I switched Claude Code over to GLM 5.2 and ran it all day. It's a 756 billion parameter open source model you can route straight into the Claude Code harness for about five times cheaper than Opus, and for most of my knowledge work it held up fine. In this one I show you what it can build, where it beats Opus and where it doesn't, and exactly how to set it up so you can switch between models per project. Here's the config I use. Drop this into your .claude/settings.local.json and swap in your own Z.ai key: "env": { "ANTHROPIC_BASE_URL": "https://api.z.ai/api/anthropic", "ANTHROPIC_AUTH_TOKEN": "your-z-ai-api-key-here", "ANTHROPIC_API_KEY": "", "API_TIMEOUT_MS": "3000000", "ANTHROPIC_DEFAULT_OPUS_MODEL": "glm-5.2", "ANTHROPIC_DEFAULT_SONNET_MODEL": "glm-5.2", "ANTHROPIC_DEFAULT_HAIKU_MODEL": "glm-5.2", "ANTHROPIC_SMALL_FAST_MODEL": "glm-5.2", "CLAUDE_CODE_SUBAGENT_MODEL": "glm-5.2" }

If you're hitting session limits in Claude Code, this video breaks down exactly how tokens actually work and the habits that will stop you from burning through them. I cover context rot, manual compaction, the rewind feature, sub agents, markdown conversions, and a free token dashboard I built so you can see where your tokens are really going. By the end you'll know when to clear, when to chain sessions, and why the 1 million token window is insurance, not a goal to fill. Token Dashboard 10 GitHub Repos: https://x.com/DeRonin_/status/2045420155434320270?s=20

I used to wonder why two people could ask Claude the same question and get completely different answers. One person would get a vague, generic response they'd have to rework three times. The other would get something so precise and useful, it felt like the AI had read their mind. Same tool. Same question. Wildly different output. Then I stumbled onto something, almost by accident, that changed the way I work with AI forever. And once you see it, you can't unsee it. Here's what I discovered: The quality of your output isn't determined by the AI. It's determined by the quality of the instruction you give it. Most of us type a prompt the way we'd fire off a WhatsApp message, fast, rough, half-formed. And the AI does its best with what it's given. Which isn't much. But what if you could hand the AI a better version of your own prompt, before it even starts working? That's exactly what this trick does. Here's the process: Write your prompt out in a Google Doc or a text file first. Don't worry about making it perfect. Just get your thoughts down. Then paste it into Claude (or ChatGPT) and add this one line before you hit send: "Do not execute this prompt yet. Improve it, the grammar, the clarity, the explanation. Rewrite it so you can give me the best possible response." That's it. What comes back will be sharper, more specific, and better structured than anything you typed. Then you take that improved version, start a fresh chat, and paste it in as your actual prompt. The difference in output quality is not subtle. Try it once. Write a rough prompt as you normally would. Then use this method. Compare the two responses side by side. I'll be surprised if you ever go back to the old way.

Im struggling to decide what to follow/offer, so many options. If you can relate, can you help me, but letting me know the following: 1. What is the easiest and best Ai automation you've sold or are selling? 2. How much for (upfront and monthly)? 3. Did you SELL first, build after? or build first then sell? Thanks in advance!

I turned Clawdbot into my 24/7 executive assistant, and in this video, I'm showing you exactly how to do the same. After spending 100+ hours refining this setup, I've built a system where my Clawdbot, Klaus, proactively manages my tasks, checks in on what I'm working on to offer help, and even builds things while I sleep. I walk you through the custom dashboard I use to track everything it's doing, share the exact setup you can copy, and reveal the hacks I've discovered along the way that most people miss.