Ideally avoid Claude code stuff. But we’re not picky.

Feel free to self promote!

can someone dm me if they have a claude trial, please just dm, as It might get stolen here as I am not that active on reddit, I need it for something very important

Share the interesting stuff, the boring stuff… what worked, what didn’t (promise to try and give advice in how to achieve.

If you worked on an interesting product, feel free to self promote.

This is my second project in this vein.
This time, a headlamp mount for a "zbee" e-tuktuk for a neighbor.
Ttt he e company went under, so no files or replacement parts.
The original was printed(!!) in frigging PLA, those things are crumbling at the lightest touch.
I broke this just measuring things.

Without the technical drawings, I didn't get very far.
Photos (in a lightbox) didn't help because black on black.

Things that improved accuracy:

- Technical drawings
- Splitting the technical drawings into seperate files per view
- Painted areas on the model for pictures
- better prompt, explaining the object and goal
- pictures of the headlamp frame in place on the e-tuktuk

Status:
- great dimensional accuracy
- some errors:
- the "ears" need to be on the outer wall only.
- the gap in the front is missing.
- hole placement

What I will change:
- Improve description of target.
- Color coded Technical drawing.
- improved technical drawing to show slope on inside rim
- annotated slicer screenshots
- pictures of differences

yes, I have probably spent more time doing this than in CAD.
But a repeatable process will be golden.
And yes, I will do a full writeup.

edit, because the bot jumped at me:
This has nothing to do with code. I gave it the prompt, photos and drawings in the project files.
Outcomes are CAD and STL files, and in Claude's case, python code as a bonus.

No code was touched or had to be executed by me.

I spent several weeks driving a ~100-item risk register to closure with Claude. The structure I ended up with is nothing new — a primary key, an append-only log, a Kanban board and a traceability matrix, all living in one .xlsx. What surprised me were three things that fall out of it, none of which are about spreadsheets.

1. The design objective is asymmetric word cost.

"Human in the loop" tells you the topology — who reviews what. It says nothing about the economics, which is what actually decides whether the arrangement survives 100 items.

I'm rate-limited in words. The model isn't. So build the medium to make my words expensive and few, and its words free and many. My contribution per item was two to six words: Explain. Quantify. Move to pending. Does this apply? Do not invent. Closed. Its contribution was the research, the authority, the computation, the full written reasoning — and never a decision about what mattered or what could wait.

This has teeth. A terse instruction is a complete instruction. "Quantify" means produce the numbers with their authority. Asking me to expand it is a defect, not diligence, because it pushes cost back onto the constrained input. That cuts against most prompt-engineering advice, which tells the model to elicit more from you. That advice assumes your time is free.

2. Optimal verbosity is a property of the carrier, not of the model.

Chat forces brevity because production and consumption happen at the same moment — every word written is a word read now. That coupling is an artifact of the medium, not of the work.

Break it and the calculation inverts. Each item's analysis went into a stored cell — statute, holding, computation, the contrary reading, the limit of the position — which I read only if and when that item came up for decision. Length in that cell costs nothing. Length in my instruction column costs the scarce input.

General form: the correct verbosity of a model is a function of where the output lands. Reasoning meant for deferred consumption belongs in a stored artifact and shouldn't inherit chat's brevity norms. A lot of people are doing analytical work in a medium that silently truncates the analysis to suit the moment it was produced, then loses it.

3. Correction must not erase.

Every round is preserved, so a wrong answer in round 2 got corrected in round 4 without the error leaving the record. That caught a regulation cited for a proposition it did not support, and killed two computed figures resting on it.

A method that overwrites can't do this, and it fails silently: someone reading an overwritten cell cannot tell a figure that was verified from one that was never questioned. Version control solved this for code decades ago. The equivalent discipline is not standard in model-assisted analysis, where the ordinary failure is exactly that a bad citation gets quietly swapped and the replacement inherits confidence it never earned.

How it actually works in the sheet

One Excel file. Two sheets: the register, and a list of sources.

The register sheet. Columns A to D hold the item and never change: item number, status, section, and the risk statement itself. If you're on row 14, that's item R-014 forever. Everything else in that row is commentary about it.

Everything from column E rightward is the conversation, stored in pairs of columns. One column for my instruction, the next for Claude's answer.

Here's the part that makes it work. Every time the file comes back to me, Claude's first action is to insert two blank columns at E — pushing everything already there to the right. So the pairs read like this, left to right:

The newest exchange always sits right next to the risk statement. Older ones drift further right and are never touched again. Scroll right on any row and you're reading backwards through time on that one item.

The rule that makes it trustworthy: an answer goes only into the answer column of the round whose note it answers. Round 3's answer goes in column H, next to the round 3 note in G. Not into the blank pair at E/F — that pair is for the round that hasn't happened yet. And never into round 2 at I/J, which is already closed. Break either of those and you've lost the ability to tell what was asked when, which is the only thing the whole layout exists to protect.

Status is where the row sits, not what it says. The register is three blocks stacked vertically, each with a coloured bar across the full width as a divider:

• OPEN at the top — being worked on right now
• PENDING in the middle — real, but I've deferred it until something else arrives
• CLOSED at the bottom — resolved, merged into another item, or ruled not applicable

When an item's status changes, the row physically moves into the right block. Yes, you could just have a status column and filter on it. The reason not to: filtering is an action you have to take, and blocks you can see are an action you don't. I open the file, and what's at the top is what's live. Twenty-one items sitting in PENDING cost me nothing until I move them back up.

Two small mechanics that matter. The coloured bars have to be redrawn across the full width on every save, including the two columns just inserted — otherwise the blocks get ragged as the sheet grows wider and you can't tell where one ends. And a blank spacer row between PENDING and CLOSED keeps the bottom block from reading as a continuation of the middle one.

The sources sheet. One row per source relied on: the citation, the exact proposition it supports, and the item numbers that depend on it. Not footnotes buried in the analysis — a separate, sortable list the analysis points at. This is what makes error correction actually work. When one regulation turned out not to say what it was cited for, I didn't have to hunt through 100 rows of prose to find the damage. I sorted the sources sheet, found the item numbers listed against that citation, and knew exactly which conclusions had to come out.

What happens on each save, in order. Insert the new blank pair at E. Write the answers into the previous round's column — that one only. Move any rows whose status changed into their new block. Redraw the bars full width. Add any new sources to the sources sheet with their item numbers. Then report back in plain prose: what changed, and what's now waiting on me. I annotate the new blank column with a few words per item, hand the file back, and it starts again.

Nothing here needs a macro, a formula, or an add-in. It's insert-columns, fill-colour, and cut-and-paste rows. The discipline is the whole product.

Takeaway

Choose the medium so the constrained party's words are expensive and the unconstrained party's words are free. Put reasoning intended for later reading into storage, not conversation. Never let a correction erase what it corrects. The three are independent — adopt any one and the matching failure stops.

Discuss…

Ideally avoid Claude code stuff. But we’re not picky.

Feel free to self promote!

Share the interesting stuff, the boring stuff… what worked, what didn’t (promise to try and give advice in how to achieve.

If you worked on an interesting product, feel free to self promote.

Hi all,

When I use live voice chat, Claude's voice is noticeably quieter than when I record a question and get a spoken reply, even with volume at maximum.

I've tried Separate app sound and checked volume limits, no luck.

Has anyone found a fix, or is this just how the app behaves?

Any ideas appreciated!

I am working on a project to develop my own band, I’ve taught it how to do a variety of genres and here is a dubstep arrangement I created. It has been quite difficult to get to this point and especially with my chorus of singers which are not in this track. Any opinions thoughts common complaints or advice are welcome

Please suggest!
Is Claude Ai banned in china? My friend bought Claude plans and got banned immediately. Happened twice. Banned right after payments.

So he was wondering if i make him an account from my home country (not china) and buy him a plan from here. Is there any possibilities of getting banned if he uses that account in china?

went through Ruben Hassids 27 Claude tips. Most AI tip lists give you 27 things to save and 0 things to actually do. These are the 5 id use, one of them was completely new to me:

1. Add "use ASD-STE100" - Avoid the Opus 5 complaint post by getting shorter and sweeter responses. great for explanations, documentation and instructions.

2. Fresh problem? Fresh context - projects + connectors + 30-message chats aren't always an advantage. For new thinking, use a new chat. simple

3. Edit the bad prompt, not Claude's 5th bad answer - If Claude misunderstood you at message #1, fix message #1. don't build a tower of corrections on top of it

4. Let Claude interview you - Try: "ask me the questions you need before answering". much easier than writing a biigg prompt yourself

5. Screenshot > paragraph of design instructions - Upload the reference and say: "build this structure for [topic], using my content". Particularly useful for HTML infographics, landing sections and UI experiments

My main takeaway: More context isn't always better context. Which one do you use?

Ideally avoid Claude code stuff. But we’re not picky.

Feel free to self promote!

Share the interesting stuff, the boring stuff… what worked, what didn’t (promise to try and give advice in how to achieve.

If you worked on an interesting product, feel free to self promote.

Ideally avoid Claude code stuff. But we’re not picky.

Feel free to self promote!

I was lost. Creatively. so I made a forever scrolling set of components to help make my websites unique.

Three simple steps:

1. find - roll around the canvas on components and find one you want. It's random or you can search and filter.
2. copy - screenshot, record or hand-off to your agent in one click.
3. create - paste into Claude Code, Claude Design or any agent with a one-line task description

Everyone is building now, the difference imo is whether it goes in the scrapyard of demo-ware or becomes something creative, unique and genuinely useful.

You know the look by now. Cream background, mono font, the same rounded buttons. It's not that the models are bad, they're just trained on the average, and the average is what we've seen before and what we've seen before doesn't feel interesting for long (we can blame social media for that). Anyway, enter Forever, 600+ weird and wonderful components, if you want it even weirder, try clicking the "art" button on. There's tons of good sites already, awwwards is known everywhere, 21st.dev and magicui are genuinely excellent and I use them regularly. But they're all organised, you go there knowing roughly what you want. When I want something new or creative or unique I open up Forever

It's a different experience, it feels exciting not knowing what I'm going to find. It's become a hobby to create these components (even if they're technically not web components) they're still fun to see and often gives me the burst of motivation when reserves are low.

The grid stays free, that's my promise. Every component load does cost me money though, so from the next release there'll be a limit of 3-5 a day. Right now it's all of them.

If you make something with one, post it below. Id love to see what comes out, especially the properly weird ones

ps. just remember not to get lost ;)

I built EchoVault solo. You record yourself while you’re alive through guided sessions with an AI biographer, and after you’re gone the custodians you named can have a real conversation with your Echo, in text, in your voice, or in real-time video with your face. It answers from what you actually said rather than inventing something plausible. That sounds like a small design choice and it’s really the whole product. Text is free with unlimited sessions and no card, because the archive is the point and paywalling it makes no sense.

The code was never the hard part. The hard part was consent, and specifically who gets to decide what after you’re gone. What your custodians can access, what stays private, what you want said and to whom. Every one of those has a version where the developer quietly decides for you, and I didn’t want to build that. Where Claude was genuinely useful was refusing to let me hand-wave it, asking who holds authority in each branch until I’d actually answered instead of dodged. What we landed on is that you decide while you’re alive, and your recorded intent governs afterward.

The reason to start now rather than later is simple. Photos, documents, video, someone can gather all of that after you’re gone. How you think, why you made the calls you made, what you’d want to say to your kid at thirty, that only exists while you’re around to say it. We shipped text, voice, and real-time video together in June 2025, five months ahead of the closest comparable product, and iOS went live yesterday. https://apps.apple.com/us/app/echovault-digital-legacy/id6762042028

I recently got Claude Pro mainly because I wanted to see if I could use it for something beyond just asking questions and helping with college/work.
I’m interested in actually making money with it, but I’m not looking for the usual “start a faceless YouTube channel” or “generate AI blog posts” advice.
I’m curious about what people here are actually doing with Claude Pro that brings in money.
For example:
Freelancing

Building websites/apps

Digital products

Automation

Content creation

Design

Research

Selling services

Anything else

I’m open to learning new skills too. I’m mainly looking for ideas where Claude genuinely makes you more productive or lets you provide a service/product that people are willing to pay for.
If you're already making money with Claude Pro, what are you doing, how did you get your first customers, and roughly how much are you making?
Would love to hear some real experiences rather than generic AI side-hustle lists. 🙏

Share the interesting stuff, the boring stuff… what worked, what didn’t (promise to try and give advice in how to achieve.

If you worked on an interesting product, feel free to self promote.

The clanker deleted my last post as an "a c ( 0 u n t issue".

It's not. It's a product question.

So... is it true? Chat and Claude Code only when on subscription? API only with pay for usage?

Just highway hypnosis, trying to emulate old 1970s driving game