Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

There was a problem loading this video. This could be due to a temporary network issue or the video might be unavailable.

CLAUDE CODE + GROK + JEV - THE FILE WHERE THREE HEADS CLOSE A TICKET IN 9 MINUTES FOR $1.74 a month of this costs $208.80, the same 120 merges by hand are 300 hours and $28,500 ticket → plan → patch → tests → review → merge Claude... Code on Opus 5.5 writes the patch, Grok reads it back and argues, Jev holds the gate and merges only on green tests three heads, and not one of them is allowed to push code to prod on its own 38 files read, 3 touched, +412 lines, 48 tests, and the first four failed, so the patch went back two minutes twenty later it was 48 of 48, and only then did Jev open the gate out of 120 patches Claude Code and Grok signed off on 78 straight away and had a fight about the other 22 those 22 arguments are the product, because a reviewer that never objects is just decoration the meter clocked $208.80 for the month, and to catch the human bill it would have to keep running for another 136 months and here is the brutal part of this file: 6 of the 94 merged tickets came back with bugs every one of them sat in the part of the code the test suite has never read, because coverage there is 61% two models in the same blind spot is not two opinions, it is one mistake signed twice save this and paste it into Claude Code - let it run your ticket through these three heads ↓show more

Sprytix

8,295 subscribers

11,673 views • 3 days ago •via X (Twitter)

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

5 Comments

❀ Sofie n,3 days ago

Interesting perspective

Sofia g3 days ago

Interesting perspective

magsimich3 days ago

Now you must be making good money with this then

CODIFY3 days ago

That's impressive!

shobhanai2 days ago

This is a cool use case!

Related Videos

ANTHROPIC LEAKED A FILE WHERE 5 AGENTS WITH JEV BUILD A $1.2M A YEAR SYSTEM IN 30 MINUTES you pay $3.70 and walk away with an asset that can do $1.2M a year repo → data model → API → UI → evals no layer starts until the one under it is closed, and that edge is what turns five scripts into a system the operator on Haiku 4.5 brings up the repo and CI, the architect on Opus 5 lays down the data model and migrations two builders on Sonnet 5 run API and UI in parallel, and the reviewer on Opus 5.5 can keep finished code out of prod the evals were sitting in the file before the first line of code existed at minute zero there was not a single file, by the end it is a working product with payments and tests five agents cover in half an hour what a human team bills for a quarter JEV hands one line between layers instead of the whole history, so the next agent never re-reads the project and the run costs $3.70 instead of $370 the build takes 30 minutes, the first customers show up weeks later save this and paste it into Claude Code - let it assemble those 5 layers for you ↓

ANTHROPIC LEAKED A FILE WHERE 5 AGENTS WITH JEV BUILD A $1.2M A YEAR SYSTEM IN 30 MINUTES you pay $3.70 and walk away with an asset that can do $1.2M a year repo → data model → API → UI → evals no layer starts until the one under it is closed, and that edge is what turns five scripts into a system the operator on Haiku 4.5 brings up the repo and CI, the architect on Opus 5 lays down the data model and migrations two builders on Sonnet 5 run API and UI in parallel, and the reviewer on Opus 5.5 can keep finished code out of prod the evals were sitting in the file before the first line of code existed at minute zero there was not a single file, by the end it is a working product with payments and tests five agents cover in half an hour what a human team bills for a quarter JEV hands one line between layers instead of the whole history, so the next agent never re-reads the project and the run costs $3.70 instead of $370 the build takes 30 minutes, the first customers show up weeks later save this and paste it into Claude Code - let it assemble those 5 layers for you ↓

Sprytix

14,208 views • 9 days ago

Jev Founder, Diogo Almeida (ex-OpenAI): "The next era is not the Claude Code era. Claude Code is still part of the assistance era - Jev is the next step Jev is x200 faster, x400 cheaper and has 0 hallucination. This is what comes after RLHF" In 17 minutes he explains why every model you use has a human-shaped flaw baked into it and why Jev is better worth more than a $500 Claude Code engineering course watch today, then read how to actually boost yourself x100 with Jev in the post below

Jev Founder, Diogo Almeida (ex-OpenAI): "The next era is not the Claude Code era. Claude Code is still part of the assistance era - Jev is the next step Jev is x200 faster, x400 cheaper and has 0 hallucination. This is what comes after RLHF" In 17 minutes he explains why every model you use has a human-shaped flaw baked into it and why Jev is better worth more than a $500 Claude Code engineering course watch today, then read how to actually boost yourself x100 with Jev in the post below

Codez

191,889 views • 16 days ago

ANTHROPIC LEAKED A $4.2M FILE WHERE 4 AGENTS BUILD THE JEV SYSTEM IN 60 MINUTES, DOING $100K A MONTH four agents cost $0, and the system they assemble in an hour generates $100K a month scout → builder → critic → operator → JEV every agent is pinned to one exact model version, and none of them runs on "latest" the scout on Haiku 4.5 reads the market, the builder on Sonnet 5 builds everything, the critic on Opus 5 decides what ships the operator runs Haiku through the batch API at half price - the one agent that never has to hurry the builder takes 59% of the whole hour, because it's the one writing, and writing costs 5x more than reading short answers are cheap answers - and the whole economics rests on that one rule pin the versions in ROOT.md and next month JEV behaves exactly the same point it at "latest" and the model underneath updates quietly, no error, and the answers start to drift $100K a month is 334 customers at $299 four versions, one system - pin them and JEV stays JEV save this and paste it into Claude Code - let it build you these 4 agents ↓

ANTHROPIC LEAKED A $4.2M FILE WHERE 4 AGENTS BUILD THE JEV SYSTEM IN 60 MINUTES, DOING $100K A MONTH four agents cost $0, and the system they assemble in an hour generates $100K a month scout → builder → critic → operator → JEV every agent is pinned to one exact model version, and none of them runs on "latest" the scout on Haiku 4.5 reads the market, the builder on Sonnet 5 builds everything, the critic on Opus 5 decides what ships the operator runs Haiku through the batch API at half price - the one agent that never has to hurry the builder takes 59% of the whole hour, because it's the one writing, and writing costs 5x more than reading short answers are cheap answers - and the whole economics rests on that one rule pin the versions in ROOT.md and next month JEV behaves exactly the same point it at "latest" and the model underneath updates quietly, no error, and the answers start to drift $100K a month is 334 customers at $299 four versions, one system - pin them and JEV stays JEV save this and paste it into Claude Code - let it build you these 4 agents ↓

Sprytix

37,977 views • 14 days ago

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 ↓

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

66,333 views • 1 month ago

ANTHROPIC + GROK LEAKED A $4.2M DOCUMENT THAT LAUNCHES A BUSINESS IN 60 MINUTES AND TURNS $10 INTO $10,000 an empty file becomes a running loop in 60 minutes, and week one comes back ×1000 root → reality → surface → hunt → clock → back to root 5 blocks of 12 minutes each, and only 2 of them ever look outside both of those are Grok 4.6, because only it sees who is already selling this and what they charge right now the other three are Claude Code working inside: the root, the surface and the clock 3 blocks build, 2 blocks find out whether there is anyone to sell to the most common launch mistake is all 5 blocks facing inward - a flawless machine nobody ever asked the market about the hunt looks for who is complaining in public right now, and it's the only block that brings back live numbers the clock reads three numbers and rewrites the root, so the next pass starts from a sharper root take the hunt out and the clock counts zeros, and a loop with nothing coming in from outside is just a drawing save this and paste it into Claude Code - let it build you this loop ↓

ANTHROPIC + GROK LEAKED A $4.2M DOCUMENT THAT LAUNCHES A BUSINESS IN 60 MINUTES AND TURNS $10 INTO $10,000 an empty file becomes a running loop in 60 minutes, and week one comes back ×1000 root → reality → surface → hunt → clock → back to root 5 blocks of 12 minutes each, and only 2 of them ever look outside both of those are Grok 4.6, because only it sees who is already selling this and what they charge right now the other three are Claude Code working inside: the root, the surface and the clock 3 blocks build, 2 blocks find out whether there is anyone to sell to the most common launch mistake is all 5 blocks facing inward - a flawless machine nobody ever asked the market about the hunt looks for who is complaining in public right now, and it's the only block that brings back live numbers the clock reads three numbers and rewrites the root, so the next pass starts from a sharper root take the hunt out and the clock counts zeros, and a loop with nothing coming in from outside is just a drawing save this and paste it into Claude Code - let it build you this loop ↓

Noisy

17,621 views • 1 month ago

ANTHROPIC LEAKED A FILE THAT TURNS AN EMPTY FOLDER INTO A PRODUCT WITH A PRICE IN 60 MINUTES AND AIMS AT $100,000 A MONTH in one hour you get a product with a price on it - a startup burns a quarter and $80,000 for that same hour problem → shape → surface → price → machine → back to the problem you write only the first 12 minutes: who hurts, and what it costs them right now Opus 5 gives it a shape and then a price, three Sonnet 5 build three versions of the page Haiku 4.5 stands up the machine: delivery, the queue and the weekly numbers $100,000 a month is 1,000 customers at $100, or 10 at $10,000 same number, four completely different businesses which of those four rows you're standing on gets decided in minutes 36-48, not a year from now at minute sixty you have a product, a price and a machine - and 0 customers the hour compresses the first clock to nothing, it never touches the second one the hour makes the product, it does not make the demand save this and paste it into Claude Code - let it build you these 5 blocks ↓

ANTHROPIC LEAKED A FILE THAT TURNS AN EMPTY FOLDER INTO A PRODUCT WITH A PRICE IN 60 MINUTES AND AIMS AT $100,000 A MONTH in one hour you get a product with a price on it - a startup burns a quarter and $80,000 for that same hour problem → shape → surface → price → machine → back to the problem you write only the first 12 minutes: who hurts, and what it costs them right now Opus 5 gives it a shape and then a price, three Sonnet 5 build three versions of the page Haiku 4.5 stands up the machine: delivery, the queue and the weekly numbers $100,000 a month is 1,000 customers at $100, or 10 at $10,000 same number, four completely different businesses which of those four rows you're standing on gets decided in minutes 36-48, not a year from now at minute sixty you have a product, a price and a machine - and 0 customers the hour compresses the first clock to nothing, it never touches the second one the hour makes the product, it does not make the demand save this and paste it into Claude Code - let it build you these 5 blocks ↓

Noisy

14,595 views • 26 days ago

ANTHROPIC LEAKED A FILE WHERE 3 AGENTS BUILD AN LLM SYSTEM IN 60 MINUTES THAT PEOPLE ALREADY BUY FOR $100,800 the hour costs $0.01, and at the end of it Claude Code hands you a system worth more than $100K docs → chunks → index → retrieval → answer → eval the architect on Opus 5.5 writes the schema and the eval rubric before a single line of code exists the builder on Sonnet 5 writes the pipeline, the API and the tests before you've even opened your editor the evaluator on Haiku 4.5 runs 120 questions through the batch API at half price 2,400 files turn into a system that answers with its sources, and it's live before the hour is out one answer comes back faster than you can finish reading the question the model eats 91% of that time and retrieval eats almost none - yet retrieval is what everyone optimises the first run failed the gate, the second one passed after fixes - and the bar was set before the run started a gate written after the run isn't a gate, it's a number fitted to the result the same scope is quoted as two engineers for six weeks the hour builds the half that's fun to build your data, your load, your compliance and someone answering the phone are the other half of that $100,800 save this and paste it into Claude Code - let it build you this system ↓

ANTHROPIC LEAKED A FILE WHERE 3 AGENTS BUILD AN LLM SYSTEM IN 60 MINUTES THAT PEOPLE ALREADY BUY FOR $100,800 the hour costs $0.01, and at the end of it Claude Code hands you a system worth more than $100K docs → chunks → index → retrieval → answer → eval the architect on Opus 5.5 writes the schema and the eval rubric before a single line of code exists the builder on Sonnet 5 writes the pipeline, the API and the tests before you've even opened your editor the evaluator on Haiku 4.5 runs 120 questions through the batch API at half price 2,400 files turn into a system that answers with its sources, and it's live before the hour is out one answer comes back faster than you can finish reading the question the model eats 91% of that time and retrieval eats almost none - yet retrieval is what everyone optimises the first run failed the gate, the second one passed after fixes - and the bar was set before the run started a gate written after the run isn't a gate, it's a number fitted to the result the same scope is quoted as two engineers for six weeks the hour builds the half that's fun to build your data, your load, your compliance and someone answering the phone are the other half of that $100,800 save this and paste it into Claude Code - let it build you this system ↓

Sprytix

19,923 views • 11 days ago

Jev founder, Diogo Almeida, just put out a PDF on building a Jev harness for coding agents the claim: 200x faster, 400x cheaper the model stopped being the bottleneck a while ago. the harness around it is where the cost and the speed actually live five decisions sit on every loop, and only one of them writes code hand this PDF and the article below to your Claude Code or Codex instance and let it rebuild its own setup your agent gets a better harness tonight, and monday looks different than it would have 👇

Jev founder, Diogo Almeida, just put out a PDF on building a Jev harness for coding agents the claim: 200x faster, 400x cheaper the model stopped being the bottleneck a while ago. the harness around it is where the cost and the speed actually live five decisions sit on every loop, and only one of them writes code hand this PDF and the article below to your Claude Code or Codex instance and let it rebuild its own setup your agent gets a better harness tonight, and monday looks different than it would have 👇

Hanako

37,887 views • 10 days ago

ANTHROPIC LEAKED A FILE WHERE 42 WORDS OF ONE PROMPT TURN INTO A COMPANY DOING $100K A MONTH you write one message for $0.13 and 42 minutes later you have a whole AI company with 20 workers prompt → plan → build → launch Opus 5.5 breaks those 42 words into 6 decisions, 6 workers on Sonnet 5 build 8 artifacts, Haiku 4.5 through the batch API pulls out 5 launch channels Jev fans one message into 19 pieces and holds the budget, which is the only reason a single message is safe to run those same 42 words carry the price, the audience, the shape of the offer, a $40 spend cap and a stop after 3 failures all 19 artifacts inherit those six lines, so nobody stops mid-run to ask you what to do next by hand this same volume is 56 messages across three days, here it is one message and a wait the work is identical, what changed is how many times you had to describe it 1.47M tokens per run and on the way out you get the repo, the schema, the API, the app, the checkout, the emails, the docs and the tests then come six months: 38 customers, 82, 139, 201, and only in month six 335 at $299 and the brutal part of this file is that if the price in the prompt was wrong, 13 of the 19 artifacts get rebuilt one prompt is fast to run and expensive to be wrong in save this and paste it into Claude Code - let it fan your 42 words into 19 artifacts ↓

ANTHROPIC LEAKED A FILE WHERE 42 WORDS OF ONE PROMPT TURN INTO A COMPANY DOING $100K A MONTH you write one message for $0.13 and 42 minutes later you have a whole AI company with 20 workers prompt → plan → build → launch Opus 5.5 breaks those 42 words into 6 decisions, 6 workers on Sonnet 5 build 8 artifacts, Haiku 4.5 through the batch API pulls out 5 launch channels Jev fans one message into 19 pieces and holds the budget, which is the only reason a single message is safe to run those same 42 words carry the price, the audience, the shape of the offer, a $40 spend cap and a stop after 3 failures all 19 artifacts inherit those six lines, so nobody stops mid-run to ask you what to do next by hand this same volume is 56 messages across three days, here it is one message and a wait the work is identical, what changed is how many times you had to describe it 1.47M tokens per run and on the way out you get the repo, the schema, the API, the app, the checkout, the emails, the docs and the tests then come six months: 38 customers, 82, 139, 201, and only in month six 335 at $299 and the brutal part of this file is that if the price in the prompt was wrong, 13 of the 19 artifacts get rebuilt one prompt is fast to run and expensive to be wrong in save this and paste it into Claude Code - let it fan your 42 words into 19 artifacts ↓

Sprytix

23,613 views • 8 days ago

ANTHROPIC LEAKED A 6-LOOP SETUP THAT REPLACES A $3,000 AGENCY AND COSTS $59 A MONTH Microsoft and Google have been running this for a while - the gap against an agency is exactly 51x. an agency charged you for waiting, not for work - the brief walked from the strategist to the copywriter to the designer for weeks. here all 6 loops read one file on the same pass - there's nobody to wait on, and the calendar is empty. 51% of the bill is production on Sonnet 5, and only 5% is strategy on Opus 5 - the priciest model runs once a week. 22% of the whole bill sits on the batch queue at half rate - where nobody is waiting for an answer right now. the journal is the only loop that writes back into the root - which angle is dead, and next week starts tighter. the 6 loops bring you 3 angles a week - the final pick stays yours, and that's the part that never automates. save this and paste it into Claude Code - the loops remove the waiting, not the judgement ↓

ANTHROPIC LEAKED A 6-LOOP SETUP THAT REPLACES A $3,000 AGENCY AND COSTS $59 A MONTH Microsoft and Google have been running this for a while - the gap against an agency is exactly 51x. an agency charged you for waiting, not for work - the brief walked from the strategist to the copywriter to the designer for weeks. here all 6 loops read one file on the same pass - there's nobody to wait on, and the calendar is empty. 51% of the bill is production on Sonnet 5, and only 5% is strategy on Opus 5 - the priciest model runs once a week. 22% of the whole bill sits on the batch queue at half rate - where nobody is waiting for an answer right now. the journal is the only loop that writes back into the root - which angle is dead, and next week starts tighter. the 6 loops bring you 3 angles a week - the final pick stays yours, and that's the part that never automates. save this and paste it into Claude Code - the loops remove the waiting, not the judgement ↓

Noisy

10,557 views • 1 month ago

GROK BOT MADE ME $7,600 IN THE LAST 24 HOURS AND COSTS $1.90 A DAY TO RUN the bot is built straight from their own official docs, I didn't write a line of code - just one file, three lines root → scanner → analysis → filter → trade → back to root it reads every market and every headline at once and filters 400 signals a day out of those 400 exactly 1 makes it to a trade, the rest get killed before I wake up the priciest model on the stack gets called once a day, everything else runs on a $0.10 batch X Search eats 53% of the whole bill, because that is where the news shows up before the chart does 12 minutes of checking against a month of building - that is the whole gap between $7,600 and zero the check is 3,600× shorter than what most people do instead of it a 3-line ROOT.md gets read 30 mornings in a row and the bot never asks what to do next write those three lines badly and the machine automates the wrong business perfectly, 30 times save this and paste it into Grok - let it write your ROOT.md ↓

GROK BOT MADE ME $7,600 IN THE LAST 24 HOURS AND COSTS $1.90 A DAY TO RUN the bot is built straight from their own official docs, I didn't write a line of code - just one file, three lines root → scanner → analysis → filter → trade → back to root it reads every market and every headline at once and filters 400 signals a day out of those 400 exactly 1 makes it to a trade, the rest get killed before I wake up the priciest model on the stack gets called once a day, everything else runs on a $0.10 batch X Search eats 53% of the whole bill, because that is where the news shows up before the chart does 12 minutes of checking against a month of building - that is the whole gap between $7,600 and zero the check is 3,600× shorter than what most people do instead of it a 3-line ROOT.md gets read 30 mornings in a row and the bot never asks what to do next write those three lines badly and the machine automates the wrong business perfectly, 30 times save this and paste it into Grok - let it write your ROOT.md ↓

Sprytix

27,231 views • 1 month ago

ANTHROPIC LEAKED A FILE WHERE 4 AGENTS BUILD A BUSINESS DOING $100K A MONTH IN 60 MINUTES four agents run around the clock, cost $0 and work against a $100,000 target scout → architect → 2 builders → critic → back to root what makes it a team isn't the four agents, it's the three contracts written between them the scout hands the architect who already ships this and what they charge the architect hands the builders a spec with the interfaces named the builders hand the critic a diff and the tests that cover it leave any one of those boundaries vague and the work goes missing exactly there Haiku 4.5 triages cheap, Opus 5 decides expensive, Sonnet 5 builds, Opus 5 judges the most expensive model runs twice: once to plan, once to pass verdict two builders in parallel is two ways to disagree - which is exactly what the gate is for $100,000 is 334 customers at $299, $50,000 is 167, $10,000 is 34 and what you pay isn't even visible on that same scale the cost was never the thing standing in your way save this and paste it into Claude Code - let it write your 3 contracts ↓

ANTHROPIC LEAKED A FILE WHERE 4 AGENTS BUILD A BUSINESS DOING $100K A MONTH IN 60 MINUTES four agents run around the clock, cost $0 and work against a $100,000 target scout → architect → 2 builders → critic → back to root what makes it a team isn't the four agents, it's the three contracts written between them the scout hands the architect who already ships this and what they charge the architect hands the builders a spec with the interfaces named the builders hand the critic a diff and the tests that cover it leave any one of those boundaries vague and the work goes missing exactly there Haiku 4.5 triages cheap, Opus 5 decides expensive, Sonnet 5 builds, Opus 5 judges the most expensive model runs twice: once to plan, once to pass verdict two builders in parallel is two ways to disagree - which is exactly what the gate is for $100,000 is 334 customers at $299, $50,000 is 167, $10,000 is 34 and what you pay isn't even visible on that same scale the cost was never the thing standing in your way save this and paste it into Claude Code - let it write your 3 contracts ↓

Sprytix

146,843 views • 19 days ago

This Chinese developer runs 9 agents on Claude Code under a GPT-5.5 orchestrator and they close 500 client tasks a month without a single assistant. His client work is closed without him, on a single laptop and only three subscriptions. The entire system lives on one MacBook Pro M4 with 128 GB of memory and subscriptions to Claude Code and GPT-5.5 cost him approximately $300 a month. There is no CRM, no team, no office only a terminal window with 9 parallel streams. The orchestrator works with a simple system prompt: «You are the orchestrator of a client inbox. Classify every incoming email into 4 categories: code, content, analysis, communication. Delegate to the corresponding worker agent. When the result is ready, check it for completeness, send it to the client on my behalf, and mark the task as closed. Do not ask clarifying questions.» And the orchestrator checks the inbox every 30 seconds, classifies fresh emails, and distributes them to 9 worker agents on Claude Code, each of whom is responsible for their own class of tasks. Here is an example of how one of them closes a request to refactor a client's auth module: Task: refactor user-auth module Broke the monolith into 3 files by responsibilities Added unit tests, coverage increased to 87% Renamed 4 functions to camelCase according to the style guide PR is ready for review, link below» And so about 50 cycles a day. By noon 25 tasks are closed, by dinner 50, and by the end of the month 500. On average, it takes about 7 minutes from the appearance of an email in the inbox to sending the result to the client. This is more than what a live team of 6 developers, copywriters and analysts working 8 hours a day closes. This is no longer an agency. This is a workstation where an orchestrator replaces a manager, and 9 worker agents replace the staff. The pipeline goes from inbox to closing 500 times a month without human participation at any step.

This Chinese developer runs 9 agents on Claude Code under a GPT-5.5 orchestrator and they close 500 client tasks a month without a single assistant. His client work is closed without him, on a single laptop and only three subscriptions. The entire system lives on one MacBook Pro M4 with 128 GB of memory and subscriptions to Claude Code and GPT-5.5 cost him approximately $300 a month. There is no CRM, no team, no office only a terminal window with 9 parallel streams. The orchestrator works with a simple system prompt: «You are the orchestrator of a client inbox. Classify every incoming email into 4 categories: code, content, analysis, communication. Delegate to the corresponding worker agent. When the result is ready, check it for completeness, send it to the client on my behalf, and mark the task as closed. Do not ask clarifying questions.» And the orchestrator checks the inbox every 30 seconds, classifies fresh emails, and distributes them to 9 worker agents on Claude Code, each of whom is responsible for their own class of tasks. Here is an example of how one of them closes a request to refactor a client's auth module: Task: refactor user-auth module Broke the monolith into 3 files by responsibilities Added unit tests, coverage increased to 87% Renamed 4 functions to camelCase according to the style guide PR is ready for review, link below» And so about 50 cycles a day. By noon 25 tasks are closed, by dinner 50, and by the end of the month 500. On average, it takes about 7 minutes from the appearance of an email in the inbox to sending the result to the client. This is more than what a live team of 6 developers, copywriters and analysts working 8 hours a day closes. This is no longer an agency. This is a workstation where an orchestrator replaces a manager, and 9 worker agents replace the staff. The pipeline goes from inbox to closing 500 times a month without human participation at any step.

Blaze

29,917 views • 5 months ago

ANTHROPIC LEAKED A FILE THAT BUILDS A 12-PERSON TEAM FOR $0 - AND THAT TEAM BUILDS A BUSINESS DOING $1.4M A YEAR a 12-person team would cost you $50,000 a month, this one costs exactly zero and shows a result in 5 days root → contracts → staff → gates → clock → back to root the root never describes the product, it describes who is going to build it the first hour writes the team, the next day that team writes the product Opus 5 sits on the architect and the critic, three Sonnet 5 build, one more tests Haiku 4.5 keeps the records, and the auditor rewrites the team rules, never the product $1.4M is either 400 customers at $292 a month, or 39 clients at $3,000 the staff is real and costs $792 a year, the revenue line above it is arithmetic the cascade builds the machine, it does not sign a single one of those numbers want a different product - you change the task, not rebuild the system demand is decided by the offer, never by the file save this and paste it into Claude Code - let it build your ROOT.md ↓

ANTHROPIC LEAKED A FILE THAT BUILDS A 12-PERSON TEAM FOR $0 - AND THAT TEAM BUILDS A BUSINESS DOING $1.4M A YEAR a 12-person team would cost you $50,000 a month, this one costs exactly zero and shows a result in 5 days root → contracts → staff → gates → clock → back to root the root never describes the product, it describes who is going to build it the first hour writes the team, the next day that team writes the product Opus 5 sits on the architect and the critic, three Sonnet 5 build, one more tests Haiku 4.5 keeps the records, and the auditor rewrites the team rules, never the product $1.4M is either 400 customers at $292 a month, or 39 clients at $3,000 the staff is real and costs $792 a year, the revenue line above it is arithmetic the cascade builds the machine, it does not sign a single one of those numbers want a different product - you change the task, not rebuild the system demand is decided by the offer, never by the file save this and paste it into Claude Code - let it build your ROOT.md ↓

Sprytix

39,041 views • 28 days ago

THE HEAD ENGINEER AT ANTHROPIC LEAKED A SETUP WHERE ONE FILE TURNS INTO A FINISHED PRODUCT IN 24 HOURS you hire nobody - you paste a $3.2M file into Fable 5, and the system unrolls itself from there. root → wiring → 4 branches → tests → release → back into the root in the first hour you write 4 things: boundaries, stack, roles, escalation - everything downstream is a consequence of that file. the first 5 hours the system wires itself into tools and only then decides what to build - a team would spread that across two weeks. 8 straight hours run 4 parallel branches with zero meetings - the same block a team fills with standups. by the time you finally open the diff, tests and the critic have already rejected it twice. the changelog is written by the run, not by a human from memory - so it never falls behind the code. your total involvement across the day is exactly 2 hours: the first one, and the one where you say ship it. the 9 hours you were asleep weren't downtime, they were capacity - a queue you have to launch by hand becomes your monday. and the key part: at 05:00 the report rewrites that same root - what shipped, what got rejected, what it cost. without that last line this is just a schedule - with it, the schedule improves itself. save this and paste it into Claude Code - and tomorrow starts from a better file than today did ↓

THE HEAD ENGINEER AT ANTHROPIC LEAKED A SETUP WHERE ONE FILE TURNS INTO A FINISHED PRODUCT IN 24 HOURS you hire nobody - you paste a $3.2M file into Fable 5, and the system unrolls itself from there. root → wiring → 4 branches → tests → release → back into the root in the first hour you write 4 things: boundaries, stack, roles, escalation - everything downstream is a consequence of that file. the first 5 hours the system wires itself into tools and only then decides what to build - a team would spread that across two weeks. 8 straight hours run 4 parallel branches with zero meetings - the same block a team fills with standups. by the time you finally open the diff, tests and the critic have already rejected it twice. the changelog is written by the run, not by a human from memory - so it never falls behind the code. your total involvement across the day is exactly 2 hours: the first one, and the one where you say ship it. the 9 hours you were asleep weren't downtime, they were capacity - a queue you have to launch by hand becomes your monday. and the key part: at 05:00 the report rewrites that same root - what shipped, what got rejected, what it cost. without that last line this is just a schedule - with it, the schedule improves itself. save this and paste it into Claude Code - and tomorrow starts from a better file than today did ↓

Sprytix

20,755 views • 1 month ago

BlackRock runs on 20,000 people. Elon's Grok Bot runs the same shape for $300 a month, and it hires its own staff. You do not get an assistant. You get a company that hires. It does not throw ten agents at your problem and hand you the pile. It makes one agent that makes 10, and those ten make a 100. > LAYER ONE is one agent, the chief of staff, and it never touches the market > LAYER TWO is six desk heads, one job each, every one on its own computer with its own logins > LAYER THREE is whatever those six decide they need, spun up on the spot and shut down when the work is done Nobody writes a task list. You hand out job titles and the org fills itself in underneath. The swarm is never the same twice. Agents get spun up for one job, finish it, and are gone before I ever read their names. Not one of them sees the whole picture. The answer only exists after they hand off to each other. Wall Street cannot copy that. You cannot hire a hundred people for eleven minutes. BlackRock holds that shape together with a risk system called Aladdin. Mine holds it together with one agent that is only allowed to say no. I gave it $1,000 and told it to grow the money or get deleted. 15 hours later it was holding $3,900, on an address anyone can open and read. I was asleep for most of it, and I have still not written a line of code. The whole thing runs with my laptop shut, because none of it lives on my laptop. Setup is one evening. Create the chief, hand out the titles, run one trade on your screen while they watch, connect Telegram. Ten years ago a machine this shape had its name on a tower. Mine has a name I typed into a box. Save this while the whole thing still fits on one screen.

BlackRock runs on 20,000 people. Elon's Grok Bot runs the same shape for $300 a month, and it hires its own staff. You do not get an assistant. You get a company that hires. It does not throw ten agents at your problem and hand you the pile. It makes one agent that makes 10, and those ten make a 100. > LAYER ONE is one agent, the chief of staff, and it never touches the market > LAYER TWO is six desk heads, one job each, every one on its own computer with its own logins > LAYER THREE is whatever those six decide they need, spun up on the spot and shut down when the work is done Nobody writes a task list. You hand out job titles and the org fills itself in underneath. The swarm is never the same twice. Agents get spun up for one job, finish it, and are gone before I ever read their names. Not one of them sees the whole picture. The answer only exists after they hand off to each other. Wall Street cannot copy that. You cannot hire a hundred people for eleven minutes. BlackRock holds that shape together with a risk system called Aladdin. Mine holds it together with one agent that is only allowed to say no. I gave it $1,000 and told it to grow the money or get deleted. 15 hours later it was holding $3,900, on an address anyone can open and read. I was asleep for most of it, and I have still not written a line of code. The whole thing runs with my laptop shut, because none of it lives on my laptop. Setup is one evening. Create the chief, hand out the titles, run one trade on your screen while they watch, connect Telegram. Ten years ago a machine this shape had its name on a tower. Mine has a name I typed into a box. Save this while the whole thing still fits on one screen.

cvxv666

45,488 views • 1 month ago

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 ↓

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

137,040 views • 1 month ago

Official Anthropic tip for Claude Code: stop burning Opus 5.5 on work Sonnet 5.5 can do, while Fable 5.1 sits idle hand the grunt work to Sonnet 5.5 subagents and put Fable 5.1 on call run /advisor fable Opus 5.5 plans and merges Sonnet 5.5 subagents read, edit and run the tests Fable 5.1 reads the full session and only speaks up at three points: → before a plan: is this the right approach? → when the same error comes back: am I digging in the wrong place? → before "done": what did I miss? Sonnet 5.5 builds. Fable 5.1 reviews. Opus 5.5 ships Jev engineering is the same move one layer down: the forks that need no thinker (which file, which tool, retry or stop) go to Jev in under half a second, and the big models only see the ones that split - the full tree > Opus 5.5 on high runs the main session > explorer reads the code on Sonnet 5.5 > worker edits and runs tests on Sonnet 5.5 > researcher pulls the docs on Sonnet 5.5 > all three on medium > Fable 5.1 on call for main and every subagent paste the tree and this prompt into Claude Code ↓ "Rebuild my Claude Code setup around this tree: 1. Check ~/.claude/agents and .claude/agents for subagents that already fit explorer, worker and researcher. > Draft new ones only for missing roles > Give each model: sonnet, effort: medium > Skip any that pin a different model and list them 2. Set the main session to high via effortLevel in ~/.claude/settings.json, and set advisorModel to fable 3. Find anything that keeps the advisor off (CLAUDE_CODE_DISABLE_ADVISOR_TOOL, DISABLE_TELEMETRY) plus CLAUDE_CODE_EFFORT_LEVEL, which overrides subagent effort. Report them, change nothing 4. Add one rule to ~/.claude/CLAUDE.md: consult the advisor before a large plan, when an error repeats, and before calling a long task done Show me every change as a diff first. No edits until I say go." ↳

Official Anthropic tip for Claude Code: stop burning Opus 5.5 on work Sonnet 5.5 can do, while Fable 5.1 sits idle hand the grunt work to Sonnet 5.5 subagents and put Fable 5.1 on call run /advisor fable Opus 5.5 plans and merges Sonnet 5.5 subagents read, edit and run the tests Fable 5.1 reads the full session and only speaks up at three points: → before a plan: is this the right approach? → when the same error comes back: am I digging in the wrong place? → before "done": what did I miss? Sonnet 5.5 builds. Fable 5.1 reviews. Opus 5.5 ships Jev engineering is the same move one layer down: the forks that need no thinker (which file, which tool, retry or stop) go to Jev in under half a second, and the big models only see the ones that split - the full tree > Opus 5.5 on high runs the main session > explorer reads the code on Sonnet 5.5 > worker edits and runs tests on Sonnet 5.5 > researcher pulls the docs on Sonnet 5.5 > all three on medium > Fable 5.1 on call for main and every subagent paste the tree and this prompt into Claude Code ↓ "Rebuild my Claude Code setup around this tree: 1. Check ~/.claude/agents and .claude/agents for subagents that already fit explorer, worker and researcher. > Draft new ones only for missing roles > Give each model: sonnet, effort: medium > Skip any that pin a different model and list them 2. Set the main session to high via effortLevel in ~/.claude/settings.json, and set advisorModel to fable 3. Find anything that keeps the advisor off (CLAUDE_CODE_DISABLE_ADVISOR_TOOL, DISABLE_TELEMETRY) plus CLAUDE_CODE_EFFORT_LEVEL, which overrides subagent effort. Report them, change nothing 4. Add one rule to ~/.claude/CLAUDE.md: consult the advisor before a large plan, when an error repeats, and before calling a long task done Show me every change as a diff first. No edits until I say go." ↳

delost

42,409 views • 2 days ago

Claude Code tip: once Opus 5.5 is your main model, stop letting your Fable 5.1 quota go to waste put it on call with /advisor run /advisor fable Opus 5.5 keeps doing the work Fable 5.1 sits on the sidelines, reads the whole session, and steps in at three moments: → before a plan: is this right? → when the same error comes back: am I going the wrong way? → before "done": did I miss anything? Fable 5.1 advises. Opus 5.5 writes the code the same idea sits under Jev engineering: the expensive model stops weighing in on every step and only gets called at the moments that change the outcome • the full setup > Opus 5.5 on high runs the main session > subagent one reads code > subagent two edits and runs tests > subagent three looks up docs > all three on medium > Fable 5.1 on call hand the tree and this prompt to Claude Code 👇 "Set up my Claude Code to match this tree: 1. Reuse fitting subagents from ~/.claude/agents and .claude/agents. > Propose new ones only for missing roles > Set each to model: opus, effort: medium > Leave any that set a different model alone and list them 2. Set main session effort to high via effortLevel in ~/.claude/settings.json 3. Check for env vars that disable the advisor (CLAUDE_CODE_DISABLE_ADVISOR_TOOL, DISABLE_TELEMETRY, anything that stops flag fetching) and CLAUDE_CODE_EFFORT_LEVEL, which overrides subagent effort. Report them, don't change them 4. Add a rule to ~/.claude/CLAUDE.md: ask the advisor before a big plan, when an error repeats, and before calling a long task done Show me the changes first. Don't edit files yet." ↳

Claude Code tip: once Opus 5.5 is your main model, stop letting your Fable 5.1 quota go to waste put it on call with /advisor run /advisor fable Opus 5.5 keeps doing the work Fable 5.1 sits on the sidelines, reads the whole session, and steps in at three moments: → before a plan: is this right? → when the same error comes back: am I going the wrong way? → before "done": did I miss anything? Fable 5.1 advises. Opus 5.5 writes the code the same idea sits under Jev engineering: the expensive model stops weighing in on every step and only gets called at the moments that change the outcome • the full setup > Opus 5.5 on high runs the main session > subagent one reads code > subagent two edits and runs tests > subagent three looks up docs > all three on medium > Fable 5.1 on call hand the tree and this prompt to Claude Code 👇 "Set up my Claude Code to match this tree: 1. Reuse fitting subagents from ~/.claude/agents and .claude/agents. > Propose new ones only for missing roles > Set each to model: opus, effort: medium > Leave any that set a different model alone and list them 2. Set main session effort to high via effortLevel in ~/.claude/settings.json 3. Check for env vars that disable the advisor (CLAUDE_CODE_DISABLE_ADVISOR_TOOL, DISABLE_TELEMETRY, anything that stops flag fetching) and CLAUDE_CODE_EFFORT_LEVEL, which overrides subagent effort. Report them, don't change them 4. Add a rule to ~/.claude/CLAUDE.md: ask the advisor before a big plan, when an error repeats, and before calling a long task done Show me the changes first. Don't edit files yet." ↳

Mr. Buzzoni

323,076 views • 7 days ago

Someone ran Claude Code on a beach where any device overheats and that spot suddenly turned out to be the best home for the most powerful AI in the world. This is the reMarkable Paper Pro. A paper tablet for notes with no browser and no social media and not a single app. He sat down right on the sand in the open sun and brought up Claude Code on Opus 4.6 over the Claude API on the paper screen and opened his project ~/repos/webs while the waves broke a few steps away. For years every device had the same trouble outside. In direct sun the screen glares and washes out and heats up and instead of your work you see your own reflection. But e-ink does not blast its own light into your face. It reflects the sunlight like the page of a book. And here is what came out of it. The very thing that kills any normal screen outside turned into fuel for this one. The brighter the sun the sharper the picture because it has nothing to glare with and nothing to wash out. And then comes the thing no laptop on a beach will give you. Your eyes do not get tired. You can watch Opus think on max effort for an hour and it reads like a book in the sun and not a backlight you squint into. The picture only comes alive. In bright light it does not fade but turns sharper and higher in contrast than it ever was in a room. The charge lasts for days. E-ink barely touches the battery so there is no outlet anywhere on the sand and the tablet does not care. It weighs as much as a notebook. The whole setup folds into a beach bag like a pad with a pen on top. Everything on the screen is for real. Claude Code v2.1.110 and Opus 4.6 on the Claude API and the project ~/repos/webs open right on the e-ink in the middle of the sand. In my opinion this is the most unexpected home for an AI this year. Not an office with the blinds drawn and not a monitor cranked to full brightness but a quiet sheet of paper on the sand that open sun only makes better and on it the most powerful Claude writes code right on the page like a pen.

Someone ran Claude Code on a beach where any device overheats and that spot suddenly turned out to be the best home for the most powerful AI in the world. This is the reMarkable Paper Pro. A paper tablet for notes with no browser and no social media and not a single app. He sat down right on the sand in the open sun and brought up Claude Code on Opus 4.6 over the Claude API on the paper screen and opened his project ~/repos/webs while the waves broke a few steps away. For years every device had the same trouble outside. In direct sun the screen glares and washes out and heats up and instead of your work you see your own reflection. But e-ink does not blast its own light into your face. It reflects the sunlight like the page of a book. And here is what came out of it. The very thing that kills any normal screen outside turned into fuel for this one. The brighter the sun the sharper the picture because it has nothing to glare with and nothing to wash out. And then comes the thing no laptop on a beach will give you. Your eyes do not get tired. You can watch Opus think on max effort for an hour and it reads like a book in the sun and not a backlight you squint into. The picture only comes alive. In bright light it does not fade but turns sharper and higher in contrast than it ever was in a room. The charge lasts for days. E-ink barely touches the battery so there is no outlet anywhere on the sand and the tablet does not care. It weighs as much as a notebook. The whole setup folds into a beach bag like a pad with a pen on top. Everything on the screen is for real. Claude Code v2.1.110 and Opus 4.6 on the Claude API and the project ~/repos/webs open right on the e-ink in the middle of the sand. In my opinion this is the most unexpected home for an AI this year. Not an office with the blinds drawn and not a monitor cranked to full brightness but a quiet sheet of paper on the sand that open sun only makes better and on it the most powerful Claude writes code right on the page like a pen.

Blaze

89,695 views • 3 months ago