Join the discussion

Write your take first — we'll ask for email only when you're ready to publish.

  • Hacker News
  • This looks like mindless data tourism to me. I don't see much distinction between this and something like Spotify's annual "wrapped" feature. The information theoretical equivalent of junk food.
  • For most people, I guess it will say you need to take an English grammer course and draft your own email.
  • Why would a product talk its users out of using it?
  • > you need to take an English grammer course

    And a spolling one too.

  • It seems saying "Your way to use Claude is wrong somehow, you should improve the way to use AI", instead of "Our tools have some wrong aspects and we will do our best to improve them".
  • It's actually quite normal to try to acquire skill at using tools. It's very normal for toolmakers to share insights and expertise in how best to use the tools they sell.
  • > It lets you easily track and visualize how you use Claude, and decide whether that time aligns with your goals.

    i haven't yet encountered/achieved ai summarization technique nuanced enough to be called reflection and this seems basic too with no mention of behavioural patterns or workflow suitability

  • I think there's a germ of a good idea here, but really this needs to be data that is presented in a way that encourages human thought and interpretation and not something claude predigests and interprets _for_ you. I found the whole tone as it's executed incredibly off-putting and cringe inducing.
  • How would you present a collection of your past text conversations that it encourages human thought and interpretation?
  • I've integrated AI into my daily life by installing the Gemini voice app onto my phone, which I typically may use once a week, and adding Gemini and Claude bookmarks to my browser which I use all the time - but mostly Gemini since free usage is effectively unlimited.

    That's all the integration I need. I don't need OpenClaw running 24x7 trying to hack it's way into my gmail.

  • Interesting, I am not able to see it, and I have memory enabled.
  • Same. Not sure if they are doing a gradual rollout or what's up.
  • This product feels bad and sloppy, so I’ll give my hypothesis for why this was built:

    At this point, Anthropic is likely having Claude itself propose and build features autonomously based on providing it with raw user feedback. This could be one example. Which is why it has an eerie sense of redundancy and pointlessness (“You mostly used Claude to automate work and home tasks”, etc.).

  • In claude code, there's a built-in skill `/insights` which gives you a report on how you've been using claude code and where you could improve.
  • Is it any good?
  • I just feel that any attempt of a service I use to summarize and analyze my interactions with it, whether it's the AI tool usage patterns or the music I listened to the most over the past year, makes me feel creepy and makes me want to use the service less. Imagine if your local grocery store came back to you saying that you ate this many chocolate bars over the year. Thanks, I know that you know that, but I don't want you to show me that you know that.
  • I would love it if a grocery store, or Uber, or Amazon, made it easy to see my yearly spend. Instead them to intentionally obscure this and try to prevent you from seeing a big number.
  • I feel this way too except for the music one. The whole reason I use spotify is because I want their algorithm to figure out what music I like.
  • > In our interviews with users, a common theme that’s emerged is a desire to better understand how, exactly, AI can be integrated into daily life.

    I don't want to integrate AI into daily life.

  • "Cool product you have there... but what is it for?"
  • Then this isn’t for you. That’s fine.
  • Meh, I have it integrated as a replacement for search engines at this point.

    I don’t even know that Claude is inherently better or if it’s more the lack of ads.

  • To be fair, the article doesn’t quite deliver on this promise. The examples are mostly focused on improving work-related workflows, so I guess that’s what they think “daily life” is.
  • >how, exactly, AI can be integrated into daily life.

    Aka "what is it good for?"

  • Then…don’t? You are free to not do so, while others (like myself) can choose the opposite.
  • > If you can't generate a report, it may be because you don’t have Memory turned on.

    Has anyone found success with memory and Claude Code? I found Opus's 4.8 memories largely lacking value. Memories are too verbose/specific/yet-generic for the value captured.

    Instead, I've been holding "retros" with the agent immediately after a session, and _those_ responses have been typically fantastic. It has ideas for coding changes, spots unmentioned small bugs, suggests invariants, principles to adopt, lint rules, tooling tweaks, skill-file updates, follow up work, all kinds of stuff.

  • Seem to work fine for me but I usually add 1 sentence things to keep the agent from long winded rediscovery.

    Remember credentials to query database are in secret store x

    Remember company documentation is in platform y

    Remember bug fixes always need tests added

  • Self-directed memories have been awful.

    That said, I have had decent success in self-feedback-loop skills. I encapsulate a long process into a skill and the last step is to make changes as needed to the skill itself for things it ran into. I think the isolation of "this specific thing" is what makes it higher signal. Project or god-forbid global memory is just a recipe for hallucinations in my experience.

  • For me, the memory capability is a holding zone for deviations from behavior I'm looking for. I've found that a "retro" after to process "memories" and create CLAUDE.md instructions from them instead works more reliably longer term. I don't do it every session. I've got a separate tool which tracks memories on a per-project basis and recommends when to hold that retro based on accumulated memories.