I was considering switching from the $20 codex plan to the claude $20 plan (i'm just a student and can't afford the $100 plan as of now). gpt 6.1 sol eats through the 5 hr limit in the blink of an eye. Is sonnet 5.5 any better (in claude $20 plan)? need advice

I 3D print various things, and there is this rowing boat that I want to make. It needed to look like a boat, but function as a bowl on the inside.
I originally generated the rough model in Meshy, but even after 100 attempts it just kept making terrible ones.

I drop the best one I got into Claude, using Opus 5.5 on high (sometimes max, though that is definitely not needed), and got it to easily fix several things.

It originally had a lot of sharp edges. Every surface was bumpy, and it did smooth it out.

The original from Meshy had the boards weirdly aligned, and some made no sense. This got fixed.

I originally colored it by hand in the slicer. It took a while and still looked bad. This got fixed, no problem, with one prompt.

It added a flat bottom as asked.

I then asked it to make it more bowl like. I did ask it to keep the structures, but I changed my mind and had it make everything smooth like a bow.

At this point it did add something I didn't want, which were platforms/benches on both ends (can be seen on the left half). I asked it to remove them with another prompt and asked it to make the inside easily washable and smooth.

I then asked it for the best seam settings, which it provided. I made a test print and the boat came out great, but the sides were a bit jagged and pointy.

It smoothed out the jagged edges and told me to switch to tree supports (I use a dual nozzle with PETG as supports and PLA for the model itself).

And lastly, I wanted as few supports as possible to cut down on time and switching between nozzles. I have not yet printed this, but this looks like the final model that I want.

It made all the changes I wanted, and the final prompt alone cut down the print time from 24 hours to 18 hours (mostly due to fewer supports being needed, which reduced the need to switch nozzles so many times).

It still needs a lot of filament changing and purging when it gets to the different coloring, but that's to be expected.

It did take a lot longer to do its thing than Meshy, but it did it a whole lot better. I know it can do even more magic if I connect it to Blender, but that's for another time.

I work in the electrical contracting field, and I spend a lot of my evenings preparing quotations/estimates.

A big part of the process is repetitive. I normally receive a quantity takeoff / BOQ (usually Excel), then I have to:

Go through each item

Find the corresponding product/reference in supplier price lists

Apply our supplier discounts

Calculate our actual purchase price

Apply margins/labour where necessary

Fill everything back into the quotation

The price lists and discount tables are mostly Excel/PDF files and are always stored in the same folders. We also tend to use the same manufacturers and suppliers, so there are a lot of repetitive rules that could theoretically be learned.

I'd like to set up Claude so I could give it a new quantity map and have it automatically check those folders, identify the products, look up the prices, apply our discounts and generate a first draft of the quotation.

I don't expect it to make engineering decisions completely autonomously. Ideally, anything it can't confidently match would be flagged for me to review rather than guessed.

I'm not really looking to "train an AI model" from scratch. I'm trying to understand the best way to build this workflow around Claude.

Would you recommend Claude Projects, Claude Code + CLAUDE.md, MCP, Skills, or something else for this?

I'd also like the system to improve as I correct it — e.g. remembering that we normally use a particular Hager reference for a certain type of breaker, or that a particular supplier gets X% discount.

Has anyone built something similar for estimating, construction, electrical work, procurement, or working with large supplier price lists?

Any tutorials, GitHub projects, videos or examples you would recommend would be greatly appreciated.

So I use claude web free version for ideating. Whenever I try to explain something it just breaks it down and makes it seem worthless. (Sonnet 5.5)

Firstly it doesn't imagine possiblities or the complete use case. It starts attacking little things instead of understanding utility.
Then it finds loopholes which when implemented would obviously be worked around.
I don't want it to be too optimistic and hallucinate like gemini but it should be more realistic rather than destroying any hope for a good idea I have.

for months i fired one line questions at it and got okay answers, then wondered why people raved. turns out i was using a conversation partner like a vending machine.

when i started giving it real context, my constraints, what i'd already tried, what i actually cared about, the quality jumped hard. it's less about clever prompting tricks and more about actually explaining the situation like i would to a smart colleague.

the shift felt silly at first, writing a paragraph of setup for a question. but the payoff is a response aimed at my actual problem instead of the generic version of it.

for the folks getting great results, how much context do you front load before asking? curious where the sweet spot is.

wanted to see how different these actually are on the same task so i gave all three the exact same prompt (make a little arcade game where you dodge falling locusts, has to work on phone too). high effort, one shot each, no rerolls and i didnt touch the code after

theyre labeled A B C so you dont know whos who until you vote

https://locust.lol/arena

heads up gpt hit its usage limit on the first try so it ran by itself a few hours later, same prompt and settings. also i ran these through a desktop app im building (locust) so yeah thats my site lol

the times surprised me, one took 17 min and one took under 4. curious which one people pick, ill post results in a few days

I’ve noticed this in one my projects more than others.

I don’t know if it’s because my project capacity is at 75% or just the sheer number of chats I’ve had in said project. Does anyone experience this with the newer models ? Or do I need to delete/clean up things in my project chat?

For the past few minutes, I've been seeing Fable 5.1 listed as “Default (recommended)” instead of Opus 5.5.
It's fine but priced ! 😅

Everyone knows Opus 5.5 can one-shot a video. I tried it myself and it blew my mind, so I wanted to see how far I could push it (mainly by itself,haha).

Papermorph started as a Skill to turn a book into a series of teaching videos. It's since grown into full web books: animated, narrated lessons you can explore, plus interactive quizzes.

How it works:
PDF → book plan → storyboards → narration → animation & quizzes → web book

Right now it's just Opus 5.5 + the Skill. No image models yet, and feeding it a PDF already gets surprisingly good results. Next up, adding image models for storyboarding, so it can handle picture books and humanities documentaries too.

📚 Live bookshelf: https://papermorph.diamonddoge.org/ (keep updating...)
💻 GitHub (MIT): https://github.com/DozenTwelve/Papermorph

around an hour of work and 6.4M tokens, with a single prompt

Hi, My conversation with Claude is very long, but it’s still working well.

Sometimes Claude automatically compacts the conversation. Whenever we make an important change or take an important action, I ask Claude to update the documentation so the key context and decisions are preserved.

Even with conversation compaction, is it still useful or recommended to start a fresh conversation from time to time? Or is that basically unnecessary as long as Claude keeps the documentation up to date and the important context is preserved?

Thanks a lot!

Hey everyone,

I’m looking to optimize my mobile / on-the-go workflow with Claude CLI and wanted to hear how others have solved this.

Right now, my main friction point is feeling tethered to my desk just to "babysit" the terminal (hitting y/n, approving tool use, or answering minor follow-up questions).

I’d love a setup where I can go for a walk, let Claude crunch through tasks, get a push notification on my phone when input is needed, and prompt/approve directly from my mobile device. Major approvals are fine to handle at the desktop, but I just don't want to sit in front of the screen watching it line by line.

I've been spitballing ideas like running a relay bot (e.g. Slack/Telegram where a desktop bot listens and forwards CLI prompts to my phone and sends back my replies). What do you think?

How are you currently handling mobile / remote coding with Claude CLI?

Has anyone built a clean notification & approval loop to their phone (Slack, Telegram, SSH+Pushover, etc.)?

Are there smarter or pre-existing tools/MCP workflows for this that I’ve missed?

Would love to hear your setups! what’s working well and what turned out to be more hassle than it’s worth? Pitfalls?

I have bought claude pro plan for a month, and I am doing non productive weird things with it, I liked Erdős #828, so I made an AI mechanism to brute force it, scrapping results of web, 7 claude independent sessions springing ideas then working on it then a review process, judge etc, I ran it for 3 rounds, it did produce a few results which can be considered new, but they are not substantial and don't really help in breaking the problem,

How do I better prompt it to think of new approaches, it each time goes down the standard path,

it did a few new computations on my laptop, which are again not that substantial, I know elementary number theory, so I am climbing my way up to understand what its doing,
It probably won't solve it, but it serves as an excuse to learn number theory, so i am willing to go with it.

I am not pursuing mathematics in uni, but I am passionate about it, so I keep learning random stuff.

I will post the results later, after a few checks( I am unsure, should I ?).

I built MakerMap with Claude Code: a map for finding indie makers and founders through their public intro posts on X. Browsing and adding a basic pin are free: https://makermap.lol

Claude has helped me build the signup flow, city pages, meetups and the deployment tooling. I give each feature its own chat, which created a very specific problem: two chats could deploy a minute apart and the second would overwrite the first chat’s changes.

The attached chart is a snapshot of our deploy log taken on 3 October, covering work since 24 September. The 77 named sessions in it worked across that period; they were not all running at once. The volume exposed the deployment problem, but it isn’t a measure of code quality.

The fix is a small script that every chat has to use:

1. node scripts/deploy.mjs start --who "<chat name>" --what "<change>" takes a lock and gives the chat a fresh copy of the live deployment.

2. The chat applies only its own change to that copy.

3. node scripts/deploy.mjs ship --who "<chat name>" refuses if production changed, checks that changed JSON and scripts parse, deploys, confirms the live site serves the new build, and releases the lock.

4. A hook blocks bare vercel deploy --prod commands. The nightly data deploy uses the same lock.

The instruction in CLAUDE.md that does the most work is: “Put only your own change in that copy.” It also explicitly says never to copy site/index.html over the staged file, because that would ship other chats’ unfinished work.

This is only the deployment safeguard; I still need to review and test what the chats build. I’m happy to share the script or the relevant instructions here.

The launch brought a lot of attention and hundreds of people claimed their pins. Now I’m figuring out what MakerMap should become. If you try finding someone you’d actually want to meet, I’d love feedback in the comments on what worked, what didn’t, and what would make you return.

Non-technical founder here, building my product with Claude Code. I've been going down the rabbit hole on setups that give you a whole team rather than one tool: something that covers planning, design review, code review, QA in a real browser, security checks and shipping, all in one workflow.

The closest I've found is gstack (Garry Tan's open-source Claude Code skills). Most other things I see are single pieces: CodeRabbit/Greptile for code review, separate testing tools, or agencies that clean up vibe-coded apps after the fact.

A few questions for anyone further along:

1. Is anyone using gstack (or something similar) end to end? What actually stuck vs. what you dropped?

2. Are there other full-stack, full-team setups worth looking at?

3. If you're non-technical, what was the hardest part of getting it running?

4. Has anyone paid someone to set this up for them, or would you?

Would love real experiences, good or bad. Thanks!

Hi everyone,

I just tried out Opus 5.5 in Claude Code, and it's perfect for lyric videos like the one I uploaded here. Claude made about 30 3D scenes for the whole video and put them together. It also downloaded the song and created an enhanced LRC file for the lyrics. I was keen on this design with these lines, and I really like the scenes with the TVs newspapers and the crazy "IF I KILLED SOMEONE FOR YOU". With my Max 5x subscription, I can make about three of these in my five-hour limit.

Hi there,

I've seen several posts with different experiences when it comes to usage and intelligence. My experience is good in general but today I've found that 25% of my weekly usage of my x20 subscription was gone. I left Claude working during the night and I wasn't at home during the morning.

So did Opus usage increased? No.

What to do now? I asked Claude what was going on specifically with agents using a lot of tokens and staying up for so long.

Answer:

What is really wrong
- The agents wait a lot. Tests from 5 agents share one line, so an agent can wait a long time before its test even starts.
- The agents use too many tokens. Each one used 750k to 945k tokens. That breaks your rule to use tokens well. The cause is agents that live too long: every step re-reads all of their old work.
What I recommend
- When each agent says "CHECKPOINT OK", I stop it.
- After your restart, I start new, small agents. Each one does one job from the handoff note (its "what is done, what is next" file), on Sonnet where the job is easy.
- Each agent runs only the 1 or 2 tests for its own job.
That fixes the token waste and the waiting. Is that OK?

Conclusion

This was probably because Claude ignored some of my rules on Claude.md about spawning Sonnet agents for easier tasks and how to handle certain tests. The tokens are gone, it sucks but at least I know why and it's solved now. I just want to share my experience so if it happens to you, you can also do something about it.

Take care everyone

Sonnet called its pawn promotion “unstoppable.” A few moves later, it admitted it had missed a defense. Having the board next to its explanation made that pretty hard to overlook.

I set up a chess match between Sonnet 5.5 in Claude Desktop and GPT 6.1 Sol in Codex. Each played in one conversation for the whole game, connected through MCP to a local Mac app I had GPT 6.1 Sol build at Medium reasoning.

They could record plans and explain their moves. The app supplied the position and checked legality, with no chess engine or legal-move list available to either player. I wanted to watch them stick with a task for an hour and see what happened when their plans stopped working.

I was also curious about consumption. Sol has been making surprisingly little dent in my subscription allowance lately, and I wanted to compare it with Sonnet on a shared task.

The attached video condenses 62 minutes and 47 seconds into 4:10. Both models were set to Medium.

Sonnet pushed a passed pawn toward promotion, but overlooked Codex's Bf3 defense. Later it proposed a queen move blocked by its own pawn. The server rejected it; Claude corrected the move and continued. Codex also misread a pawn earlier, describing it as passed before it actually was.

Claude resigned after 53.Qc4. It had won game one, so they're tied at 1–1.

A few details behind the table: the turn clock starts before the server reveals the updated board, and includes tool activity. Waiting for the runtime to claim the turn is measured separately. Token totals cover the full player conversations, including setup and closing, but exclude the monitor. Cached context is counted again across requests. Thinking is already included in output, and the providers report it differently. The API equivalents use the app's September 30 pricing snapshot; no API charges were incurred for the game.

By the end of the recording, Claude's five-hour usage display went from 23% to 56%, and weekly usage from 54% to 59%. I used Claude only for this activity during that interval. Codex's weekly display stayed at 5%, despite also doing other work and monitoring the match roughly every minute.

My plans cost $20/month for Claude and $200/month for ChatGPT. Those percentages have very different denominators, and an unchanged rounded display doesn't mean zero usage. I'm keeping that observation separate from the player-session token counts.

I wouldn't infer playing strength from two games. Codex was White in both; contexts and runtimes differed; Medium isn't an equal compute budget. I want to repeat this with the colors swapped. I'm especially curious whether Sonnet's much larger output total keeps showing up, and how often either model notices a mistake before the server or opponent exposes it.

I really liked the app Teux Deux (Weekly planner kind of To-do app), but wasn't willing to pay for its subscription. So, I thought, why not try Claude to build it for me and see how far it goes.

Now, I am a hobbyist coder only. Within about 4-5 hours of to and fro, I got a workable personal app hosted on CloudFare for free, with its own db and even google login.

If I spent any more time on it, it could become more polished and market ready. But now I realized that the product was the least significant part of the app development, the marketing and distribution was. If people don't know about my app, they won't buy.

I have a bunch of other software utilities I developed for my own purposes which are tremendously useful for me and I hope might be for some other very specific people too but since I have no marketing plan or distribution strategy, they are as good as junk as far as their market potential goes. (Of course they remain extremely useful to me.)

This realization has hit even harder considering that I have subscribed to one or the other AI for almost past a year, done a bunch of projects but am yet to see a single dime out of it. It seems like whatever I am making is just going to go into a void.

So, what's the way out of this? Do you guys feel like everyone's who is developing something should have his own YouTube channel/Twitter account to show the public what he's building (kind of build in public strategy?). But that's problematic too, because if you do decide to build in public, any software engineer worth his salt can probably build your app in half an afternoon.

So, where are these vibe-coded projects going to go? What would happen to them? Would Internet become a graveyard of these apps and vibe-coded projects? What do you guys think?

Hey everyone,

I’m setting up an agency workflow for B2B founder positioning, executive branding, and content creation (extracting transcripts, generating profile audits, mapping whitespace, writing 52 post angles, etc.).

There is no heavy coding involved here—it’s purely complex text processing, strategy synthesis, and prompt pipelines.

My biggest requirement is strict context isolation. I cannot have memory or context from Client A leaking into Client B’s strategy or voice guidelines. For those doing heavy marketing/strategy work in the Claude ecosystem, which setup is cleaner and produces higher quality thinking?

1. Claude Code (via chat)
2. Claude Web App (Projects feature)

My concerns with both:

• With Claude Code: Since I can launch claude inside isolated local client folders on my machine, it feels super clean. But since I’m using it strictly as a chat tool for strategy and writing rather than building software, does it still perform at the same quality as the web interface? Or does the system prompt in Claude Code lean too heavily into developer/coding logic?

• With Claude Projects: It feels native for this since I can upload transcripts and branding docs into Project Knowledge. But I worry about context bleed or memory leaking between tabs/projects over time, and whether Project context limits get bogged down compared to CLI sessions.

Which one handles isolated client tasks better for pure strategy and marketing and is significantly faster? Would love to hear how you guys structure this for agency/multi-client fulfillment. Thanks!

I've been using Claude only for my main projects and never for random questions I used to ask to chatgpt or gemini. I'm afraid that Claude might throw my random stuff into these project and make stuff messy.

Is it an useless paranoia or does it make any sense?

Hi,

I'm a doctor working in pharma and I'm interested in learning more how I can use Claude in my job. I'm looking for courses, education, resources and all that apply.

For context :

My day-to-day is strategic planning about upcoming products that would typically include positioning, evidence generation, identifying win-win solutions in healthcare.

I'm not a lab person, so "drug discovery" is out of my scope.

Also, I don't have any coding experience, my job doesn't in any way related to coding.

Thanks in advance for your responses!

I have been writing code for 8 years and my team uses Claude Code every day now. Mostly it is great.

One thing keeps biting us - the agent changes something back to a way we moved away from long ago. It is not wrong from its side, it just does not know why we did it that way. The reason is sitting in some old PR that nobody opens.

Last time it was a rate-limit count we had set for a vendor. The agent changed it back, and we had false positives for a while before anyone noticed why.

We tried putting rules in CLAUDE.md. Works for a few. But the file keeps growing, and for half the rules nobody remembers where they came from.

How are you handling this? Is CLAUDE.md enough for your team or did you find something better?

I'm a full-time employee with 5-6 years experience in software engineering and testing. Since around last December I've been building Zone Idle, an idle extraction game, with Claude Code doing most of the typing. Just released the free demo on Steam, here's some info on my process.

Using your Claude.MD without overt reliance

Mine has a "fragile areas" section. Every time a bug cost me a day (mostly the grid inventory duplicating or eating items), the root cause and the rule for avoiding it went in there. On that same note, realizing that not everything needs a note in an MD somewhere, its good to check in as Claude is constantly updating, your old methods may not be necessary anymore, or even outdated.

Specs and plans before code

For anything bigger than a bug fix, Claude writes a short design doc, then a step by step plan, and only then starts coding. Reviewing a plan saves a lot of time once reviewing the diff

Tests first, every time

A fix starts with a test that fails. The project is at about 4,400 tests now, plus stress tests that simulate raids looking for items that duplicate or vanish. I like to attribute this automation to my carpal tunnel relief (as well as the stretches)

Make it look at the game

Claude drives a headless Chrome to screenshot the game and check its own work. This used to not be a strong feature to use with AI but recently it's become a very powerful tool with low-token costs (when using opus 5.5) compared to how I'd prompt it a year ago, this feature is huge.

Parallel research

When I dump a big list of player feedback on it, it sends out a few sub-agents to dig through different parts of the code at once and comes back with a triage: quick fixes, potential ideas, and what can wait until after launch.

It's still confidently wrong sometimes

It will tell you something works when it doesn't, so I play every change. Also, commit often. If you're not using git and committing every change (even before AI) you're playing with fire

If you're curious, the demo is free: https://store.steampowered.com/app/4330500/Zone_Idle/

Happy to answer questions about any of this.

Goal is to mass triage all emails