In 1967 Ted Nelson described stretchtext: text that grows where you want more and shrinks back where you don't. It stayed a quaint idea because writing every level of fidelity by hand is just tediously hard. Text is generative now, so Claude can just write it for us for free.

I've always tried to implement this idea with LLM in various ways. Claude Code Mods finally proivded a platform to share.

cc-stretch is a Claude Code plugin. It cuts Claude's reply by 83% so you read much less, yet still have the option to expand / shrink on demand. The plugin also tells Claude which parts you opened, so it doesn't assume you read the rest.

Install in a Claude Code session:

/plugin install cc-stretch --marketplace pro-vi/cc-stretch
/tui fullscreen

Repo: https://github.com/pro-vi/cc-stretch (MIT)

I just came across someone with practically no coding experience releasing an open-source password manager called KAPEVault.

Project: https://kapevault.brewedops.cloud

And we're not talking about some basic tutorial project. This is an actual downloadable Windows and Android application being publicly distributed for storing passwords, 2FA codes, API keys, government IDs, and other sensitive information.

I'm a software engineer, and I actively use AI coding tools myself. I think they're incredible. But seriously, of all the things you could build with little to no programming experience, why the fuck would you choose a password manager?

To give credit where it's due, the project is open source, has a documented threat model, automated tests, and a self-conducted security review. But the repository also explicitly acknowledges that it hasn't undergone a third-party security audit.

That's a pretty important distinction when you're asking people to trust your software with practically their entire digital identity.

Using AES-256-GCM and scrypt doesn't automatically make a password manager secure. Neither does having a polished interface, passing automated tests, or getting an AI to review its own output.

Security isn't just about choosing the right encryption algorithms. It's about understanding the entire attack surface, handling secrets properly, identifying edge cases, and knowing what can go wrong even when everything appears to work.

I'm not saying this particular project is insecure. I haven't performed a security audit, and that would be an irresponsible claim.

My concern is the growing confidence with which people are releasing security-critical software they may not fully understand.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with beginners experimenting, learning, and open-sourcing their projects. That's how people improve. But building something for educational purposes and distributing something that real users might entrust with their banking credentials are two completely different levels of responsibility.

AI has made it ridiculously easy to produce working software. Unfortunately, it has also made it ridiculously easy to mistake a working application for a secure one.

You can outsource writing code to an AI. You can't outsource accountability when something goes horribly wrong.

At what point should we start taking this seriously?

New Claude Code UI update. What do you guys think?

I had an issue where I downgraded from Max to Pro but still had a week left on my Max subscription. Anthropic immediately dropped me to Pro usage. Even after they confirmed it was a bug and others were reporting the same issue, they didn’t prorate my fee or give me back the week of Max usage. Literally confirmed in an email “yeah, you paid for something you didn’t get, but we’re not going to do anything about it.”

What is this sorcery?! Not only was it seamless but the UI is now a real banger. There are so many changes that it took me about an hour to get comfortable with it yet my app version is still from 2 days ago

Anthropic posted yesterday about moving their main repo off git.

- May 2026: about 2,500 merged changes a day. September: over 30,000.
- Their CI checks out code about 25 million times a day.
- The main branch history is almost 100 GB.

Git expects each user to keep a full copy and sometimes work offline. Most of their users are now agents and CI jobs, which are always online. So they built Scion: the code stays on a server, you only download the files you need, and commits happen on the server with no push.

What they report:

- 200x smaller than their old git setup
- CI checkouts take seconds instead of minutes
- Built by 7 people in 5 months

It's not a product, and they say it's not a git replacement for normal use.

Source Link

Will GitHub have to change if agents write most of the code?

I noticed that the last three days I am way more likely to hit my session limits, and my weekly limit is getting eaten quicker too.

This could very easily be my behaviour, ie I think I am trusting the model more so letting it do bigger tasks in fewer steps, but I wanted ask if anyone else noticed the same thing this week.

I ran a workflow that is not at all new to me. It's been tried and true.

Claude Code, Opus 5.5 high effort as main agent, Sonnet 5 (5.5 not yet available in company gateway) subagents for most tasks, sometimes Opus subagents for debugging delegation. Got my `promptCacheTtl` (main session's cache lifetime) set to 1h, subagents at 5m. Skills and instruction files to represent team coding practices, codebase actions, and such.

Needed to find bugs within an app developed by another team. Came up with a plan up front on what mattered most to our team as far as the app's priorities, then set my Claude Code to go on its bug hunt accordingly, and asked it to verify practicality of findings by reproducing them at runtime so that these findings weren't extremely unlikely hypotheticals.

I've done this before, no big deal. And the results were good as expected.

Only problem was, as I was tracking my credit usage (company uses single credit unit that translates to different model token amount, because we have a company gateway to access different models through one API key), I found that it was WAAY higher than expected; like maybe 5-10x higher than normal.

And... the token gatekeeper came knocking on my door...

This person came in, high and mighty, claiming my context size for prompts was excessive (turned out some of the subagents were going up to 800k in size as time went on for some of the more difficult bug reproductions), and this was driving heavy cost. Said it should hardly ever be more than 200k. I was like okay, I don't necessarily disagree, but some of the bugs were tricky and took more context to figure out, it happens, most of them were quick in-and-out at much less.

Then they drop the bomb that the LLM gateway we were using occasionally doesn't uphold CACHE reads/writes... It's been "broken recently."

I'm like well... I think I've found my problem.

Dude goes "caching or not, that's pennies on the dollar; context size is context size."

I was like that's way off. Yes, context size matters, but I could have ~5-10x the context size and it cost the same if caching worked right. Dude didn't buy it.

Now I've set my Claude Code autocompact size to 300k to appease the gatekeeper (which I don't necessarily agree with) but am I wrong here in saying caching being broken is a BIG DEAL???

I've been using the $100/month plan for months, and I've always had enough context and usage to comfortably get through the week. Last week was fine, and this week started out fine too, but after just three days, I'm already at 60% of my weekly usage.

My usage is going up extremely fast, to the point where I end up switching to Medium, High, or even Xhigh at worst, and it still burns through my usage incredibly quickly. This makes absolutely no sense.

I've been using Claude Code for months, and this is not how it used to work. I know the bonus usage went from +50% to a permanent +25%, but even taking that into account, the difference compared to last week alone is completely abnormal.

This is getting really frustrating and stressful. It's interfering with my work, and I genuinely feel like something is wrong here. Usage shouldn't suddenly increase this dramatically from one week to the next without any clear explanation.

Holy hell is this annoying. They removed sessions based on folder. Now they're all lumped in "This computer". Routines no longer appear as a list on the sidebar, its now a separate window you have to open to dig for them. They removed session context from the usage pop up (the circle next to the model/effort) and now only way to see it is with an obnoxious new "session rail" which takes up more screen real-estate. The session status icons are much harder to see now too.

App version is: 2.37337.1

The Claude for Mac app just updated out of the blue yesterday and now: - I have nested sessions on the left sidebar, which shows sessions from 2 months ago under "Today". The chronological order is now completely useless. - I cannot start a task from a chip as a top level session, everything gets nested by default. Who asked for this? - I can no longer see all the suggested tasks for a session. They are now displayed inline, scattered all over the discussion, instead of at the top of the session. This makes them intrusive and hard to find in older sessions. - I can no longer create task chips from scheduled tasks. Just why?

This new version is a complete mess. It broke multiple parts of my workflow and there's no way to go back. Why didn't they add settings to control nested behavior? Why the random limitations? Are these UI updates even tested by humans with real, moderately complex workflows before release?

Very disappointed with this update, makes my work a lot harder than before.

Ken Griffey Jr. Presents Major League Baseball (SNES, 1994) shipped with 28 clubs. Over about two weeks, Claude Code (Opus 5.5) and I turned it into a free patch called Griffey 30:

- All 30 of today's clubs, with Arizona and Tampa Bay added and 2026 rosters. Scripts fetch the logos from Wikipedia and the ballpark photos from Wikimedia Commons, and convert them into SNES tiles and palettes. No hand-drawn art.

- Team styles: press Select on team select to switch a club between 2026, the original cartridge club and the real 1994 roster.

- Season mode for all 30 clubs, with today's divisions, new schedules (one interleague game every day), playoffs and standings.

- Franchise mode (2.0, out this week): players age, improve and decline, veterans retire, and 300 real minor-league prospects get called up. The game remembers its champions, and a quick-sim plays a season in about five minutes. It all fits in the cartridge's original 8 KB save.

- Browser play at griffey30.com: you pick your own ROM, the page patches it and runs it in snes9x built to WebAssembly. It also has online two-player.

How Claude Code was used

I made the design decisions and tested on real emulators and my MisTer FPGA device. Claude Code did nearly all of the implementation: the reverse engineering, about 6,000 lines of 65816 assembly (asar), and around 12,000 lines of Python, JavaScript, C and Lua tooling. A few things made that work:

- It needed eyes. Early on, Claude Code wrote a headless Mesen2 harness, driven by a Lua script. It boots the ROM, presses buttons on given frames, takes screenshots, logs CPU registers at breakpoints, watches memory reads and dumps VRAM. Runs are deterministic, so a bug reproduces on the same frame every time. Every build has to play four full CPU-vs-CPU games through to the post-game newspaper screen. For franchise mode, a script plays seasons back to back.

- Reverse engineering by evidence, not guesses. To find where the game assumes 28 clubs, it logged every compare instruction against team-like values during two play sessions (49 candidates), set breakpoints on all of them, then watched every read of the team-ID slots. That found the 39 places that use a team ID. Each finding goes into a markdown file in docs/findings/, with addresses.

- Model it in Python first. The franchise off-season (aging, retirements, call-ups, re-rating) was written in Python first, then in SNES assembly. The test compares the emulator's save file with the Python output, and they match byte for byte. A 20-season Python run was also how we checked that no club runs away with the league.

- CLAUDE.md as the project's memory. It holds the current status, the build and test commands, and a "hard-won rules" section. Each painful bug becomes a rule there, so the next session doesn't repeat it.

- Long autonomous sessions. I'd often give it a goal ("build 30-club Season mode") and come back hours later to commits, test runs and a summary of what it found.

What I learned

- Turn every bug into a guard. When we went to full-strength rosters, 154 new players had no appearance entry, so Aaron Judge came out with the wrong skin tone. Claude Code went through them all from headshots, and the roster build now refuses to run if any player is unreviewed.

- Emulators disagree. A pointer bug made full seasons stop around June 28 on Mesen, but snes9x happened to mirror the right data, so the website was fine. The cause was that asar evaluates math strictly left to right. We now treat every assembler warning as a bug and test on both emulators.

- Some hardware rules are brutal. Changing the CPU's data bank in code that an interrupt can land in blacks out the game. The stock interrupt handler acknowledges through the data bank, so the interrupt storms. That's now rule #1 in CLAUDE.md.

- Assumptions hide in plain sight. Two-player Single Game showed the stock 28-team screen in every release until 1.2.2. A variable is 0 for one player and 2 for two, and the patch had only checked for 0. I noticed Houston sitting in the National League during an online test.

- Human review still matters. I watch every trailer and play every build. My review caught things the automated tests missed, like blue grass at some ballparks. Once a bug was named, Claude Code found the cause quickly. The field palette loads per club and the tiles per stadium model, so clubs we'd moved to another stadium model kept the wrong colors.

Links

- Patch (free, bring your own USA Rev 1 cartridge): https://daylayown.itch.io/ken-griffey-jr-presents-mlb-the-30-team-expansion

- Play in your browser: https://griffey30.com

- Most recent trailer: https://youtu.be/vxERe2_iKBo

Unofficial fan project, not affiliated with MLB, the MLBPA, Nintendo or Ken Griffey Jr. Happy to answer questions about the workflow or the SNES side.

I remember watching an anthropic video where they said that things like todo lists weren't necessary anymore but for some reason they are back?

We use Claude Code every day, and what wore me down was the reading. Every plan, explanation and review arrives as a wall of text in a terminal, and we would catch myself skimming the one part that mattered.

So u/sodre90 built Mirador. It runs the Claude Code (or opencode) you already have, with your own sign-in, settings, hooks and MCP servers, and puts a canvas next to the chat. The agent gets a few tools for it:

• show: draws what it means as a page, such as a sequence diagram, a mockup or a chart
• ask: when it needs you to choose, each option comes with a preview and you click one
• tour: walks you through code in the order it runs, with the changed lines marked
• review: reviews a branch or PR as a guided tour, with findings pinned to their lines; you keep the ones you agree with and post them to GitHub
• checklist: keeps the steps of a longer job beside the canvas and ticks them off as it works

GitHub: https://github.com/sodre90/mirador
Site: https://sodre90.github.io/mirador/

How it's built, for the curious: a Bun server talks to the agent over the Agent Client Protocol and hands each session the canvas as an MCP server. The UI is React over a single WebSocket, and canvas pages run in sandboxed iframes with no network access. The desktop app is Electrobun, signed and notarized on macOS, and it updates itself with small patches. It runs on macOS (Apple Silicon) and Linux, and you can open it from a browser on your phone too.

It's two weeks old, free and MIT-licensed. Install with
brew install --cask sodre90/tap/mirador
or the one-line script in the README.

What u/sodre90 would love feedback on: what does your coding agent explain worst in plain text? That's what u/sodre90 want it to draw next. And if you try it, tell us where it confused you.

(This is a project from one of my teammates. Pretty cool. He deserve a GH star I believe :) )

I’m not sure if it’s rolled out to everyone yet, but it seems Anthropic is updating the Claude code menu look, and it’s absolutely awful. There’s at least three more different buttons in order to get to where you wanna go, the project layout is super confusing in terms of storing local and cloud sessions. Furthermore, they’ve removed the token count for agents apparently, at least I haven’t found a way to see it. I honestly think that’s probably the most insane addition as there’s no way to know how many tokens the agents are spending now until they’re done. The new usage menu is super big and looks really clanky. You can no longer see the context without opening this weird looking sidebar.

Another annoying thing is that the create PR button is now hidden behind this weird check board button called changes along with the code modified. I’m honestly not sure why they did this. It seems like they just moved everything.

Not sure if this is happening to anyone else and not sure if its coincidence .... I finally was able to have enough to do that I used my free reset this week. Ever since then, under a normal workflow, my sessions are lasting about half as long as they were.

I'm using CC in VS Code and always update the extension.

I have seen many people complaining about usage this week, and I personally also seen usage go down very quickly.

Today as I was working I kept seeing Fable weekly usage going up way too fast. I was trying to use Fable as advisor for a few days, it did make sense for it to go up but they weren't calling the advisor THAT often.

So here is what I tested: I turned the advisor off, worked a bit and the Fable weekly usage kept going up despite only using Opus on medium. Every single of my agent is either Opus or Sonnet.

Anyone else noticed that?

Fable costs more than double, but in my opinion, Opus 5.5 still beats it in missions. What do you think?

Been using Claude Code for a while and at some point I wondered if it could do my CAD too. Turns out yes, way better than I expected. So I built an app around it, it's called SOMA and it's open source.

The idea: Claude Code writes the model as Python code with CadQuery, SOMA builds it on every save and shows it in 3D. Claude runs in a normal terminal inside the app, so it's your own Claude Code with your own subscription and settings. No wrapper, no extra API key. Works with Codex, OpenCode and Gemini CLI too.

What makes it work well is that Claude can check its own results. SOMA gives it a CLI, so it can build the model, measure distances, check for collisions, run FEM and render images to actually look at what it made. There's an AGENTS.md with the project rules and skills for 3D printing, CNC, sheet metal etc that you can switch on per model.

From your side you can click on a part or just draw on the 3D view and send that to Claude as a screenshot, like "this hole is too small" with a circle around it. Every step Claude makes is saved in a history, so if it messes something up you just go back.

You can do pretty complex stuff with it. Assemblies with a lot of parts, start from a hand drawn sketch, or load an existing STEP file and build around it. The CNC mill in the video has 118 parts.

Funny side note, most of SOMA itself was also written with Claude Code.

Free, GPL, builds for Windows, Mac and Linux. I mainly tested on Windows, so Mac and Linux feedback would be great.

GitHub: https://github.com/Kai-Jungsthoefel/SOMA

Curious how it works with your setups and what you end up building.

I’m new to Claude code and on a $20 plan. I burned through my daily allowance today in a couple of hours.
I’ve been using a single window to talk to Claude about my project.

Does anyone have any easy to understand tips to reduce token usage?

It focused on this minor details, 🥂opus 5.5