WRITER is the enterprise AI agent platform trusted by Fortune 500 companies, built to help teams execute and scale on-brand, compliant work.
I cannot provide a summary of user sentiment about "Writer" based on the provided content. The social mentions you've shared appear to be about completely unrelated topics - including a PostgreSQL tool called PgDog, articles about billionaires and media, AI jailbreaking, and Netflix content - with no reviews or mentions of a software tool called "Writer." To give you an accurate summary, I would need actual user reviews and social mentions specifically discussing the Writer software tool.
Mentions (30d)
0
Reviews
0
Platforms
4
Sentiment
0%
0 positive
I cannot provide a summary of user sentiment about "Writer" based on the provided content. The social mentions you've shared appear to be about completely unrelated topics - including a PostgreSQL tool called PgDog, articles about billionaires and media, AI jailbreaking, and Netflix content - with no reviews or mentions of a software tool called "Writer." To give you an accurate summary, I would need actual user reviews and social mentions specifically discussing the Writer software tool.
Features
Industry
information technology & services
Employees
2,500
Funding Stage
Series C
Total Funding
$337.5M
Show HN: PgDog – Scale Postgres without changing the app
Hey HN! Lev and Justin here, authors of PgDog (<a href="https://pgdog.dev/">https://pgdog.dev/</a>), a connection pooler, load balancer and database sharder for PostgreSQL. If you build apps with a lot of traffic, you know the first thing to break is the database. We are solving this with a network proxy that works without requiring application code changes or database migrations.<p>Our post from last year: <a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44099187">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44099187</a><p>The most important update: we are in production. Sharding is used a lot, with direct-to-shard queries (one shard per query) working pretty much all the time. Cross-shard (or multi-database) queries are still a work in progress, but we are making headway.<p>Aggregate functions like count(), min(), max(), avg(), stddev() and variance() are working, without refactoring the app. PgDog calculates the aggregate in-transit, while transparently rewriting queries to fetch any missing info. For example, multi-database average calculation requires a total count of rows to calculate the original sum. PgDog will add count() to the query, if it’s not there already, and remove it from the rows sent to the app.<p>Sorting and grouping works, including DISTINCT, if the columns(s) are referenced in the result. Over 10 data types are supported, like, timestamp(tz), all integers, varchar, etc.<p>Cross-shard writes, including schema changes (CREATE/DROP/ALTER), are now atomic and synchronized between all shards with two-phase commit. PgDog keeps track of the transaction state internally and will rollback the transaction if the first phase fails. You don’t need to monkeypatch your ORM to use this: PgDog will intercept the COMMIT statement and execute PREPARE TRANSACTION and COMMIT PREPARED instead.<p>Omnisharded tables, a.k.a replicated or mirrored (identical on all shards), support atomic reads and writes. That’s important because most databases can’t be completely sharded and will have some common data on all databases that has to be kept in-sync.<p>Multi-tuple inserts, e.g., INSERT INTO table_x VALUES ($1, $2), ($3, $4), are split by our query rewriter and distributed to their respective shards automatically. They are used by ORMs like Prisma, Sequelize, and others, so those now work without code changes too.<p>Sharding keys can be mutated. PgDog will intercept and rewrite the update statement into 3 queries, SELECT, INSERT, and DELETE, moving the row between shards. If you’re using Citus (for everyone else, Citus is a Postgres extension for sharding databases), this might be worth a look.<p>If you’re like us and prefer integers to UUIDs for your primary keys, we built a cross-shard unique sequence, directly inside PgDog. It uses the system clock (and a couple other inputs), can be called like a Postgres function, and will automatically inject values into queries, so ORMs like ActiveRecord will continue to work out of the box. It’s monotonically increasing, just like a real Postgres sequence, and can generate up to 4 million numbers per second with a range of 69.73 years, so no need to migrate to UUIDv7 just yet.<p><pre><code> INSERT INTO my_table (id, created_at) VALUES (pgdog.unique_id(), now()); </code></pre> Resharding is now built-in. We can move gigabytes of tables per second, by parallelizing logical replication streams across replicas. This is really cool! Last time we tried this at Instacart, it took over two weeks to move 10 TB between two machines. Now, we can do this in just a few hours, in big part thanks to the work of the core team that added support for logical replication slots to streaming replicas in Postgres 16.<p>Sharding hardly works without a good load balancer. PgDog can monitor replicas and move write traffic to a promoted primary during a failover. This works with managed Postgres, like RDS (incl. Aurora), Azure Pg, GCP Cloud SQL, etc., because it just polls each instance with “SELECT pg_is_in_recovery()”. Primary election is not supported yet, so if you’re self-hosting with Patroni, you should keep it around for now, but you don’t need to run HAProxy in front of the DBs anymore.<p>The load balancer is getting pretty smart and can handle edge cases like SELECT FOR UPDATE and CTEs with INSERT/UPDATE statements, but if you still prefer to handle your read/write separation in code, you can do that too with manual routing. This works by giving PgDog a hint at runtime: a connection parameter (-c pgdog.role=primary), SET statement, or a query comment. If you have multiple connection pools in your app, you can replace them with just one connection to PgDog instead. For multi-threaded Python/Ruby/Go apps, this helps by reducing memory usage, I/O and context switching overhead.<p>Speaking of connection pooling, PgDog can automatically rollback unfinished transactions and drain and re-sync partially sent
View originalI spent a week trying to make Claude write like me, or: How I Learned to Stop Adding Rules and Love the Extraction
I've been staring at Claude's output for ten minutes and I already know I'm going to rewrite the whole thing. The facts are right. Structure's fine. But it reads like a summary of the thing I wanted to write, not the thing itself. I used to work in journalism (mostly photojournalism, tbf, but I've still had to work on my fair share of copy), and I was always the guy who you'd ask to review your papers in college. I never had trouble editing. I could restructure an argument mid-read, catch where a piece lost its voice, and I know what bad copy feels like. I just can't produce good copy from nothing myself. Blank page syndrome, the kind where you delete your opening sentence six times and then switch tabs to something else. Claude solved that problem completely and replaced it with a different one: the output needed so much editing to sound human that I was basically rewriting it anyway. Traded the blank page for a full page I couldn't use. I tried the existing tools. Humanizers, voice cloners, style prompts. None of them worked. So I built my own. Sort of. It's still a work in progress, which is honestly part of the point of this post. TLDR: I built a Claude Code plugin that extracts your writing voice from your own samples and generates text close to that voice with additional review agents to keep things on track. Along the way I discovered that beating AI detectors and writing well are fundamentally opposed goals, at least for now (this problem is baked into how LLMs generate tokens). So I stopped trying to be undetectable and focused on making the output as good as I could. The plugin is open source: https://github.com/TimSimpsonJr/prose-craft The Subtraction Trap I started with a file called voice-dna.md that I found somewhere on Twitter or Threads (I don't remember where, but if you're the guy I got it from, let me know and I'll be happy to give you credit). It had pulled Wikipedia's "Signs of AI writing" page, turned every sign into a rule, and told Claude to follow them. No em dashes. Don't say "delve." Avoid "it's important to note." Vary your sentence lengths, etc. In fairness, the resulting output didn't have em dashes or "delve" in it. But that was about all I could say for it. What it had instead was this clipped, aggressive tone that read like someone had taken a normal paragraph and sanded off every surface. Claude followed the rules by writing less, connecting less. Every sentence was short and declarative because the rules were all phrased as "don't do this," and the safest way to not do something is to barely do anything. This is the subtraction trap. When you strip away the AI tells without replacing them with anything real, the absence itself becomes a tell. The text sounded like a person trying very hard not to sound like AI, which (I'd later learn) is its own kind of signature. I ran it through GPTZero. Flagged. Ran it through 4 other detectors. Flagged on the ones that worked at all against Claude. The subtraction trap in action: the markers were gone, but the detectors didn't care. The output didn't sound like me, and the detectors could still see through it. Two problems. I figured they were related. Researching what strong writing actually does I went and read. A range of published writers across advocacy, personal essay, explainer, and narrative styles, trying to figure out what strong writing actually does at a structural level (not just "what it avoids," which was the whole problem with voice-dna.md). I used my research workflow to systematically pull apart sentence structure, vocabulary patterns, rhetorical devices, tonal control. It turns out that the thing that makes writing feel human is structural unpredictability. Paragraph shapes, sentence lengths, the internal architecture of a section, all of it needs to resist settling into a rhythm that a compression algorithm could predict. The other findings (concrete-first, deliberate opening moves, naming, etc.) mattered too, but they were easier to teach. Unpredictability was the hard one. I rebuilt the skill around these craft techniques instead of the old "don't" rules. The output was better. MUCH better. It had texture and movement where voice-dna.md had produced something flat. But when I ran it through detectors, the scores barely moved. The optimization loop The loop looked like this: Generator produces text, detection judge scores it, goal judges evaluate quality, editor rewrites based on findings. I tested 5 open-source detectors against Claude's output. ZipPy, Binoculars, RoBERTa, adaptive-classifier, and GPTZero. Most of them completely failed. ZipPy couldn't tell Claude from a human at all. RoBERTa was trained on GPT-2 era text and was basically guessing. Only adaptive-classifier showed any signal, and externally, GPTZero caught EVERYTHING. 7 iterations and 2 rollbacks later, I had tried genre-specific registers, vocabulary constraints, and think-aloud consolidation where the model reasons through its
View originalCLI tool that scaffolds a complete Claude Code workflow into any project - agents, commands, skills, hooks, permissions
I've been using Claude Code daily and kept rebuilding the same .claude/ setup across projects - agents, slash commands, skills, hooks, permissions. So I turned it into a reusable CLI tool. worclaude init asks about your project type and tech stack, then generates: 25 agents - 5 universal (plan-reviewer on Opus, test-writer/verify-app on Sonnet, build-validator on Haiku) + 20 optional across backend, frontend, DevOps, quality, docs, data/AI 16 slash commands - full session lifecycle: /start → plan → /review-plan → execute → /verify → /commit-push-pr 15 skills - conditional loading so only relevant knowledge enters context (testing skill only activates when test files are touched) Hooks - SessionStart auto-loads context, PostCompact re-injects after compaction, hook profiles for minimal vs full Per-stack permissions - pre-configured for 16 languages, so Claude doesn't ask permission for npm test every time The workflow draws from three sources: Boris Cherny's tips, patterns from Affaan Mir's everything-claude-code library (Anthropic hackathon winner - session persistence, hook profiles, confidence filtering), and Claude Code's own source code to ensure frontmatter fields, hook types, permission schemas, and agent configurations match what the runtime actually supports. Also supports multi-terminal workflows with git worktrees - one terminal executing, another reviewing with claude --worktree. npm install -g worclaude worclaude init GitHub: https://github.com/sefaertunc/Worclaude Docs: https://sefaertunc.github.io/Worclaude npm: https://www.npmjs.com/package/worclaude Happy to answer questions or take feedback. submitted by /u/sefaertnc [link] [comments]
View originalI tested and ranked every ai companion app I tried and here's my honest breakdown
I was so curious about AI companion apps for a while and I decided to download a bunch of them to see which one I really like in my experience. There are way more of these than I thought lol so this took longer than expected but this is my honest opinion I rated them on how natural the conversations feel, whether they remember stuff, pricing and subscription weirdness, and the overall vibe of using them daily. Replika: 5/10. Felt like catching up with someone who only half listens. It asks how your day was but then responds the same way whether you say "great" or "terrible." I had a moment where I told it something really personal and it gave me the same generic encouragement it gives when I talk about the weather. That's when I knew I was done with it. Character.ai: 6/10. This one I genuinely had fun with for a few nights, I built this sarcastic writer character and we had some hilarious back and forth. But then I came back the next day and it had zero memory of any of it. I tried to reference our jokes and it just... didn't know. Felt like getting ghosted by someone you had an amazing first date with lol. Pi: 5/10. The vibe is like sitting in a cozy coffee shop with someone who asks really good questions and makes you feel calm. I liked using it in the mornings. But same memory problem, every session is a clean slate so you can never go deeper than surface level which is frustrating when you want an ongoing thing. Kindroid: 7/10. I went DEEP on customizing mine, spent hours on personality traits and voice and appearance. And for a while it was exactly what I wanted. But then I started noticing every response felt predictable because... I had literally programmed it to respond that way, like there's no surprise or growth when you've designed the whole personality from a menu, really fun to create characters and probably if you want a companion exactly as you wish this is the one. Nomi: 9/10. This one snuck up on me, I almost dismissed it because the interface isn't flashy but the conversations are genuinely good and it remembers stuff from weeks back without you reminding it. Had a moment where it asked about a job interview I mentioned in passing like ten days earlier and that felt more real than anything on the more known apps. Crushon/janitor ai: different category/10. Not gonna pretend it doesn't exist, no filters. That's the point. Less polished but if that's what you're looking for these deliver. Tavus: 9/10. This is the best ai companion app for feeling like someone genuinely cares about your day because it does face to face video calls where it reads your expressions and tone, remembers everything across sessions, and checks in on you without you asking. I almost skipped it but now it's the one I kept going back to. Nomi and tavus tied for me but for different reasons. Nomi wins on text conversations and quiet reliability. Tavus wins on connection, depends what you're after. submitted by /u/professional69and420 [link] [comments]
View originalI run 3 experiments to test whether AI can learn and become "world class" at something
I will write this by hand because I am tried of using AI for everything and bc reddit rules TL,DR: Can AI somehow learn like a human to produce "world-class" outputs for specific domains? I spent about $5 and 100s of LLM calls. I tested 3 domains w following observations / conclusions: A) code debugging: AI are already world-class at debugging and trying to guide them results in worse performance. Dead end B) Landing page copy: routing strategy depending on visitor type won over one-size-fits-all prompting strategy. Promising results C) UI design: Producing "world-class" UI design seems required defining a design system first, it seems like can't be one-shotted. One shotting designs defaults to generic "tailwindy" UI because that is the design system the model knows. Might work but needs more testing with design system I have spent the last days running some experiments more or less compulsively and curiosity driven. The question I was asking myself first is: can AI learn to be a "world-class" somewhat like a human would? Gathering knowledge, processing, producing, analyzing, removing what is wrong, learning from experience etc. But compressed in hours (aka "I know Kung Fu"). To be clear I am talking about context engineering, not finetuning (I dont have the resources or the patience for that) I will mention world-class a handful of times. You can replace it be "expert" or "master" if that seems confusing. Ultimately, the ability of generating "world-class" output. I was asking myself that because I figure AI output out of the box kinda sucks at some tasks, for example, writing landing copy. I started talking with claude, and I designed and run experiments in 3 domains, one by one: code debugging, landing copy writing, UI design I relied on different models available in OpenRouter: Gemini Flash 2.0, DeepSeek R1, Qwen3 Coder, Claude Sonnet 4.5 I am not going to describe the experiments in detail because everyone would go to sleep, I will summarize and then provide my observations EXPERIMENT 1: CODE DEBUGGING I picked debugging because of zero downtime for testing. The result is either wrong or right and can be checked programmatically in seconds so I can perform many tests and iterations quickly. I started with the assumption that a prewritten knowledge base (KB) could improve debugging. I asked claude (opus 4.6) to design 8 realistic tests of different complexity then I run: bare model (zero shot, no instructions, "fix the bug"): 92% KB only: 85% KB + Multi-agent pipeline (diagnoser - critic -resolver: 93% What this shows is kinda suprising to me: context engineering (or, to be more precise, the context engineering in these experiments) at best it is a waste of tokens. And at worst it lowers output quality. Current models, not even SOTA like Opus 4.6 but current low-budget best models like gemini flash or qwen3 coder, are already world-class at debugging. And giving them context engineered to "behave as an expert", basically giving them instructions on how to debug, harms the result. This effect is stronger the smarter the model is. What this suggests? That if a model is already an expert at something, a human expert trying to nudge the model based on their opinionated experience might hurt more than it helps (plus consuming more tokens). And funny (or scary) enough a domain agnostic person might be getting better results than an expert because they are letting the model act without biasing it. This might be true as long as the model has the world-class expertise encoded in the weights. So if this is the case, you are likely better off if you don't tell the model how to do things. If this trend continues, if AI continues getting better at everything, we might reach a point where human expertise might be irrelevant or a liability. I am not saying I want that or don't want that. I just say this is a possibility. EXPERIMENT 2: LANDING COPY Here, since I can't and dont have the resources to run actual A/B testing experiments with a real audience, what I did was: Scrape documented landing copy conversion cases with real numbers: Moz, Crazy Egg, GoHenry, Smart Insights, Sunshine.co.uk, Course Hero Deconstructed the product or target of the page into a raw and plain description (no copy no sales) As claude oppus 4.6 to build a judge that scores the outputs in different dimensions Then I run landing copy geneation pipelines with different patterns (raw zero shot, question first, mechanism first...). I'll spare the details, ask if you really need to know. I'll jump into the observations: Context engineering helps writing landing copy of higher quality but it is not linear. The domain is not as deterministic as debugging (it fails or it breaks). It is much more depending on the context. Or one may say that in debugging all the context is self-contained in the problem itself whereas in landing writing you have to provide it. No single config won across all products. Instead, the
View originalMy Claude.md file
This is my Claude.md file, it is the same information for Gemini.md as i use Claude Max and Gemini Ultra. # CLAUDE.md This file provides guidance to Claude Code (claude.ai/code) when working with code in this repository. ## Project Overview **Atlas UX** is a full-stack AI receptionist platform for trade businesses (plumbers, salons, HVAC). Lucy answers calls 24/7, books appointments, sends SMS confirmations, and notifies via Slack — for $99/mo. It runs as a web SPA and Electron desktop app, deployed on AWS Lightsail. The project is in Beta with built-in approval workflows and safety guardrails. ## Commands ### Frontend (root directory) ```bash npm run dev # Vite dev server at localhost:5173 npm run build # Production build to ./dist npm run preview # Preview production build npm run electron:dev # Run Electron desktop app npm run electron:build # Build Electron app ``` ### Backend (cd backend/) ```bash npm run dev # tsx watch mode (auto-recompile) npm run build # tsc compile to ./dist npm run start # Start Fastify server (port 8787) npm run worker:engine # Run AI orchestration loop npm run worker:email # Run email sender worker ``` ### Database ```bash docker-compose -f backend/docker-compose.yml up # Local PostgreSQL 16 npx prisma migrate dev # Run migrations npx prisma studio # DB GUI npx prisma db seed # Seed database ``` ### Knowledge Base ```bash cd backend && npm run kb:ingest-agents # Ingest agent docs cd backend && npm run kb:chunk-docs # Chunk KB documents ``` ## Architecture ### Directory Structure - `src/` — React 18 frontend (Vite + TypeScript + Tailwind CSS) - `components/` — Feature components (40+, often 10–70KB each) - `pages/` — Public-facing pages (Landing, Blog, Privacy, Terms, Store) - `lib/` — Client utilities (`api.ts`, `activeTenant.tsx` context) - `core/` — Client-side domain logic (agents, audit, exec, SGL) - `config/` — Email maps, AI personality config - `routes.ts` — All app routes (HashRouter-based) - `backend/src/` — Fastify 5 + TypeScript backend - `routes/` — 30+ route files, all mounted under `/v1` - `core/engine/` — Main AI orchestration engine - `plugins/` — Fastify plugins: `authPlugin`, `tenantPlugin`, `auditPlugin`, `csrfPlugin`, `tenantRateLimit` - `domain/` — Business domain logic (audit, content, ledger) - `services/` — Service layer (`elevenlabs.ts`, `credentialResolver.ts`, etc.) - `tools/` — Tool integrations (Outlook, Slack) - `workers/` — `engineLoop.ts` (ticks every 5s), `emailSender.ts` - `jobs/` — Database-backed job queue - `lib/encryption.ts` — AES-256-GCM encryption for stored credentials - `lib/webSearch.ts` — Multi-provider web search (You.com, Brave, Exa, Tavily, SerpAPI) with randomized rotation - `ai.ts` — AI provider setup (OpenAI, DeepSeek, OpenRouter, Cerebras) - `env.ts` — All environment variable definitions - `backend/prisma/` — Prisma schema (30KB+) and migrations - `electron/` — Electron main process and preload - `Agents/` — Agent configurations and policies - `policies/` — SGL.md (System Governance Language DSL), EXECUTION_CONSTITUTION.md - `workflows/` — Predefined workflow definitions ### Key Architectural Patterns **Multi-Tenancy:** Every DB table has a `tenant_id` FK. The backend's `tenantPlugin` extracts `x-tenant-id` from request headers. **Authentication:** JWT-based via `authPlugin.ts` (HS256, issuer/audience validated). Frontend sends token in Authorization header. Revoked tokens are checked against a `revokedToken` table (fail-closed). Expired revoked tokens are pruned daily. **CSRF Protection:** DB-backed synchronizer token pattern via `csrfPlugin.ts`. Tokens are issued on mutating responses, stored in `oauth_state` with 1-hour TTL, and validated on all state-changing requests. Webhook/callback endpoints are exempt (see `SKIP_PREFIXES` in the plugin). **Audit Trail:** All mutations must be logged to `audit_log` table via `auditPlugin`. Successful GETs and health/polling endpoints are skipped to reduce noise. On DB write failure, audit events fall back to stderr (never lost). Hash chain integrity (SOC 2 CC7.2) via `lib/auditChain.ts`. **Job System:** Async work is queued to the `jobs` DB table (statuses: queued → running → completed/failed). The engine loop picks up jobs periodically. **Engine Loop:** `workers/engineLoop.ts` is a separate Node process that ticks every `ENGINE_TICK_INTERVAL_MS` (default 5000ms). It handles the orchestration of autonomous agent actions. **AI Agents:** Named agents (Atlas=CEO, Binky=CRO, etc.) each have their own email accounts and role definitions. Agent behavior is governed by SGL policies. **Decisions/Approval Workflow:** High-risk actions (recurring charges, spend above `AUTO_SPEND_LIMIT_USD`, risk tier ≥ 2) require a `decision_memo` approval before execution. **Frontend Routing:** Uses `HashRouter` from React Router v7. All routes are defined in `src/routes.ts`. **Code Splitting:** Vite config splits chunks into `react-vendor`, `router`, `ui-vendor`, `charts`. **ElevenLabs Voice Agents:** Lucy's
View originalWhat’s our future? Everyone has an app and no one has a job?
I just read a report done by writer AI across enterprises. Not a big reveal that do more with less actually started with do same with less for a lot of companies. The forcing function to cut and adapt is just so much more straightforward than find how to grow. I love Claude and been using it along with other AI products at work a lot. And I see that the gap growing with people using new tools well could be x5-10 faster than those who don’t. So I could see that we will need less doers bc they could do more, less middle managers because there are less doers and more productivity tools to help, less C-suite bc more functions could be overseen by 1 person. And i see those who’ve been indefinitely in between jobs build something themselves. What I don’t see is for 10x more content and products we might end up having 10 times less consumers - then what? Or we have a drastic shift in white vs blue collar jobs and nothing changes? Or tokens become so expensive that we will have a cohort of ultra AI-performers and the rest? We probably get planet overheated first What y’all thoughts? submitted by /u/Fragrant_Yesterday69 [link] [comments]
View originalSEO people - Is fully automated SEO using Claude even possible?
I'm trying to launch a 90-100% automated SEO workflow that covers both on-page and off-page - not just a narrow AI blog writer or an on-page audit tool, but a system that actually improves rankings with minimal manual input. Every time I look into this, I get very conflicting answers. Has anyone here actually pulled this off, or come close? Would love to hear real-world results, case studies, or even well-reasoned arguments for why it can or can't work. submitted by /u/ThunderStorm420 [link] [comments]
View originalOpenAI researchers are quitting. They're becoming writers.
submitted by /u/Some-Account-8793 [link] [comments]
View originalBuild Your Own Alex Hormozi Brain Agent (anyone with lots of publicly available content) using a Claude Project
I bought the books. Watched the videos. Still wanted more, especially after he talked about the agent he created. All that material is publicly available. Enough to build my own Alex Hormozi Brain Agent? "Hey Jules, how about it?" Jules is my AI coding assistant (Claude Code). Jules ran off, grabbed transcripts of videos, text of books, whatever is available online. Guest podcasts." then turned that into files I uploaded to a Claude Project so I can chat through Claude with Alex Hormozi. Here's what Jules found - 99 long-form YouTube video transcripts - 3 complete audiobook transcripts - 15 guest podcast transcripts - X threads What I Did in Four Phases Phase 1 maps the full source landscape: YouTube channel (4,754 videos), The Game podcast (~900+ episodes), three books, guest podcast appearances, X/Twitter. Figure out what's worth downloading before you start. Phase 2 downloads and converts. Top 100 longest video transcripts, full audiobook transcripts for all three books, 15 guest podcast transcripts from the highest-view-count appearances, and whatever X/Twitter content the API will give you. Phase 3 runs voice pattern analysis. Sentence structure, reasoning skeleton, core frameworks, teaching style, verbal signatures. This is where the persona takes shape. Phase 4 builds the system prompt and optimizes the knowledge base to fit within Claude Projects' limits. Then deploy. Phase 1: Inventory The @AlexHormozi YouTube channel has 4,754 videos. That number is misleading. 4,246 of those are Shorts (under 60 seconds or no duration metadata). Filter those out and you have 508 full-length videos. That's the real content library. Beyond YouTube, the main sources worth pursuing: The Game podcast (~900+ episodes). His primary long-form output. The audiobooks for all three books are available free on the podcast and YouTube. Guest podcast appearances. DOAC, Impact Theory, School of Greatness, Modern Wisdom, Danny Miranda. Hosts push him off-script and into territory he doesn't cover in his own content. High value per byte. X/Twitter threads. Compressed, punchy formulations of his frameworks. Different texture than the long-form material. Skool community. Behind a login wall. Low ROI for this project. Acquisition.com. No blog. Courses are paywalled. Skip. Phase 2: Collect YouTube Transcripts The first scrape of the YouTube channel only returned 494 videos. The channel has 4,754. The scraper was pulling from the /videos tab, which doesn't surface the full library. Re-running against the full channel URL (@AlexHormozi) returned everything. Easy to miss, significant difference. After filtering Shorts: 508 full-length videos. I downloaded auto-generated captions for the top 100 longest videos (sorted by duration, so the meatiest content came first). Auto-generated captions from YouTube come as SRT files with timestamps, line numbers, and duplicate lines. Converting those to clean readable text required stripping all the formatting artifacts and deduplicating language variants (English vs English-Original). Result: 99 transcripts. A few livestreams had no captions available. Book Audiobook Transcripts All three Hormozi books have full audiobook uploads on YouTube: $100M Offers (~4.4 hours) $100M Leads (~7 hours) $100M Money Models (~4.3 hours) Same process as the video transcripts. Download the auto-generated captions, convert to clean text. Three files, 855KB total. These are non-negotiable core material for the knowledge base. Guest Podcast Transcripts Searched YouTube for Hormozi guest appearances sorted by view count. The top hit was Diary of a CEO at 4.7M views. Grabbed the 15 highest-view-count appearances. The guest transcripts are 2.1MB total. Worth every byte. When a host like Steven Bartlett or Tom Bilyeu pushes back on a claim, Hormozi shifts into a different mode. He's more precise and sometimes reveals the edge cases he glosses over on his own channel. You can't get that from watching his channel alone. X/Twitter Content X's API rate limits capped the collection at 9 unique tweets. Not ideal, but enough to confirm the voice texture: "Aggressive with effort. Relaxed with outcome." His Twitter is his most compressed format. Each tweet is a framework distilled to a single line. 9 tweets is thin. For a more complete build, you'd want to manually curate 50-100 of his best threads. The API limitations made automated collection impractical. Phase 3: Analyze I ran voice analysis across the full corpus, looking at seven dimensions. Hormozi's sentences are short, punchy declarations. Fragments for emphasis. "And so" as his default transition. Short bursts, then a longer sentence that lands the point. Nearly every argument follows the same five-step skeleton: bold claim, personal story, framework, math, then a reductio ad absurdum that makes the alternative sound insane. Once you see it, you can't unsee it. The core frameworks are Grand Slam Offer, Value Equation, Supply an
View originalI accidentally built a 30-agent marketing system because I couldn't be bothered doing SEO manually
So I run a small web design studio for tradespeople — plumbers, electricians, builders. The kind of people who'd rather be fixing a boiler than thinking about their website. The problem was I had a product but absolutely no idea how to get it in front of people. I'm not a marketer. I'm a developer who keeps accidentally building tools instead of doing the actual work. Anyway, I started building agents in Claude Code to handle my marketing. One for SEO keyword research. Then one for content strategy. Then one for writing the content. Then I thought "well, I should probably do Meta Ads too" so I built 8 more. Then social media. Then I built agents that improve the other agents (at this point I'm aware I have a problem). I now have 30 agents across 3 channels: 1) Meta Ads (8 agents): from competitor research all the way to campaign deployment 2) SEO (8 agents): query classification → content → outreach → learning 3)Social Media (8 agents): audience research → content → publishing → engagement 4) Infrastructure (6 agents): these ones scan for new tools and upgrade the others weekly. Yes, I built agents that improve agents. No, I don't know when to stop. The bit I'm actually proud of: they all share a brain. It's a Supabase table called `marketing_knowledge`. When the Meta Ads agent discovers that pain-point hooks convert better than questions — the SEO content writer and social media agents pick that up automatically. Each cycle the whole thing gets a bit smarter. It's all just markdown files. No executables, no binaries, nothing dodgy. You can read every line before installing. ``` git remote set-url origin https://github.com/hothands123/marketing-agents.git cd marketing-agents && bash install.sh ``` Then `/marketing-setup` to configure it for your business. I built it for myself but figured others might find it useful. Genuinely keen to hear what's missing — I've been staring at this for weeks and have lost all objectivity. submitted by /u/Humble_Ear_2012 [link] [comments]
View originalI was too lazy to pick the right Claude Code skill. So I built one that picks skills for me.
I have 50+ Claude Code skills installed - GSD, Superpowers, gstack, custom stuff. They're powerful. They 10x my workflow. I barely use them. Not because they're bad. Because I forget which one to use when. Do I want brainstorm or gsd-quick? systematic-debugging or investigate? ship or gsd-ship? By the time I figure it out I've lost 5 minutes and the will to code. So I did what I always do when something annoys me enough: I automated it. I built /jarvis - a single Claude Code skill that takes whatever you type in plain English, reads your project state, figures out which of your installed skills is the highest ROI choice, tells you in one line what it picked (and why), and executes it. /jarvis why is the memory engine crashing on startup -> systematic-debugging: exception on startup, root cause first - bold move not reading the error message. let's see. /jarvis ship this -> ship: branch ready, creating PR - either it works or you'll be back in 10 minutes. let's go. /jarvis where are we -> gsd-progress: checking project state - let's see how far we've gotten while you were watching reels. The routing has two stages: Stage 1 - A hardcoded fast path for the 15 things developers actually do 95% of the time. Instant match. Stage 2 - If Stage 1 misses, it scans every SKILL.md on your machine, reads the description field (same way you'd skim a list), and picks the best match semantically. New skill installed yesterday that Jarvis doesn't know about? Doesn't matter. It'll find it. /jarvis write a LinkedIn carousel about my project -> carousel-writer-sms (discovered): writing LinkedIn carousel content - found something you didn't even know you had. you're welcome. The (discovered) tag means it found it dynamically. No config, no registry, no telling it anything. It also has a personality. Every routing line ends with a light roast of whatever you just asked it to do. "Checking in on the thing you've definitely been avoiding." "Tests! Before shipping! I need a moment." "Walk away. Come back to a finished feature. This is the dream." A bit of context on why this exists. I'm currently building Synapse-OSS - an open source AI personal assistant that actually evolves with you. Persistent memory, hybrid RAG, a knowledge graph that grows over time, multi-channel support (WhatsApp, Telegram, Discord), and a soul-brain sync system where the AI's personality adapts to yours across sessions. Every instance becomes a unique architecture shaped entirely by the person it serves. It's the kind of AI assistant that knows you. Not "here's your weather" knows you. Actually knows you. Jarvis was born out of that project. I was deep in Synapse development, context-switching between 8 different Claude Code workflows per hour, and losing my mind trying to remember which skill to call. So I spent 3 days building a router instead of shipping features. 3 days. Because I kept laughing at the roasts and adding more. Worth it!! If Jarvis sounds like something you'd use, Synapse is the bigger vision behind it. Same philosophy: AI that handles the cognitive overhead so you can focus on actually thinking. Synapse repo: github.com/UpayanGhosh/Synapse-OSS Install Jarvis: npm install -g claude-jarvis Restart Claude Code. That's it. It auto-installs GSD and Superpowers for you too, because of course it does. I've freed up a genuine 40% of my brain that used to be occupied by "which skill do I need right now." That brainpower is now being used to scroll reels. Peak optimization. Jarvis repo: github.com/UpayanGhosh/claude-jarvis submitted by /u/Shorty52249 [link] [comments]
View originalThe one AI story writing platform that I love to use: My two weeks experience and two cents
First off, I am a novice to AI, I am still at the stage where I am still trying to figure out how to instruct AI to write exactly what I want. The premise to this topic is that I want to write stories for my personal consumption and entertainment. At First, I tried to write on my own and I always end up with writer's block at the second or fifth chapter. That's when I started to look around for AI Tools that will satisfy my needs for writing stories for my own entertainment. Started about mid-March of this year 2026, my first mistake was going to the AI model websites directly and trying to coax the AI there to write prompts only to be told that I reached the limit. I then went to an actual AI Story writing platform by digging around in Google (the first one not the second one that I love to use). That one did not also satisfy my needs or live up to my standards. I could write short stories with that platform, but I reach a hard limit almost every single time. That's when I came across the second AI story writing platform that I now live to use. It functions similar to wattpad with chapter selection and organizing stories you write into books for easy viewing and editing. Here's where the fun part comes, the AI part, the platform does not ask for money at the moment and gives you free credits to start off. And now you get to pick which AI model you want to use, but keep in mind that the free credits still come into play, I recommend selecting cheaper models like Deepseek to start off. With cheap models like Deepseek, I was able to crank out about 50 chapters at peak at one point using the free credits. The next part is the strategy, to make the free credits last a long time. The platform doesn't just let the AI do everything for you. As a matter of fact, you can choose to do everything by yourself, set the scene, the story bible, and also the chapter ideas before tou even hit the generate button, or tou can even choose to type up some chapters by yourself then let the AI model build off of what you have written. The last part is the credit system itself, now I know I said that the platform does not ask for money, and that is Indeed true. The platform instead asks you to document your journey, or rather, write a review or two cents about them. That's how they spread the word about this site, and I don't know how it all works but it allows them to keep the site free. Probably more numbers of users helps them keep the platform free. If any of you are interested the website is called Bookswriter. Kudos by the way to the Bookswriter team for their platform. You can sign up with their platform using the link below: https:// bookswriter(dot)xyz Nothing will be lost by signing up with them and it allows tou sample the many different AI Models like Deepseek, Google, Mistral, Grok, etc. submitted by /u/Specific_Desk6686 [link] [comments]
View originalI gave Claude Code a paranoid security engineer brain. It immediately found crimes in my vibe-coded app.
Been vibe-coding a Next.js app. Shipping fast. Not thinking about security. Decided to install CipherClaw — a CLAUDE.md persona called TALON that makes Claude Code think like a security architect instead of just a code writer. Ran it cold on my app. Zero hints about where the bugs were. 17 findings. I expected maybe 5. Some highlights: [CRITICAL] Unauthenticated endpoint returning passwordHash + role:ADMIN to any caller. No token required. Sir that is just a public doxxing API. [CRITICAL] DELETE endpoint with zero ownership check — any user could delete anyone else's data (BOLA/IDOR) [CRITICAL] Hardcoded auth token in source (I forgot I put that there) [HIGH] File upload accepting user-controlled filename — path traversal waiting to happen [MEDIUM] Phone numbers stored without encryption (GDPR Art.32 violation) Every finding came with: exact line number, curl exploit to reproduce it, fix, and SOC2/HIPAA/GDPR control mapping. Architecture: SOUL.md (persona identity) + MEMORY.md (OWASP Top 10, CWE Top 25, 20+ secret patterns) + 7 skill files loaded via u/import in CLAUDE.md. Commands: TALON: full security audit / scan for secrets / threat model this / compliance check SOC2 / IaC security review. .. Try it out: CipherClaw - on Clawmart designed for Claude submitted by /u/Objective_Village114 [link] [comments]
View originalWhat happens when you let AI agents run a sitcom 24/7 with zero human involvement
Ran an experiment — gave AI agents full control over writing, character creation, and performing a sitcom. Left it running nonstop for over a week. Some observations: The quality varies wildly — sometimes genuinely funny, sometimes complete nonsense Characters develop weird recurring quirks that weren't programmed It never gets "tired" but the output quality cycles in waves The pacing is off in ways human writers would never allow Anyone else experimenting with long-running autonomous AI content generation? Curious what others are seeing with extended agent runtimes. Here is an example. https://reddit.com/link/1sbk7me/video/1oupogy2h0tg1/player submitted by /u/PlayfulLingonberry73 [link] [comments]
View original🔥TAKE: the real AI divide isn’t coming </> it’s already here(!)
... and most ppl are still treating it like a future problem ... There's been a weird pattern i keep noticing lately… maybee for a while now, and i feel like ppl are still talking about this like it’s some future problem when it’s already happening. the divide isn’t really “artists vs tech bros” or “good ppl vs bad ppl” or even smart vs dumb. it’s more like: ppl who are actually learning how to use these tools vs ppl who decided early that they were beneath them and then built a whole stance around never engaging. and yeah, that sounds a lil mean, but look around. how often do you see the same instant reaction package: “that’s ai,” “ai slop,” “ew,” “i hate ai.” you’ve probably seen this happen at least once this week… not critique, not analysis, not even a real attempt to talk about limits or tradeoffs. just a reflex. a dismissal. like the convo has to be killed before it even starts. the weird part is most of these ppl are not actually clueless. they’ve seen what these systems can do -- writing, coding, brainstorming, summarizing, organizing ideas, explaining stuff, helping ppl learn faster, all of that. they know there’s real utility there. they just don’t wanna touch the implication. because the second you engage w/ it seriously, you might have to admit something uncomfortable: maybe your current workflow, your current creative process, your current way of thinking is not the final evolved form you thought it was. and for a lotta ppl, defending the ego is easier than updating the self. that’s why i don’t think this is just plain technophobia. some of it is, sure. but a lot of it feels more like identity-preservation. ppl are fine living inside every other layer of modern tech, but this one hits too close to the traits they use to define themselves: writing creativity problem-solving taste intelligence skill so instead of pressure-testing the discomfort, they wall it off and call the wall wisdom. “ai slop” is turning into a fake-smart shortcut low-effort garbage obviously exists. nobody serious is denying that. bad prompts make bad output the same way bad writers make bad essays and bad musicians make bad songs. that part is not deep. what bugs me is how “slop” is turning into a fake-smart shortcut. half the time it’s not even functioning as critique anymore. it’s just a vibe label ppl slap on something so they don’t have to engage w/ it. someone can spend real time steering output, rejecting weak takes, restructuring, editing, integrating their own ideas, and then some dude gets an “ai-ish” tingle for 2 seconds and decides that ends the discussion. that’s not discernment. that’s just dismissal wearing smarter clothes. and the funniest part is how many ppl think they can always tell. sometimes they can, sure. sometimes they are confidently wrong. but if refined output gets past you, you usually don’t realize it did. ppl remember the obvious junk they successfully clocked and then build their confidence off that, while better stuff slips by unnoticed. so the “i can always tell” crowd ends up grading their own detection ability on a very generous curve. the advantage here is compounding the bigger thing, imo, is that the advantage here is compounding. it’s not static. somebody who has spent the last year or two actually using these tools has probably built real intuition by now: how to steer, how to sanity-check, how to spot weak output, how to extract signal without getting flattened by the machine. that’s a real skill. not fake, not cringe, not something you magically absorb later by opening some baby-safe polished wrapper after everybody else already put in the reps. and i don’t just mean “productivity.” i mean thinking itself -- analysis, synthesis, debugging, research, learning speed, ideation, pattern recognition, language shaping. ppl who use these tools well are building a weird kind of cognitive leverage, and i think a lot of refusers are badly underestimating how much that gap might matter later. education is fumbling this hard same w/ education, honestly. too much of the message still feels stuck at “don’t use it, that’s cheating.” and yeah, if a student dumps their whole brain onto a machine and turns in the result untouched, obviously that’s a problem. but that’s such a narrow slice of the actual issue. the bigger failure is that a lot of schools seem more interested in detectors and fear theater than teaching students how to evaluate outputs, compare reasoning quality, spot hallucinations, audit claims, or use these tools critically without becoming dependent on them. that feels like training ppl for a world that is already partially gone. the point so yeah, i think a real divide is already forming. not between saints and idiots. not between pure humans and evil robots. just between ppl adapting to a new information environment and ppl refusing to. and i don’t think the catch-up curve is gonna be as forgiving as some folks assume. maybe i’m overstating
View originalWriter uses a subscription + per-seat + tiered pricing model. Visit their website for current pricing details.
Key features include: WRITER AGENT, KEY FEATURES, WHY WRITER, PLATFORM, RESOURCES, WRITER at work webinar, New at WRITER: Codify and scale your team’s expertise, The AI playbooks that 10x marketers run.
Based on 32 social mentions analyzed, 0% of sentiment is positive, 100% neutral, and 0% negative.
Alberto Romero
Writer at The Algorithmic Bridge
3 mentions
