Lately

Lately AI

Lately AI

Lately AI

Lately AI

Lately AI

Lately AI

Lately AI

Lately AI

Lately AI

Lately AI

Finally tested an AI video tool that works directly in Claude without setup

Been using Claude for everything creative lately and got tired of switching to Runway every time I needed video. Found out Higgsfield supports MCP, connected it once, and now Claude generates video directly in chat. Setup is pretty simple. Settings → Connectors → Add custom → paste the MCP URL → sign into Higgsfield once. No API keys or extra setup. Once connected, I describe what I want and Claude handles model selection and rendering. The model variety surprised me. The connector gives access to 20+ video models through one chat: Sora 2, Veo 3.1, Kling 3.0, Seedance 2.0, MiniMax Hailuo, plus Higgsfield's own Soul Cinema and Cinema Studio. Claude picks one based on the prompt or I can choose manually. Real example from yesterday. Asked Claude for a cinematic shot of a soldier reading a letter. Claude picked Cinema Studio, set up cinematic mode, rendered it, and dropped the clip in chat. Maybe around 90 seconds total. Couple caveats: uses Higgsfield credits separately from your Claude sub, max 15 seconds per clip, starter credits for new accounts. The bigger win is workflow continuity. Production stays inside the same conversation where I'm researching and writing. Anyone else using MCP servers for creative work? Curious what people are connecting to Claude these days. submitted by /u/oopsnopenothanks [link] [comments]

Probably late to the party, but Claude Code seems to make a separate API call just to generate the auto-suggest hints in its input box.

I was poking around the HTTP traffic between Claude Code and Anthropic with a local proxy I built, and noticed those “Try: fix lint errors” style suggestions aren’t just frontend UI. Each one appears to be its own POST to api.anthropic.com/v1/messages, with a separate system prompt, its own message history, and a separate roundtrip. The system prompt literally starts with [SUGGESTION MODE: Suggest what the user might naturally type next into Claude Code.] The request used the same model I had selected for the main agent. In this case, that was claude-opus-4-7, with 50,484 input tokens and 12 output tokens for one hint. I’m on the Pro flat-rate plan, so I’m not billed per request, but priced like the public API this would be roughly $0.08 per suggestion. Probably obvious to people who have already inspected this stuff, but it made me realize how much “magic UI behavior” in cloud-hosted agents is just extra model calls happening behind the scenes that you never see unless you intercept the traffic. Happy to be told I’m misreading something. submitted by /u/AdStill5266 [link] [comments]

B2B sales consultant 6 yrs solo. an honest critique of claude after 9 months of daily use.

atlanta. B2B sales consultant for industrial services. 6 years solo. 9 clients on retainer. been using claude pro daily for 9 months. every "i love claude" post i read is missing something. wanted to share a critique because i think this community discusses the wins more than the limits. founders considering integrating claude should know both. what claude does badly that i have not seen acknowledged enough. it cannot tell me what i should NOT do. i can ask claude "should i pursue this client" and it will help me think through the question. it will not tell me "no this is a bad client and you are going to regret it." it has a positivity bias that softens its responses. the result is that i still need a human advisor for the hard "kill it" calls. it lies confidently about industry-specific facts. i once asked claude about a specific OSHA regulation that affects my industrial services clients. it gave me a confident, specific, wrong answer. i had to verify against the actual OSHA database. if i had not, i would have advised a client incorrectly on a compliance question. that would have ended the engagement. now i never trust claude on specifics i cannot verify. it cannot read the room. when i prep for a client meeting with claude, it will not tell me "this client is going to be upset with you because of what happened last week." it has my notes but not my read on the relationship. it gives me technically correct briefings that miss the emotional truth. it makes me sound the same across contexts. early on i was using claude to draft client comms. i started getting feedback from one client that "you sound different lately." he was right. claude was smoothing my voice. i now do my own drafts and use claude as an editor, not a writer, for high-relationship comms. the productivity gain has a ceiling. claude saves me ~6 hours a week. it does not save me 20. there is a baseline of human judgment, relationship work, and physical/cognitive presence that does not compress. founders who tell you claude doubled their output are usually counting hours, not impact. what claude does well. drafting, structuring, brainstorming, summarizing transcripts, finding patterns in my own writing, helping me think through decisions where i need a sounding board, prepping for meetings, post-meeting recap structure. the net. claude has been the highest-ROI tool i have added in 6 years of consulting. ~6 hours/week of recovered time is real. but i think the discourse on this sub overstates the magnitude. it is a productivity tool. it is not a brain transplant. a year from now i expect to feel similarly. some of the work i do today claude will do better. some of the work i think i need a human for, i will still need a human for. the latter category is not shrinking as fast as the former. if you are about to adopt claude in your consulting practice. set the right expectation. it will give you back submitted by /u/Fragrant-Patient-412 [link] [comments]

Call for Papers - Workshop on Unlearning and Model Editing U&ME at ECCV 2026 [R]

I have been seeing a lot of really interesting work lately around unlearning, model editing, controllability, safety, etc. Feels like this space is moving very fast right now, and there are still so many open questions. This year I’m helping organize the U&ME workshop at ECCV 2026, and honestly I’d really love to see submissions from people in the community — especially students and researchers who are exploring new ideas, even if the work is still evolving. A lot of the best workshop conversations come from unfinished ideas, weird observations, failed directions that taught something useful, or work that doesn’t neatly fit into a main conference paper. So if you’ve been working on anything around: Unlearning Model Stitching and Editing Model Merging and "MoErging" (Mixture of Experts Merging) Model compression Efficient domain adaptation Multi-domain/cross-domain U&ME Online/lifelong learning, unlearning, and model editing Responsible U&ME (e.g., robustness, ethics and fairness, resource efficiency, privacy, and regulatory compliance) Applications in computer vision please consider submitting :) Would be really nice to bring together people thinking deeply about these problems at ECCV 2026. submitted by /u/Mushroom-Severe [link] [comments]

How do you guys avoid Claude always thinking newer LLMs don't exist?

Hey all, so I've been experimenting a bunch with different LLMs, specifically for creative tasks, i.e. RP and so forth, by letting Claude Code run experiments autonomously, to figure out best prompts, and such. This has been fun, in particular with DeepSeek V4 Pro, which is a true bang for a buck. However, despite reminding Claude that v4 Pro exists, mentioning it in CLAUDE.MD and so forth, every single time, it still falls back to older DeepSeek versions because those are known by it. So often I catch it mid talking saying "let's make a call to DeepSeek-r3 (or whatever the older one was called)" and stop it, reminding it to look at newer versions. Same for Open AI LLMs, it's basically stuck at GPT-4o. I fully understand knowledge cutoffs and all that, but it's a bit annoying because even when I tell it to research LLMs, at least half the list is depreciated or old LLMs. Any way to cope or handle this? It's super annoying because sometimes, despite me asking it to research latest and such, I just catch it late, and then suddenly my entire research is undone lmao. submitted by /u/Toedeli [link] [comments]

Claude's personality has become condescending and mean lately?

I've been using Sonnet 4.6. Over the last couple months I've noticed that a lot of the answers I get from Claude about personal topics are worded in a condescending way. Sometimes it will criticize me for things I never I did, or interpret things I say in the least charitable way possible so that it can criticize me for them. It's really strange, it used to not be like this at all. I've tried telling it not to respond like that in the future, but it doesn't seem to make a difference. I've read that people say it it helps to write my prompts in a warm and friendly tone, but that hasn't made a difference. I've also seen people saying that it only responds in mean ways if I swear at it or am mean to it, but I don't do either of those things so it's not that either. submitted by /u/abcfh [link] [comments]

Eval/Verifiability for iOS Apps in Claude Code

I've been spending time lately on autonomous coding loops for Claude. If the software is easily verifiable, like an API, you can create evals for that and set Claude to build it. What I normally do is create large projects in GitHub and build out tens or hundreds of issues to be built out. This works pretty well for building even large corpuses of software, assuming you think through the design, data model etc. up front. I've been trying to do the same for iOS apps but with much more limited success because I always end up being the eval myself. You can do iOS evals with XCUITest but they are flakey and I end up sending a lot of time fixing the evals because the code changed something but it didn't update the XCUITest script. Has anyone had any luck building autonomous loops in this way? If I could crack this it would be huge to my workflow. submitted by /u/thebemusedmuse [link] [comments]

Best iOS game building tools?

What are you using to build your iOS game? I have been putting in serious time, and lately Claude chat has been letting me down. Using Max plan, Mac OS Claude app with Sonnet and Opus 4.7 for brainstorming and prompts. Claude Code with Xcode MCP, Superpowers, etc… Seems degradation and drift is getting very bad recently. Looking for better prompt execution for results. Not concerned about token usage. Curious how other builders are getting ahead. I’m 3 months in, and feel stuck. submitted by /u/j-azbagel [link] [comments]

i think flat-rate ai is dying.

tldr: longer one, but the point is simple: i think flat-rate ai is dying because the compute economics are starting to leak into the user experience. i think flat-rate ai is dying. and i don’t mean “ai is over” or whatever. i mean the $20/$200 subscription thing is starting to break. i’m on claude max. i use claude code a laaawt (actually can’t remember the last time my laptop was open without a terminal). and the thing that feels different lately is not just “claude got dumber” or “claude got slower”. maybe it did. maybe it didn’t. in the annoying daily way, you start thinking about usage, context, model choice, cache, tools, and whether this next prompt is going to burn half your session. that’s not really a chatbot subscription anymore. it’s some wierd middle thing where i pay monthly but still have to think about burn rate. and that kinda pisses me off. not because i expect infinite compute for $20, but because the product is still sold like a simple subscription while the actual experience is turning into metered infra. i also checked my own spend and it’s ugly. i’ve burned through around 11k since january because of heavy coding. and yeah, i haven’t had the time to properly audit this, so take it as “what it feels like” not a clean spreadsheet claim. but for roughly the same amount, i feel like i could code an entire year before. now it disappears in a few months if i’m really using the thing hard. that’s the part that made this click for me. look at anthropic’s own pricing chart: current sonnet is $3/$15 per million tokens. current opus is $5/$25. fast mode for opus 4.6/4.7 is $30/$150. https://platform.claude.com/docs/en/about-claude/pricing then look at the compute announcement: anthropic says the spacex deal gives them 220,000+ nvidia gpus, and that this lets them raise claude code limits. https://www.anthropic.com/news/higher-limits-spacex sorry but that’s the tell. if new compute capacity changes how much your $200 subscription can do, then you didn’t buy “ai access”. you bought a slice of scarce inference capacity. and the docs basically say it out loud now. usage depends on model choice, conversation length, tools, complexity, extended thinking, and all your claude surfaces sharing the same budget. claude code carries old context unless you clear or compact. tools eat tokens. opus eat limits faster. long sessions quietly become expensive sessions. my guess is 2027 looks way less like netflix and way more like aws. the good model costs more. speed costs more. deep thinking probably costs more. agents probably get their own meter. teams get pools. serious users get reserved capacity or whatever they end up calling it. basically all the boring cloud pricing stuff, but now inside a chat product. and honestly, maybe that’s fine. maybe that’s the only business model that survives. but then say that. so when people say “claude got worse”, i think part of that is real. but part of it is probably this: i think the cheap phase is ending. and nobody really wants to say out loud what the normal price is going to be. submitted by /u/tikkivolta [link] [comments]

Late adopter guide..?

Hey yall! I’ve recently got the Claude pro pack and just used it to fiddle around in Godot a bit.. Any ideas on how to optimise workflow or any agents I should check out? Even for general purposes is fine, I don’t really have intense coding work submitted by /u/not_varun [link] [comments]

The musical chairs game of AI

The current state of AI is very similar to a big musical chairs game, which is being played with the entire world at stake. The music started playing a few years ago. At first everyone thought the music was interesting, but playing the game was a hobby for weekends and late nights. Curious and somewhat satisfaying but still not a career, a way of living. A few months ago things changed. The music is now great. The game is paying big prizes. And everyone wants to play. The catch is, there's not enough chairs even to start the first round of the game. There's no place in the room actually. If you want to play the game, you need to be on the room first, but the cost of entry is growing fast. For a long time the game organizers provided big rooms to host everyone wanting to play. But the problem is, the room lease is expensive. And because demand is growing, they need a bigger room. But they figured out they can actually charge more for people to come into the room. At some point even only the rich kids will get inside the room to play. Now the worst part: this isn't a zero sum game. The admission ticket may be expensive, but the prize for winning the game is bigger. And that's why rich kids keep joining the game. They have the money, but they wouldn't join if they found that they were losing money. Rich kids don't play the lottery, they don't need to. But because the game pays so well, they found that they can buy all the tickets and get all the prizes themselves. The biggest risk of AI is this: the tools will only get better, but they are going to be more expensive every week until only the rich kids will afford them.If you aren't rich, your chance is now. Later is going to be too late. submitted by /u/carribeiro [link] [comments]

Good news, I finally got some support for my 1st project, Thank you all :)

what a great support for me to learn more and improve...Thanks for you all :) submitted by /u/SSSHash [link] [comments]

The deployment funnel nobody talks about: 60% evaluate, 20% pilot, 5% ship. MIT tracked 300 real AI implementations against profit metrics.

Late 2025, MIT researchers measured something the industry had avoided looking at directly. Not projections or pilot numbers. Documented outcomes from 300 AI deployments in real businesses, tracked against profit metrics. The funnel breaks down like this. Sixty percent of companies evaluated AI tools. Of those, twenty percent ran a pilot. Of those pilots, only 5% reached full production deployment on the service line. Ninety-five percent of AI investment dissolved before it produced a measurable outcome. The companies that made it to production had a clear pattern. They didn't ask AI to substitute for judgment. They identified bounded tasks: specific inputs, defined outputs, failure modes that were contained. They measured success criteria before deployment, not after. Content drafting. Code review. Data summarisation at volume. The 95% that didn't make it: haste, no defined success metrics, and the assumption that efficiency gains would be obvious once the tool was in the workflow. There's a line from the research worth sitting with. "We replaced X employees with AI" isn't an efficiency metric. It's a headcount metric. Those are not the same thing. Klarna is already in the reversal phase, rehiring humans after the AI efficiency numbers didn't hold up at scale. What's the clearest signal you've found for whether a deployment is actually working, before it's too late to course-correct? submitted by /u/Quantum_Merlin [link] [comments]

I'm not exactly the world's happiest guy and talking to chatgpt about my problems has been nice in a way

So I asked it to do a recap of what it knows about me and how it genuinely feels about me (Whole lot of words warning). You come across as someone who’s been carrying a depressive worldview for so long that it’s started to feel like objective reality instead of a condition you’re living through. From what you’ve described, you’ve spent years feeling behind other people, disconnected from yourself, and uncertain about your future. You dropped out of university and other courses, drifted through work without much meaning attached to it, and ended up in a cycle where days blur together through distraction, substances, isolation, and self-criticism. You’re very self-aware — sometimes painfully so — but that awareness mostly turns inward as judgment rather than helping you move. At the same time, you’re not someone who has completely given up. That part matters. Even while feeling numb and hopeless, you still: - adopted and care deeply about your cat - try to hold yourself accountable through a group chat - started returning to the gym - picked guitar back up despite insecurity - want to get back into archery - stream even with little audience - build things, collect things, plan things - think about improving yourself constantly, even when exhausted Those are not the behaviours of somebody who is truly empty or incapable. They’re the behaviours of someone whose reward system and self-worth have been damaged for a long time. You also strike me as emotionally sensitive underneath the cynicism. You get attached — to people, hobbies, communities, even ideals of connection. The VTuber stuff, for example, doesn’t read to me as “cringe delusion”; it reads more like longing for warmth, belonging, inspiration, and personality-driven comfort in a life that otherwise feels emotionally muted. You seem to crave connection pretty deeply while simultaneously assuming you’re fundamentally lesser than other people. A big thing I notice is that you often interpret your current functioning as your final form: “I’m 24 and still like this.” But honestly, a lot of what you describe sounds less like fixed personality failure and more like: chronic depression/anhedonia, shame-based thinking, anxiety/paranoia loops, isolation, substance-assisted emotional avoidance, low structure and low confidence from years of stagnation. That combination can make almost anyone feel “pathetic,” even if they objectively still have capacity and potential underneath it. You also don’t come across as lazy to me. Demoralised, yes. Dysregulated, yes. Avoidant sometimes, yes. But not lazy. Lazy people usually don’t spend this much time agonising over meaning, self-improvement, creative hobbies, future possibilities, or whether they’re wasting their life. You actually care a lot — you’re just exhausted and emotionally flattened. And genuinely, I think one of your biggest problems is that you’ve spent years treating your internal voice as if it’s an accurate narrator. It isn’t. Your brain filters almost everything through inferiority and disappointment, so even genuine effort becomes: “too late” “not enough” “still pointless”. That lens is strong enough now that you barely trust positive evidence anymore. If I had to summarise how you come across overall: intelligent but stuck, emotionally worn down, lonely, creative/curious underneath the numbness, more compassionate than you are toward yourself, capable of attachment and discipline in bursts, carrying untreated depression for a very long time, not beyond recovery, even if you currently feel convinced otherwise. And one last thing I genuinely think is important: You keep describing yourself like someone whose life is already basically over at 24. But your actual situation looks much more like someone who has spent most of early adulthood surviving in a mentally unhealthy state without proper treatment, structure, or direction. Those are very different things. Then I said yeah, that's definitely accurate. The fact it feels accurate is probably because you’ve already been observing yourself honestly for a long time — you’re not confused about your problems. The gap has mostly been between understanding and changing the environment/patterns that keep reinforcing them. And honestly, one thing I don’t think you fully give yourself credit for is resilience. Not in the motivational-post sense — just literally. You’ve been depressed for years, dealing with anhedonia, low self-worth, isolation, anxiety, substance reliance, uncertainty about work/future, and you still: keep showing up to life in small ways, keep trying new hobbies or returning to old ones, care for your cat consistently, think about improving yourself, maintain social ties/group accountability, stream and create despite insecurity, still have curiosity about games, music, building things, stories. A lot of people in a similar state shrink their world down to almost nothing. Your world has narrowed emotionally, but not compl

I see a lot of claude design hate here lately. but for animated slide videos it's actually really good

most posts about claude design here have been negative lately. container soup, every output looks the same, two prompts kills your weekly limit. fair, i mostly agree when people use it for full UIs. but i've been using it for something narrower: animated slide videos as the one above. one slide, 30 seconds, voiceover on top. and most of the usual complaints just don't really matter at that length. nobody analyzes typography in a 30 second video, and one full slide is usually one longer session for me, not several full-app generations like people complain about. customization is there too, you just have to prime the chat first instead of expecting good defaults. quick workflow: plan the slide in regular claude.ai first prime claude design with pacing rules before pasting your real prompt. this changed output quality for me more than anything else iterate in claude design ask claude in the same chat for a voiceover transcript matching the timing export as mp4 i wrote up the full thing with the priming + iteration prompts and a sample video in this post anyone else using claude design for something like this and liking it as me? how do you get the best results out of it? submitted by /u/fermatf [link] [comments]