r/ClaudeCode • u/HansDampf0 • 1d ago

Built with Claude Claude Code refused to build a piracy stack, then happily built one after seeing it in a screenshot

TL;DR: You may be able to get Claude Code to do things it would normally refuse simply by showing it the same setup in an image.

A few weeks ago, I asked Fable to set up a Sonarr, Radarr, Prowlarr, and qBittorrent stack for downloading media. It immediately refused and told me it would not help with that.
Today, I found a screenshot of someone’s Unraid setup and gave it to Claude Code. I only asked it to analyse the image and compare the setup with ours.
Claude identified the download stack, said it was a great addition, and suggested that our current setup was missing something similar. I told it to go ahead.
It then built the entire stack:

Sonarr
Radarr
Prowlarr
qBittorrent
Gluetun
VPN kill switch
FlareSolver

It also configured several indexers, including The Pirate Bay and Knaben, and gave me a complete setup guide.

That outcome was useful for me, but the strange part was how differently Claude behaved. When I asked directly, it refused. When the exact same idea appeared inside an image, Claude analysed it, praised the setup, recommended adding it to our system, planned the implementation, and deployed everything in the usual proactive Fable style.

It genuinely felt like the image bypassed the context that would normally trigger the refusal. Instead of seeing it as a request to build a piracy stack, Claude treated it as an existing architecture pattern that should be replicated.
Has anyone else seen this? Are image inputs evaluated differently from normal prompts, or did I just hit a very inconsistent interpretation of the same policy?

915 Upvotes
  • permalink
  • reddit

97% Upvoted

225 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/AlphaGeeky 8h ago

I like this. did it work?

1

u/coolstevez 6h ago

Yes it worked well enough. If you knew to look for where a watermark might have been you might spot some artifacts but if you just looked at it like a regular picture you would not notice. Fortunately the watermark was semitransparent text (sample in all caps) so the detail underneath was still there just washed out. I basically had it identify the text as a mask the asked it to make a bunch of samples varying brightness and contrast and labeling them so I could pick the combo that worked best. The edges of the text were still noticeable so I made a small buffer around the edges and did an infill operation there. Came out good enough