I just listened to a young entrepreneur talk about this pipeline and it reminded me of this community and what Jake is preaching. He says, if you gain 10k followers, which is not hard tool do if you stay consistent, then that’s enough to point them to a software tool and make six figures a month for it. He says that you can literally just copy someone else’s software and do this. I own a luxury house cleaning business and I plan to use instagram to discuss my expertise and point house cleaners to my software. I wonder, does it make sense to have a community also, or is that another pipeline for another time? I am trying to make sense of when it’s smart to point people to software and when we should point them to community. Or maybe it’s just both, or either or…? Curious on your guys thoughts on any of this!

How many seats of Claude before you get live customer support or a white glove treatment? Well Mr. Owl (see gif) it's more than 60 I'll tell you that as Pato Molina CTO of Belo learned on April 17, 2026. Belo is a financial app designed for to help remote workers receive international payments. For those that don't know money transfer in LATAM is a real challenge and it's a market that has real pain point that need addressing. This is not an endorsement of Belo as I have not done a deep dive on them. However what this is about is a company building a dependency on 1 AI company. I don't know Belo tech stack but one thing is for sure it was dependent on Claude enough for the CTO to take to X. *Either this is smart marketing on his part to get attention for his app or poor reliance on 1 platform. Now I'm currently guilty of this myself but working on using Jake's ICM to may a migration to other LLMs easy and understand the 60/30/10 rule so LLMs as a whole won't stop what I'm building. The question isn't really about how many seats make you safe with Claude. It is how are you diversifying your tech stack to limit dependencies.

I'm not sure if I’m comfortable with always relying on AI for work. As a heavy user, I’m constantly refining with AI, a system designed to mostly agree with you by default. When the internet is down or usage limit is maxed out, you feel powerless. I hardly use Google that once forced you to do some active reading. On days I don’t use AI I feel very refreshed. I wonder what a healthy balance look like. Is this an indication that I might need to limit my usage and actually THINK on some days so I don’t loose myself in the Augmentation process. [Augmentation is the active collaboration of Humans and AI to achieve a goal] What’s your experience? Can you work without AI?

An ex Anthropic researcher just leaked 10 prompts to help you optimize your prompting. ## Prompt 1: Context Brief (The Map Claude Actually Needs) Never jump straight into a question. Start with rich context: ``` You are helping me with [specific goal]. My background: [your role + company/project + constraints]. I've already tried [X and Y]. I'm stuck on [Z]. First, confirm you understand the full context before suggesting anything. ``` Internal tests showed this single change boosts output quality by 41%. Claude isn't psychic — give it the full map. ## Prompt 2: Force Visible Reasoning (Chain-of-Thought on Steroids) Don't ask for answers. Demand the process: ``` Before giving any final recommendation: - show your full step-by-step reasoning - explicitly list every assumption - flag uncertainties and confidence levels (low/medium/high) - only then deliver the polished answer. ``` This pulls out Claude's hidden reasoning layers. You don't just get an answer — you get an auditable thought process you can actually trust. ## AND MORE - see attached files. From @kyronis_talks on X

This is my personal guide for working inside an ICM (Interpretable Context Methodology) workspace—Jake’s Method turned into executable muscle memory. It is not a loose set of tips. It is the exact rule set that turns a folder of markdown files into a deterministic, human-reviewable, self-improving production line. Every bullet below was stress-tested in real delivery pipelines where the only orchestration is numbered folders, CONTEXT.md stage contracts, and the filesystem itself. Why This List Is Important Most AI workflows die in one of two ways: they collapse under context bloat or they hallucinate their way through invisible state. ICM fixes both by making the entire workflow visible, editable, and version-controlled on disk. This list enforces that fix at the behavioral level. It guarantees the agent never drifts into framework thinking, never hides state in a black-box memory, and never ships half-baked output. Follow it and you get: - Predictable handoffs at every stage boundary - Human edits that become permanent factory improvements - Zero token waste from irrelevant subagents or monolithic prompts - Ruthless quality that compounds instead of eroding In short: this list turns Jake’s folder-as-architecture into actual shipped value instead of another pretty diagram.