@bemuuvi Underrated because it's boring. Everyone wants the automated pipeline, nobody wants to sit and compare 3 outputs side by side. That's where taste actually gets built.
24 free GitHub repos that turn Claude Code into a full video studio.
The video above was made with code. No After Effects, no timeline app. Just repos and a terminal.
Most people run Claude Code with nothing on it. No memory, no taste, every token burned on raw logs. Here's the toolkit.
PART 1. MOTION
1. Three.js: 3D scenes
https://t.co/5aNRcLyrUS
2. faster-whisper: auto captions from audio
https://t.co/OlqAp7oGDO
3. Remotion: videos made with React
https://t.co/IhgwRSW1wl
4. tsParticles: particle effects
https://t.co/CX8rfrxbuC
5. Tone.js: synths and sound fx
https://t.co/1OzHeFQwvu
6. PixiJS: fast 2D graphics on the GPU
https://t.co/fhYCx3BHF1
7. Chatterbox: open-source voiceovers
https://t.co/uwCVwqmTte
8. Matter.js: 2D physics
https://t.co/rRnUBh1cNj
9. HyperFrames: turns HTML into MP4, has a Claude Code plugin
https://t.co/1UWtIcUHkV
10. GL Transitions: shader transitions
https://t.co/Uq2XqJXsd2
11. Anime.js: timeline animation
https://t.co/TKcwNbH1lr
12. GSAP: the animation library pros use, now free
https://t.co/TZY5Phc2eu
13. FFmpeg: encode and export everything
https://t.co/6eDF69xOoK
14. Playwright: drives a real browser, so the agent can screenshot and render frames
https://t.co/xuCQo62RxB
PART 2. CLAUDE CODE
15. claude-mem: remembers what your agent did last session and brings it back
https://t.co/TT1xBNkIhE
16. context-mode: keeps raw tool output out of your context window
https://t.co/FTe4reSxWu
17. rtk: compresses command output before your agent reads it
https://t.co/oLmfuQnjiO
18. planning-with-files: the plan lives on disk, so /clear doesn't wipe it
https://t.co/dBfA4owMBk
19. agent-skills: Addy Osmani's workflow from spec to ship
https://t.co/uW6QDVlyvM
20. UI UX Pro Max: a design skill so your UI doesn't scream "AI made this"
https://t.co/Ua7wh6Wnqf
21. Everything Claude Code: plan, test, review, verify, remember in one plugin
https://t.co/LWKhAJHYa1
22. Agent-Reach: lets your agent read platforms it normally can't reach
https://t.co/wyF0mIZgMJ
23. Ruflo: runs a crew of agents across Claude Code and Codex
https://t.co/hoiI98shyU
24. career-ops: paste a job post, it checks the fit and drafts your answers. You still press send.
https://t.co/ThT3t8Y2Q8
Quick tip: don't install all of this.
Every plugin eats context before you type a word. Pick 3: one for memory, one for tokens, one for the job you actually do.
Run the same task before and after. If it's not better or cheaper, delete it.
@neilchor Love that out of 328 messages, one of the 4 it flagged as important is a bank asking him to sign a wire. Scammers are going to love this bot.
@Zyvqor Start stupidly simple: 3 options instead of 5 (quick look, deep review, ask a human) and a threshold of 0.9.
Loosen it only after you've read a week of logs.
What would you never let an AI review alone?
Your AI reviews a typo fix and an auth change the same way. That's the bug.
Most setups throw every diff at the same review. A full deep review on a README typo. The same quick pass on a PR that touches secrets.
The fix: before any review runs, make one small call that decides how to review.
What goes in:
diff size
paths touched
test delta
number of pushes
What comes out is one choice from a list you define:
security
tests
quick look
deep review
ask a human
Plus a confidence score.
The threshold is the part that matters. In the video:
auth + secrets change → security, 0.94
README typo → quick look, 0.97
billing refactor with zero test changes → the top answer was only 0.37, so it goes to a human
The model doesn't get to guess on the risky stuff. Below 0.80, a person decides.
How to set it up:
1. Send a summary of the diff, not the whole diff. Small input, fast answer.
2. Keep the options fixed. A pick from 5 labels, not an essay.
3. Use a small fast model. Haiku can handle it, and decision models like Jev from TypeSafe are built for exactly this kind of call (still on a waitlist).
4. Pick a threshold and send everything below it to a human.
5. Log every call with its verdict. After a week you'll see where the router gets it wrong.
Run it in CI before review, and the expensive review only happens where it's needed.
One call per diff. The verdict moves with it.
=== POST === THE $41K FACELESS CHANNEL NEEDS 1.4 MILLION VIEWS A MONTH, AND THE PART CLAUDE CAN'T DO IS THE PART YOUTUBE NOW CHECKS
At the post's own $10-30 per 1,000 views, $41,000 takes 1.4 to 4.1 million views every month. Claude can write the scripts. It can't make them count as yours.
the pipeline in the post:
→ Claude writes 10 scripts a day, each with a pattern break in the first 5 seconds → a curiosity loop every 45 seconds keeps people watching → ElevenLabs reads it, Runway moves it, CapCut cuts it → the one human picks the title and the thumbnail
Most people copy that pipeline and ship 10 voiced scripts a day. The fix is boring: fewer videos, each built on something only you have. Your test, your data, your screen, your own voice on at least part of it.
paste this into Claude Code ↓
"Plan 3 videos for my [niche] channel.
For each one, name the original part it depends on: a test I ran, data I collected, footage I shot or an opinion I can defend.
If a video has no original part, drop it and tell me why.
Write the script around that part, with a hook in the first 5 seconds.
Mark every line that's generic enough to appear on another channel, so I can rewrite it."
no original part, no upload.
where it gets hard: → $41k a month is the creator's claim, and the post shows no dashboard behind it → $10-30 per 1,000 views is the post's range, real rates swing with country, audience and niche → YouTube's monetisation rules call mass-produced, template videos inauthentic content, and the latest update reportedly adds AI personas talking about finance
The original guide is in the article below.
@moatmemo Same rule applies to anyone building on someone else's platform today. The cover gets the fame. Whoever owns the rights gets paid for 30 years. Dolly understood that in 1974.
@51bodila Small correction that makes it more interesting: it's not a leak. It sits on Bloomberg's official GitHub, with an arXiv paper and a pip package (causalts). They published it on purpose. The ~$30K is the Terminal, which is the data. The code is free, the data still isn't.
THE MOST EXPENSIVE LINE IN A CHIP LAYOUT IS THE ONE NOBODY WROTE DOWN. In the quoted post, a 200µm gap nobody could justify got closed in a revision. It was thermal, and the respin cost more than the tooling. The geometry survived. The reason didn't. Most people save the layout and keep the why in someone's head. The fix is boring: write the reason next to the geometry, in the same file, at the moment the block gets placed. the prompt I'd give the model: "For every block you place, add one line to reasons.json: id, position, and the rule from the spec that put it there. Every gap gets a line too. If a gap has no rule, write NO RULE so I see it. Before any edit that moves a block, read reasons.json and refuse the move if it breaks a rule, unless I override it by name." who does what: → spec: timing, thermal and pin limits, written as plain text → solver: places each block and writes its reason in the same step → reasons.json: lives in the repo next to the layout, reviewed like code → revision: reads the reasons first, then moves only what a changed rule touches → you: approve every override, by name → the next engineer: reads why a gap exists before touching it, not after the respin no gap without a reason. where it can go wrong: → a reason like "looked cleaner" is not a reason. make the model cite a rule id, or it will write filler → reasons go stale when the spec changes and nobody re-solves. re-run placement after every spec edit → the video is a model I built for this post, not a real chip: 15 blocks, 23 nets, and every count on screen is read from that model the original breakdown is in the quoted post.
«He used to split his last $5 with me for shawarma. Then he got rich. Last week I saw him again, and he asked me to split the bill 💀 Money doesn't change people, it reveals them.
Made with ChatGPT and Veo 3 🎬
More videos like this coming soon, stay tuned 👀»
Everyone said you shoot them before they get you. Even the cats.
His name was Wander. Nine years ago she pulled him out of a dumpster behind her first apartment, soaking wet and furious about it.
Then the world ended. People turned first. Then the animals.
On day 41 she found him in the farmhouse where they'd been hiding. Grey eyes. Blood in his fur. Still sitting the way he always did when he waited for her to come home.
She raised the gun. Her hands wouldn't stop shaking.
Everyone was right. She put the gun on the floor and opened her arms anyway.
(AI short film. Story by GPT, video by Veo 3)