the next turn does not start from zero. it starts by querying what already exists, and the query walks edges instead of guessing at similarity. good graph engineering is deciding what counts as the same thing twice. the unit of work is one relationship. > they are not alternatives the graph is what refills the window. context engineering decides what fits. graph engineering decides what there is to choose from. remove the graph and every session starts blind. remove the context work and the best structure in the world arrives as an unreadable dump. that also tells you which one broke. the answer drifted from what you actually said, or forgot something from this same session. that is the window. the answer is coherent but invents a connection that does not exist, or cannot join two facts it has clearly seen. that is the structure. people debug the prompt because the prompt is the easiest thing to edit. it keeps taking the blame for failures that live a layer down. save this - then read the full breakdown below
0:40

context engineering vs graph engineering. every few months the list gets a new word and everyone treats it as a replacement for the last one. these two are not on the same list. one decides what the model sees this turn, the other decides what exists at all. the cleanest way to tell them apart is to ask what a single unit of work looks like. > context engineering is the window the window opens empty, every single time. you assemble what goes in it. the prompt, the docs, the history, the tool results. the assembling is the work. the window only grows. it never shrinks on its own, so eventually something gets dropped. usually from the middle. usually without telling you. then the turn ends and the window is thrown away. not archived, thrown away. the next turn opens empty again and you re-explain what you already explained. good context engineering is knowing what to leave out, not what to pack in. the unit of work is one window. > graph engineering is the structure the same material arrives from the same sources. instead of packing it into a window, you pull entities out of it, resolve the duplicates into one node, and write typed edges between them. nothing here is stored as text you hope to find again. it is stored as a thing with a name and its connections to other things. when the turn ends, the graph is still there. the next turn does not start from zero. it starts by querying what already exists, and the query walks edges instead of guessing at similarity. good graph engineering is deciding what counts as the same thing twice. the unit of work is one relationship. > they are not alternatives the graph is what refills the window. context engineering decides what fits. graph engineering decides what there is to choose from. remove the graph and every session starts blind. remove the context work and the best structure in the world arrives as an unreadable dump. that also tells you which one broke. the answer drifted from what you actually said, or forgot something from this same session. that is the window. the answer is coherent but invents a connection that does not exist, or cannot join two facts it has clearly seen. that is the structure. people debug the prompt because the prompt is the easiest thing to edit. it keeps taking the blame for failures that live a layer down. save this - then read the full breakdown below

Hanako

19,160 Aufrufe • vor 21 Tagen

CLAUDE CODE JUST SHIPPED THE FEATURE THAT SOLVES THE BIGGEST PROBLEM EVERY BUILDER HAS WITH AI AGENTS. The problem: Claude starts a task, gets distracted by a sub-problem, goes down a rabbit hole, and never finishes the original thing you asked for. The solution: /goal One command. You set the goal at the start of the session. Claude now has a north star it checks against every action it takes. Not just at the beginning. Throughout the entire session. Every time Claude is about to do something it asks: does this action move me toward the goal the user set or am I drifting? If it is drifting it corrects. If it completes a sub-task it returns to the primary goal. If it hits a blocker it reports back instead of spending 45 minutes solving the wrong problem. This sounds like a small feature. It is not. The reason most people do not trust Claude Code for long autonomous runs is not capability. It is reliability. A Claude Code session that reliably finishes what it started is worth 10 times more than one that is more capable but wanders. /goal is the feature that makes long autonomous sessions reliable. Set the goal. Let it run. Come back to a finished result. Not a result that got 70% done before Claude decided the sub-problem was more interesting. Done. The builders running overnight agent sessions are going to use this command on everything from today forward. Bookmark this. Follow CyrilXBT for every Claude Code feature the moment it ships.
0:24

CLAUDE CODE JUST SHIPPED THE FEATURE THAT SOLVES THE BIGGEST PROBLEM EVERY BUILDER HAS WITH AI AGENTS. The problem: Claude starts a task, gets distracted by a sub-problem, goes down a rabbit hole, and never finishes the original thing you asked for. The solution: /goal One command. You set the goal at the start of the session. Claude now has a north star it checks against every action it takes. Not just at the beginning. Throughout the entire session. Every time Claude is about to do something it asks: does this action move me toward the goal the user set or am I drifting? If it is drifting it corrects. If it completes a sub-task it returns to the primary goal. If it hits a blocker it reports back instead of spending 45 minutes solving the wrong problem. This sounds like a small feature. It is not. The reason most people do not trust Claude Code for long autonomous runs is not capability. It is reliability. A Claude Code session that reliably finishes what it started is worth 10 times more than one that is more capable but wanders. /goal is the feature that makes long autonomous sessions reliable. Set the goal. Let it run. Come back to a finished result. Not a result that got 70% done before Claude decided the sub-problem was more interesting. Done. The builders running overnight agent sessions are going to use this command on everything from today forward. Bookmark this. Follow CyrilXBT for every Claude Code feature the moment it ships.

CyrilXBT

19,586 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

DELETE FIGMA. ONE MCP CONNECTOR TURNS CLAUDE CODE INTO A GOD-MODE STUDIO IN 30 MINUTES. The exact setup, step by step, no jokes: > open connectors, add a custom connector, drop in the Higgsfield MCP > open a Claude Code session and paste one prompt > it generates the first frame, the last frame, and the motion between them > then wires the result straight into an animated hero section for your site > 30 minutes end to end, nothing rendered by hand The bigger thing hiding here: MCP means the model rents hands. it doesn't know how to animate, so it hires a tool that does, mid-task, without you switching tabs. The ceiling of what one prompt ships isn't the model anymore, it's how many hands you've plugged into it. The method underneath (the goal, the rules, the bar, the loop) is in the article below, and it works with any connector you add next.
0:32

DELETE FIGMA. ONE MCP CONNECTOR TURNS CLAUDE CODE INTO A GOD-MODE STUDIO IN 30 MINUTES. The exact setup, step by step, no jokes: > open connectors, add a custom connector, drop in the Higgsfield MCP > open a Claude Code session and paste one prompt > it generates the first frame, the last frame, and the motion between them > then wires the result straight into an animated hero section for your site > 30 minutes end to end, nothing rendered by hand The bigger thing hiding here: MCP means the model rents hands. it doesn't know how to animate, so it hires a tool that does, mid-task, without you switching tabs. The ceiling of what one prompt ships isn't the model anymore, it's how many hands you've plugged into it. The method underneath (the goal, the rules, the bar, the loop) is in the article below, and it works with any connector you add next.

Miraqle

38,373 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

Read the actual Anthropic piece. It's wilder than the hype precisely because it's so measured. As of last month, Claude writes more than 80% of the code Anthropic merges into its own codebase. Their engineers now ship roughly 8x the code per day they did in 2024. On a fixed test they run every release (take some training code, make it run faster), the model went from ~3x a year ago to ~52x. A skilled human gets about 4x in a few hours. And when a researcher hits a wrong turn mid-investigation, the newest model now picks the better next step 64% of the time. The honest part the hype skips is that Anthropic says we are NOT at self-improvement yet. Claude still can't decide which problems are worth solving. That research taste is the last thing keeping a human in the loop. But they openly map the moment it closes, when agents can build and train models themselves and Claude starts improving Claude. And the loudest signal in the whole thing sits at the end: the company building this is the one asking for a working pause button before the loop closes.
0:34

Read the actual Anthropic piece. It's wilder than the hype precisely because it's so measured. As of last month, Claude writes more than 80% of the code Anthropic merges into its own codebase. Their engineers now ship roughly 8x the code per day they did in 2024. On a fixed test they run every release (take some training code, make it run faster), the model went from ~3x a year ago to ~52x. A skilled human gets about 4x in a few hours. And when a researcher hits a wrong turn mid-investigation, the newest model now picks the better next step 64% of the time. The honest part the hype skips is that Anthropic says we are NOT at self-improvement yet. Claude still can't decide which problems are worth solving. That research taste is the last thing keeping a human in the loop. But they openly map the moment it closes, when agents can build and train models themselves and Claude starts improving Claude. And the loudest signal in the whole thing sits at the end: the company building this is the one asking for a working pause button before the loop closes.

Alex Veremeyenko

33,736 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

ANTHROPIC LEAKED A 3-SEAT SETUP WHERE THE BILL DROPS FROM $100 TO $21 AND SPEED GOES UP 3X engineers at Google and Microsoft have been running this for a while - they pay $21 where you pay $100. sorter → worker ×8 → judge → rejected → back to the worker every seat is a role you would otherwise have hired a person for - and none of the three adds headcount. Haiku throws 500 tasks a day into three buckets and doesn't think at all - anything you'd solve with a regex belongs on the cheapest seat. Sonnet carries the work across 8 parallel lanes 200 times a day - most of the bill lives right here. move this seat up one tier and the bill doubles with almost nothing to show for it. Opus runs only twice a day - expensive per turn and invisible on the bill. the author never grades its own work - Sonnet writes, Opus judges, rejected goes back. cut that judge to save money and you lose the only reason the cheap work is trusted. 3x isn't a faster model, it's eight lanes at once - you pay the latency of the slowest lane, not the sum of all. and the trap: 5x cheaper stops being true the second the cheap seat starts deciding. save this and paste it into Claude Code - and you get 3 seats instead of 3 hires ↓
1:26

ANTHROPIC LEAKED A 3-SEAT SETUP WHERE THE BILL DROPS FROM $100 TO $21 AND SPEED GOES UP 3X engineers at Google and Microsoft have been running this for a while - they pay $21 where you pay $100. sorter → worker ×8 → judge → rejected → back to the worker every seat is a role you would otherwise have hired a person for - and none of the three adds headcount. Haiku throws 500 tasks a day into three buckets and doesn't think at all - anything you'd solve with a regex belongs on the cheapest seat. Sonnet carries the work across 8 parallel lanes 200 times a day - most of the bill lives right here. move this seat up one tier and the bill doubles with almost nothing to show for it. Opus runs only twice a day - expensive per turn and invisible on the bill. the author never grades its own work - Sonnet writes, Opus judges, rejected goes back. cut that judge to save money and you lose the only reason the cheap work is trusted. 3x isn't a faster model, it's eight lanes at once - you pay the latency of the slowest lane, not the sum of all. and the trap: 5x cheaper stops being true the second the cheap seat starts deciding. save this and paste it into Claude Code - and you get 3 seats instead of 3 hires ↓

Sprytix

23,189 Aufrufe • vor 7 Tagen

AN ANTHROPIC ENGINEER LEAKED THIS OBSIDIAN CONVENTION you start with 12 notes and one convention. 6 months later you have 2379 and every one is linked to every one it belongs next to. you never touched the graph. claude did the convention is a domain prefix at the top of every markdown file. six characters. claude reads it, knows where the note belongs, and connects it to the older ones without you ever asking you drop in a new pdf at midnight. claude reads it, writes 8 linked notes, contradicts your old note from march, dates both versions, and pins the one you actually need on top by morning your vault stops being a folder. it becomes a night sky article in the first reply i test things like this on myself and share the results. follow kai if you want to see what's next
0:21

AN ANTHROPIC ENGINEER LEAKED THIS OBSIDIAN CONVENTION you start with 12 notes and one convention. 6 months later you have 2379 and every one is linked to every one it belongs next to. you never touched the graph. claude did the convention is a domain prefix at the top of every markdown file. six characters. claude reads it, knows where the note belongs, and connects it to the older ones without you ever asking you drop in a new pdf at midnight. claude reads it, writes 8 linked notes, contradicts your old note from march, dates both versions, and pins the one you actually need on top by morning your vault stops being a folder. it becomes a night sky article in the first reply i test things like this on myself and share the results. follow kai if you want to see what's next

kai

11,994 Aufrufe • vor 13 Tagen

ANTHROPIC LEAKED A SETUP THEY SPENT OVER 4 YEARS BUILDING WHERE A $30,000/MONTH TEAM GETS REPLACED BY $4 A DAY you're not a solo dev - you're one person carrying work the market prices at $30,000 a month. plan → code ×4 → tests → critic → docs → audit → back to the plan Opus cuts the task into steps and runs twice a day - the priciest model comes out at $1.05, not the biggest line on the bill. Sonnet holds 4 files at once across four lanes for $1.20 - the biggest line, and still the cheapest hour you ever bought. tests run themselves until green for $0.50 - you never see a red build again and never lose an hour to one. the critic is a different model than the one that wrote it - $0.72 for the only second pair of eyes a solo dev gets. $0.22 a day closes the docs you've been postponing for years - the cheapest role on the list turned out to be the one you skipped. the auditor at $0.32 closes the loop back into the planner - cut that edge and you get six assistants instead of a system. the left column is a hiring plan, the right column is a config file. save this and paste it into Claude Code - and you get 6 roles for $4 a day ↓
0:59

ANTHROPIC LEAKED A SETUP THEY SPENT OVER 4 YEARS BUILDING WHERE A $30,000/MONTH TEAM GETS REPLACED BY $4 A DAY you're not a solo dev - you're one person carrying work the market prices at $30,000 a month. plan → code ×4 → tests → critic → docs → audit → back to the plan Opus cuts the task into steps and runs twice a day - the priciest model comes out at $1.05, not the biggest line on the bill. Sonnet holds 4 files at once across four lanes for $1.20 - the biggest line, and still the cheapest hour you ever bought. tests run themselves until green for $0.50 - you never see a red build again and never lose an hour to one. the critic is a different model than the one that wrote it - $0.72 for the only second pair of eyes a solo dev gets. $0.22 a day closes the docs you've been postponing for years - the cheapest role on the list turned out to be the one you skipped. the auditor at $0.32 closes the loop back into the planner - cut that edge and you get six assistants instead of a system. the left column is a hiring plan, the right column is a config file. save this and paste it into Claude Code - and you get 6 roles for $4 a day ↓

Sprytix

13,458 Aufrufe • vor 7 Tagen

ANTHROPIC'S LEAD ENGINEER LEAKED A $1.2M SYSTEM THAT TURNS ONE ENGINEER INTO A FLEET OF 10 LOOPS your hands were the bottleneck all along - here are 8 steps that change that stop writing, start delegating - loop: feature, loop: bugfix, loop: tests - each runs independently and ships in parallel CLAUDE.md is law - every agent reads one file before acting - ten agents, one voice, zero chaos Opus 5 breaks the task into 3 independent subtasks - a bad plan multiplied by 10 workers equals 10 disasters each agent gets an isolated git worktree - three features land in the repo while you review one crash at hour 3 means resume at hour 3 not zero - without this you lose hours every day every loop writes its findings to the shared graph - worker 3 never repeats worker 1's dead end at night CLAUDE.md patches itself based on failures - tomorrow the fleet wakes up smarter save this and paste into Claude Code - and your first fleet of 10 loops is already running
0:54

ANTHROPIC'S LEAD ENGINEER LEAKED A $1.2M SYSTEM THAT TURNS ONE ENGINEER INTO A FLEET OF 10 LOOPS your hands were the bottleneck all along - here are 8 steps that change that stop writing, start delegating - loop: feature, loop: bugfix, loop: tests - each runs independently and ships in parallel CLAUDE.md is law - every agent reads one file before acting - ten agents, one voice, zero chaos Opus 5 breaks the task into 3 independent subtasks - a bad plan multiplied by 10 workers equals 10 disasters each agent gets an isolated git worktree - three features land in the repo while you review one crash at hour 3 means resume at hour 3 not zero - without this you lose hours every day every loop writes its findings to the shared graph - worker 3 never repeats worker 1's dead end at night CLAUDE.md patches itself based on failures - tomorrow the fleet wakes up smarter save this and paste into Claude Code - and your first fleet of 10 loops is already running

Sprytix

61,481 Aufrufe • vor 23 Tagen

Someone ran Claude Code on an e-ink notebook and the slowest screen in the world suddenly turned out to be the best home for an AI that already thinks one word at a time. This is the reMarkable Paper Pro, a paper tablet for notes with no browser and no social media and not a single app. He went into it over SSH and brought up Claude Code on Opus 4.8 on Claude Max and typed right into the terminal on the paper screen: "hello reddit, this is ssh terminal on rmpp". For years this screen got slammed for one thing. E-ink is too slow and it draws with a delay and it ghosts and it is no good for real work. But Claude itself puts out a thought one word at a time. And here is what came out of it: the very thing that killed the paper screen for normal software lined up perfectly with the pace of the AI. There is no more lag because there is nothing left to lag. And then come the things no monitor can give you. Your eyes do not get tired. You can watch Opus think on max effort for an hour and it feels like reading a book and not staring into a backlight. Nothing distracts you. Not a single notification and not a single tab and just a cursor and an agent that writes code while you simply watch the page. The charge lasts for days. E-ink barely touches the battery so Claude can grind on a task all night long and the tablet is still alive by morning. And it weighs as much as a notebook. The whole work setup now fits into a bag like a notepad with a stylus on top. Everything on the screen is for real: Claude Code v2.1.162 and bypass permissions on and Opus going off to think on max effort right on the e-ink. In my opinion this is the most unexpected home for an AI this year. Not a farm of graphics cards and not a wall of monitors but a quiet sheet of paper on a coffee table where the most powerful Claude writes code one word at a time like a pen.
0:52

Someone ran Claude Code on an e-ink notebook and the slowest screen in the world suddenly turned out to be the best home for an AI that already thinks one word at a time. This is the reMarkable Paper Pro, a paper tablet for notes with no browser and no social media and not a single app. He went into it over SSH and brought up Claude Code on Opus 4.8 on Claude Max and typed right into the terminal on the paper screen: "hello reddit, this is ssh terminal on rmpp". For years this screen got slammed for one thing. E-ink is too slow and it draws with a delay and it ghosts and it is no good for real work. But Claude itself puts out a thought one word at a time. And here is what came out of it: the very thing that killed the paper screen for normal software lined up perfectly with the pace of the AI. There is no more lag because there is nothing left to lag. And then come the things no monitor can give you. Your eyes do not get tired. You can watch Opus think on max effort for an hour and it feels like reading a book and not staring into a backlight. Nothing distracts you. Not a single notification and not a single tab and just a cursor and an agent that writes code while you simply watch the page. The charge lasts for days. E-ink barely touches the battery so Claude can grind on a task all night long and the tablet is still alive by morning. And it weighs as much as a notebook. The whole work setup now fits into a bag like a notepad with a stylus on top. Everything on the screen is for real: Claude Code v2.1.162 and bypass permissions on and Opus going off to think on max effort right on the e-ink. In my opinion this is the most unexpected home for an AI this year. Not a farm of graphics cards and not a wall of monitors but a quiet sheet of paper on a coffee table where the most powerful Claude writes code one word at a time like a pen.

Blaze

422,760 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

Anthropic Claude Code engineer: "The moment you're reviewing every line Claude writes, you became its tester. You weren't hired for that." this 36 min talk is the clearest breakdown of how to get yourself out of the loop entirely the shift is simple: you stop prompting and start building agents that work instead of you agents that run, check themselves, and keep going while your laptop is closed watch it, then build your own with the step-by-step guide below
36:48

Anthropic Claude Code engineer: "The moment you're reviewing every line Claude writes, you became its tester. You weren't hired for that." this 36 min talk is the clearest breakdown of how to get yourself out of the loop entirely the shift is simple: you stop prompting and start building agents that work instead of you agents that run, check themselves, and keep going while your laptop is closed watch it, then build your own with the step-by-step guide below

Anatoli Kopadze

28,042 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten