Over time LLM have been getting better and solving Mathematical problems in different ways. I follow this guy (Yes I am a nerd) but he does a good job of explaining things. If you want to see how AI has helped the math field, watch it.

Writing this one from the road. I'm a couple of days into a tour with my family, and I keep landing on the same thought I want to share with you all. The air out here. The trees, the leaves. The kids finding themselves again away from their screens. And the funny part is that the itinerary that made this walk through the woods possible, the one that lined everything up so neatly, came out of the system we've been building. The AI put it together so we could close the laptop and actually go be in it. That's the balance on my mind. Building and creating, then going out into the world to see how it gets manifested in real life. I've loved going back and forth with a lot of you lately about setting up the gateways, getting the rules right so the output comes out the way you want it later. Good conversations. And they keep reminding me how much the why matters. When you're clear on why you're building something, the parameters and the guardrails start to make sense on their own. You stop fighting them. So smell the flowers. Build the kind of things that make the flowers shine, that make the experience worth stepping away from the computer for. I'll be hopping in here when I can over the next two or three weeks between stops. To everyone who reads, replies, and engages here: thank you, from the bottom of my heart. The people who inspired me to put things out there, you're doing the same for all of us in this room. So let's keep cheering each other on, and let's be an inspiration to each other and to ourselves.

$200 cash prize. One winner. Let's go!!!! THE CHALLENGE: "The Fake Client You just got hired. Here's your client 👇 - 📎 Download the full client brief attached to this post. YOUR DELIVERABLE: - A complete brand voice document for Ruff Cuts. - How you structure it, how detailed you go, what sections you include, how you get AI to nail the tone... that's all on you. - Same brief. Wildly different outputs. Show us what you've got. 💰 PRIZE: $200 CASH - One winner takes it all. 🗳️ HOW WE PICK THE WINNER - Community vote. Your fellow members decide. 📅 DATES - Submit by: Saturday, April 25th at 12:00 PM EST - Winner announced: Monday, April 27th at 12:00 PM EST 🎟️ WHO CAN ENTER - Premium and VIP members only. - Not a member yet? You know what to do. 📝 HOW TO SUBMIT - Drop your brand voice guide in the comments below. Text, screenshots, PDF, whatever works. Just make sure we can see it. ⚡ A NOTE ON FUTURE COMPETITIONS - This first one is straightforward on purpose. We wanted to start simple. - They won't all be like this. Challenges will get harder, more creative, and more technical as the weeks go on. Enjoy the easy win while it lasts. First competition. First winner. First $200. - Who's taking it? 👇

If you could only keep ONE client acquisition strategy for the next 12 months, which one are you keeping and why?

In my grad job, I had to do regression testing. Checking certain things hadn’t fallen over or gone backwards when a new feature or improvement was going to be released. This morning - inspired by @Bas Rosario ’s post earlier this week - I got Fable and a bunch of Opus sub-agents to do an ICM system audit, looking for bloat and other issues. Turns out things were in pretty good shape, which was nice. (Also, full credit to Jake and ICM. There was a whole debate about whether naming conventions belonged in Claude.md or not and it was eventually determined that stripping them out meant a whole separate file that would have to be loaded each time anyway and saved nothing and cost more…) What I found particularly interesting in the whole process was that almost all of the initial findings were rejected in the pass by the “sceptic” sub-agent. Among other things, it checked my system health logs and reflection loops. So things the audit report was initially recommending were overturned “that was the original design of the system. It caused xyz issues. It was changed in reflection as a result of resolving observation 32 and fixed the root cause issue which has not recurred since.” (By the way, observation 32 is a real number that came up a lot!) The audit was suggesting what seemed neat and tidy on the surface. In most cases, that is where my system started. It isn’t where my system has evolved to, because each run early on had issues and I slowly and systematically worked with my system to deal with each of those at the root until it was humming. I didn’t ask it to go look at those logs or records. From the system prompt I could see to invoke the subagent, neither did Fable. But we did ask it to look for any and all evidence that the findings were wrong and to show its working. It left no stone unturned and all the records were neatly filed in my system to prevent regression. Not because of me remembering every step of the evolution - I probably would have accepted some of these because I don’t remember that I started there months ago - but because I get my system to keep good records.