风逍扬

专注于AI工具、办公效率和生产力提升的实践者
公众号：AIshape

[风逍扬 @FelixYonglyr]

@yrq1024 邀请码：DX9Y2C

[风逍扬 @FelixYonglyr]

@CryptoDaJin DX9Y2C

[风逍扬 @FelixYonglyr]

Anthropic 即将推出主动式智能体Claude Duet，视频演示的是Stripe Link 实现的智能体购物流程。

视频演示里，有个用户在创业做糖果礼盒，她只说了一句：「帮我找几款有爆款潜力的糖果，比如抹茶软糖、黑芝麻牛轧糖、芒果酸糖，问问供应商报价，把最好的样品下单。」

接下来 Claude 自己把这件事拆成了四步：先筛出有爆款潜力的糖，再找供应商比价，接着挑出最好的两款并说明理由，最后下单买样品，每样不超过 20 美元。

到了付款这一步，它不会自己直接扣钱，而是弹出一张订单卡片，上面有个「在 Link 里批准」的按钮。Link 是支付公司 Stripe 做的一键支付钱包。点开以后会写清楚 Claude 要替你花 16.49 美元、在哪个网站买、买的是什么、寄到哪里、用哪张卡，你点「批准」才会真的扣款，点「拒绝」就不买。这张授权单还有时限，十几分钟后就失效了。

两单都批准以后，Claude 汇报一共花了 33.97 美元，给了两个订单号，还解释了为什么没选抹茶和黑芝麻：在镜头前看起来太平淡，不适合拍视频。用户说一周后试吃完再聊，它就自己设了个提醒，到时候主动回来问口感怎么样。

还有一个细节：界面最上面挂着 #alices-candy-company 这样的标签，看起来像是按项目分频道来管对话，类似 Slack。

这件事为什么值得关注
1. 大趋势是，AI 不再只是帮你搜，而是从找货、比价一路做到付款都帮你跑完。整个过程由Claude Duet可自主研究决策交易，用户只批关键操作即可；
2.未来每个人都可以拥有自己的牛马助理～

[🚨 AI News | TestingCatalog @testingcatalog]

ANTHROPIC 🔥: An early look at how agentic shopping flow with Stripe Link would work on Claude Duet, Anthropic's upcoming proactive agent.

Interesting to see these hashtags under the agent - does it mean that we will see its UI designed around "threaded" conversations like on Slack?

Fun fact: Duet's internal name is "aibo".

APKPLZ 👀

[风逍扬 @FelixYonglyr]

@testingcatalog @grok 这个视频演示的内容是什么？有什么洞见？

[风逍扬 @FelixYonglyr]

同样是中国护照 KYC 认证后，付款秒被封。

一开始充值触发了 KYC ，充值失败，然后用中国护照认证通过了，接着充值。

我找的是第三方充值，通过 session 去充，我怀疑是同一个账号在多个不同的网络环境登录导致的封号。充值成功之后秒封。

现在已经按推友给的模板提交申诉了，也给官方 support 发了邮件，看会不会有奇迹发生。

[程序员鱼皮 @yupi996]

不是哥们，Claude 付款时秒弹 KYC。。

然后我信了某个帖子，选择「中国」地区 + 护照验证，结果秒封！🫠

[风逍扬 @FelixYonglyr]

@vipinxtwt 谷歌：这边建议新注册一个 Google 账号

[风逍扬 @FelixYonglyr]

痛心，哎！用五年的 GitHub 老号获得了一个邀请码注册的 Linux do 突然就登录不上了，一查，发现是因为不活跃被清理了，太有原则了吧

[风逍扬 @FelixYonglyr]

manus cue 登录要求短信验证码 问题解决
亲测，接码平台接码登录了，第二次通过谷歌登录不再要求验证手机号，可以直接进入
不过接码的手机号会被绑定到账户中心，下次要更换手机号就无法更换了
跟官方说的有点出入：使用 Google/Apple/Microsoft 登录，也需要验证手机号，都测了，无一例外

[风逍扬 @FelixYonglyr]

好几天没登录，Cue 要验证手机号了；是每次登录都要验证吗，用接码平台搞定首次登录，后面登录还会弹吗

[风逍扬 @FelixYonglyr]

好几天没登录，Cue 要验证手机号了；是每次登录都要验证吗，用接码平台搞定首次登录，后面登录还会弹吗

[风逍扬 @FelixYonglyr]

@uu_remote @grok UU远程开放的这个能力可以有什么应用，有哪些典型场景以前要做到很麻烦，现在可以直接实现了？

[风逍扬 @FelixYonglyr]

Antigravity 上可以用Gemini 4 Argon 了，面向Pro 会员推出独立配额

可惜，闲鱼薅的非正儿八经付费的会员不可用，Gemini 4 Argon is currently available to Ultra and paid Pro plan subscribers.

[Google Antigravity @antigravity]

We’re rolling out Gemini 4 Argon in Antigravity to paid Google AI Pro subscribers today. Demand has been incredible and we've scaled capacity deliberately to get here. We’ve rolled out a separate weekly-only Argon quota for Pro on top of the existing Gemini bucket for 3.8 Flash so you have the best of Gemini for all your tasks.

[风逍扬 @FelixYonglyr]

分享我的 5 条防封经验 https://t.co/3zG1XfuhK3

[风逍扬 @FelixYonglyr]

https://t.co/ChAcukPpBD

[风逍扬 @FelixYonglyr]

@yuqingjz 是的

[风逍扬 @FelixYonglyr]

X、Grok、Cursor 合成一份订阅了：The X Subscription，【一图看懂新旧订阅差异】

同样的钱，能拿到三家的权益；代价是 Claude、GPT 不再含在月费里。

【新方案】
- Free / Plus $8 / Premium $30 / Super $100 / Ultra $200
- 额度是 Plus 的 1 / 4 / 15 / 50 倍。X、Grok、Grok Bot、Cursor 共用一个额度池，每周刷新。
- Grok Bot 从 Premium 起，Plus 没有。

【老用户切过去，多了什么、少了什么】
- 单买 Cursor Pro（$20）→ Premium（$30）：每月多付 $10。多了 X 蓝标和去广告、SuperGrok 级别的 Grok、Grok Bot，用 Grok 写代码的额度至少翻倍；少了月费里含的 Claude/GPT 额度。
- 单买 SuperGrok（$30）→ Premium（$30）：价格不变，多了 Cursor 和 X 蓝标。

- X Premium+（$40）→ Premium（$30）：每月少付 $10，多了 Cursor。
- X Premium（$8）→ Plus（$8）：价格不变，多了 Grok 额度和 Cursor（只能用 Grok 模型）。
- SuperGrok Plus（$100）→ Super（$100）：价格不变，多了 Cursor 和 X 蓝标。
- 三家都在付（SuperGrok + Cursor Pro + X Premium+，合计 $90）→ Premium（$30）：同样一套权益，每月少付 $60。
- 官方只明确了一个对应关系：Premium = 原 SuperGrok + Cursor Pro + X Premium+。Super、Ultra 和旧方案只是价位相同，额度怎么比官方没给，新 Ultra 也不等于旧 Cursor Ultra。

【要注意的坑】
1. 第三方模型：旧 Cursor 月费里含一部分 Claude/GPT 额度，不切就一直保留；新方案不含，Premium 起按 API 原价另付，Plus 只能用 Grok。
2. 共享池是双刃剑：生图生视频、Grok Bot、写代码都从一个池里扣，一边用多了，另一边就少了。
3. 首月五折只管第一个月（Premium 及以上、按月付、因账号而异），第二个月起按原价自动续费。值不值，要按原价算。
4. 切换是单向的：立即生效，旧方案停掉、按剩余天数退款。旧方案已经不卖给新用户，切过去就回不来了。
代充要小心：退款一般退回原支付方式。旧订阅是代充买的，退款会退到代充那边，你拿不到。代充的用户，最好等旧订阅快到期再切。
5. 不切也行：老订阅暂时原价保留，但官方说最终会迁过去，时间没定。

【值得注意】
1. 真正变的是计价单位：从按产品付钱，变成按额度付钱。X 会员不再只是社交会员，而是 AI 额度的入口。
2. 月费只补贴自家模型：用 Grok 越来越划算，用 Claude、GPT 按原价算。说到底，是用价格把用户往 Grok 上引。

怎么选，看你的钱主要花在哪个模型上。打开 Cursor 用量面板，旧方案的两个额度池分开显示：Grok 用得多，切过去更划算；Claude、GPT 用得多，留在原地更省钱。

来源：https://t.co/NwTNMC4Dan 官方公告、Cursor 定价页和文档

[SpaceX Super Intelligence @SpaceXSI]

We've unified plans across Grok, Cursor, and X Premium.

Introducing The X Subscription.

[风逍扬 @FelixYonglyr]

我也这么呼吁，自从宠上了 Grokbot，什么dot、cue、muse 都被我打入冷宫了。有人说Grokbot 还是太贵了——换个角度想，如果你是个老板，每个月花个 100 刀（几百块钱），租了几台云电脑，从杂活到专家型的活都有人帮你干的、7x 24 小时在线，还能喊你“皇帝陛下”“主人”提供情绪价值，真的贵吗？

[刘小排 @bourneliu66]

求求那些觉得 dot 和 muse 好用的人去用下 Grok bot

[风逍扬 @FelixYonglyr]

The future is already here — it's just not very evenly distributed.——William Ford Gibson (August 31, 1993)

[Andrej Karpathy @karpathy]

Dusting off this tweet from April because this gap in shared understanding of LLM capability is *widening*. It's now less "two groups of people speaking past each other" and more a sharp funnel.

- Napkin math somewhere around 6B people (~75% of the population) have barely come in contact with LLMs at all.
- Around 1-2B (~20%) are casual and infrequent users of free-tier ChatGPT-like products. This group sees derpy chatbots and treats them a bit like a better Google search, a writing aid, or etc. Maybe an agent tries to book you a flight. I have non-tech friends who (reasonably, imo) say they have not much use for it at all. Even many professionals outside of math&code are in this tier. For example, execs and many other functions spend a lot of their time talking to other people, so while they understand what is happening intellectually, it is still second-hand and a bit abstract.
- Now we get to professional use of frontier-grade LLMs in math&code. Somewhere around 20M people (0.2%) see first-hand that large, complex projects that used to take them weeks/months can now be completed by agents with a prompt. Building apps, copying apps, translating apps, decompiling apps from binaries... This has all happened very quickly and recently - less than 1 year ago, I was writing code manually by hand, typing memorized computer code commands into a code editor character by character, occasionally pressing Tab to autocomplete a little chunk of code.
- And finally we get to the ~5,000 people (~0.00006%) with access to frontier-grade systems internally. The external world has seen the preview. It looks like swarms of thousands of agents collaborating over weeks on software mega projects: minting zero days, running cyber attacks and defenses at machine speeds, discovering new science, advancing the frontier of mathematics. Things that would have taken top professionals in the industry years of work. Meanwhile, human review and comprehension are starting to fall behind. For example, people are still involved in the "archeology" of the OpenAI-HF incident from many months ago. Mathematicians may be poring over the 722 manuscripts on frontier mathematics for a while.

The funnel is driven by a combination of factors:
1. The impact scales with ambition, problem size, and horizon. A question with a paragraph answer barely stresses the system. You need a reservoir of big, difficult problems that you really care about. This aspect drives the consumer / professional dimension of the funnel.
2. The jaggedness of the system (which I have written about a lot separately). Capability peaks in domains that are digital, verifiable and economically valuable. This is because LLM capability emerges from reinforcement learning on verifiable rewards on a curated environment mixture driven by revenue potential. This aspect primarily drives the area (e.g. math&code) dimension of the funnel.
3. Access. Free-tier, paid-tier, internal.

So this is the weirdness of the moment. The general public has mostly not interacted with these systems. When they have, it looks like a derpy chatbot. The majority of professionals still see only a modest uplift. And a small sliver of professionals are experiencing the vertigo of the curve going vertical. And it is all happening at the same time.

[风逍扬 @FelixYonglyr]

有反馈说已经失效了

[风逍扬 @FelixYonglyr]

https://t.co/fuYR71YxoL