u/Drogoff1489

Claude Mythos 5 dropped this morning, but you can't use it. It's restricted to something called Project Glasswing, a group of partners like AWS, Apple, and the US government who get near-unrestricted models for cybersecurity defense work.

What everyone else gets is Claude Fable 5, the same model class with safeguards baked in. If you ask it something on the restricted list, it quietly falls back to Opus 4.8 instead.

A few details that stood out to me:

→ Fable 5 is live for all Claude users today, but only for about 2 weeks

→ Pricing is $10/M input and $50/M output, which sounds steep but is less than half the Mythos preview pricing

→ Stripe ran a codebase-wide migration with it in 1 day that a full team had estimated at 2+ months

→ Paired with the new dynamic workflows feature it spawns hundreds of subagents that verify each other's work

The two-tier release is the part I keep thinking about. Anthropic is basically saying the unrestricted version is too capable to hand to the public, so the rest of us get the governed twin. That's a pretty different posture from every release before this.

Curious what others make of the Glasswing setup. Reasonable safety move, or the start of a permanent capability gap between institutions and everyone else?

My Claude Code spend was getting out of hand. The plans go up to $200/month and I kept burning through limits faster than I expected.

So instead of just paying more, I went looking for ways to actually cut token use. Ended up with 6 free open source repos that moved the needle.

→ ccusage (15k stars) - shows where every token goes, broken down by model and agent. Couldn't fix anything until I could see this part.

→ RTK (~60k stars) - compresses the bash command output before it hits the model. Strips noise, groups repeats, collapses redundancy. Claims 60-90% off command tokens.

→ Caveman Claude - makes Claude reply in a minimal caveman style. Sounds dumb but it cuts the fluff and saves ~75% per reply. If you know your project the short answers are just as clear.

→ Karpathy's skills repo - doesn't save tokens directly, but it stops Claude from making wrong assumptions and touching files it shouldn't, so you stop paying for the back and forth.

→ Graphify (~60k stars) - builds a local knowledge graph of your codebase so Claude consults the graph instead of re-reading everything. Runs locally, no API.

→ Obsidian skills - same idea but for your notes instead of code.

The Caveman one surprised me the most. Felt like a gimmick, ended up keeping it on.

Anyone stacked these together or found other repos that cut spend? Curious what your Claude Code bill looks like.

I've been posting on LinkedIn for about a year and grew to 200k followers, but I had a nagging problem: tons of engagement, no real signal on whether actual buyers were seeing my stuff.

So I pointed Claude Code at it.

First version was scrappy. I just had it pull my posts and dump the commenters into a CSV. Useless on its own.

Then I layered on the actual logic: → wrote a prompt to reverse-engineer my ideal customer straight from my offer → scraped every post + every commenter with an Apify scraper → had Claude classify each commenter against that ICP, including a "negative ICP" for people who look like buyers but aren't → built a small HTML dashboard to see it all in one place

The result was humbling. The posts I was proudest of (flexing about replacing my team, business wins) actually repelled buyers. Other creators and competitors filled those comment sections. The posts that pulled real buyers were the boring ones where I just taught a beginner something.

It then pulled 3 content angles out of the buyer-attracting posts and wrote a reusable template off my best performer.

Biggest surprise was the negative ICP part. A big chunk of the people I assumed were my audience were just other people doing what I do.

Anyone else actually audited who engages with them vs who buys? Curious if the teach-beginners pattern holds outside my niche.