Claude Cowork Is Claude Code for Everyone Else

Today on the AI Daily Brief, Anthropic's new cowork tool is Claude Code for everybody else, and today we're talking about why it's potentially a very big deal. The AI Daily Brief is a daily podcast and video about the most important news and discussions in AI. All right friends, quick announcements before we dive in. Firstly, and of course thank you to today's sponsors, Optimizely, Zencoder, assembly and Super Intelligent. If you are one of those folks who would love to pay for the privilege of not hearing the ads and has an extra three bucks a month to spend, you can find the ad free version@patreon.com aidaily brief or if you are an Apple listener, you can subscribe directly from the Apple Podcast app to learn about sponsoring the show. Send us a Note @ SponsorsIDailyBrief AI. And speaking of AIDAILYBrief AI, one more quick thing while you're there, press the number 5 or navigate to AIDAILYBrief AI Compass. If you are interested in the new Strategy Compass product, we are launching from Superintelligent. It's basically our agent readiness assessments plus an information subscription all bundled into a self serve package and we are going to start onboarding people over the next couple of weeks. Now, last note before we dive in, this is one of those meaty main episodes that really deserves its own show and so that's what we've done. We will be back with our normal format tomorrow, but for now let's dig in and talk about Claude Cowork. One of the universally recognized truths among people in the AI industry is that the single worst named product is is not somehow ChatGPT or GPT5.2 Pro, QXYZ or the totally out of left field Nano Banana Pro, but is in fact Claude Code. And the reason that Claude Code is such a bad name in some ways is that the code part of Claude Code in fact distracts from the full possibilities that the tool actually represents. Now all it takes is a quick look at any especially non technical person who has really dug into Claude Code to see why it's so much more powerful than it seems just from that name alone. Just a couple of days ago on Sunday, Nikhil Krishnan wrote, I've spent the last 48 hours in Claude Code as a non technical person. It's basically unlocked three very big things for me. One the ability to interact with APIs generally. Again as a non technical person, one of the big barriers to running the business has been touching APIs. For example what you can do in Stripe in the non developer portal versus through the APIs is night and day two. The ability to Thread Things together Another issue has been threading several different projects we work with together to do cohesive tasks. Zapier gets you part of the way for triggers, but Claude code lets me do way more complex things that touches multiple things simultaneously. 3. Run something regularly Being able to set a script and run it regularly with this level of ease is a game changer. In about an hour I set up a daily email to myself that tells me the top three emails I need to respond to based on a priority scoring system we made together that pulls data from a few different places. I know I'm late to this and I'm probably doing things poorly, so be nice to me, but it's been really awesome to dive into this Back in October, Lenny Ryczky of Lenny's Newsletter and Lenny's Podcast wrote a piece called Everyone should be Using Claude Code more where he wrote, and I quote, A few weeks ago I finally started playing around with Claude code and holy crap, we've all been sleeping on it. The key is to forget that it's Claude code and instead think of it as Claude Local or Claude Agent. It's essentially a super intelligent AI running locally, able to do stuff directly on your computer, from organizing your files and folders to enhancing image quality, brainstorming domain names, summarizing customer calls, creating linear tickets, and as you'll see below, so much more now. From there he curated 50 of the most creative ways that non technical people in his audience were using Claude code. Point being that the non technical folks who have spent the time to actually go figure out this technology have come away blown away and feeling like they are in a fundamentally different era of AI assistants where they really have a capable agent at their beck and call. But poor Nikhil Man691 likes 111,000 views Only to have all that work just 2 days later be all for naught. He followed up on Monday. Why did I learn this all the day before Cowork came out yesterday, Anthropic announced Cowork, as they put it, Claude code for the rest of your work. In the announcement post they put it simply, when we released Claude code, we expected developers to use it for coding. They did, and then quickly began using it for almost everything else. This prompted us to build Cowork a simpler way for anyone, not just developers, to work with Claude in the very same way. And it's very clear from the testimony of Anthropic team members on Twitter X that this was a very user behavior inspired product evolution. Felix Reisberg from Anthropic wrote Claude code doesn't just resonate with developers anymore. Non technical people are using it to build things. Technical people are using it for non technical work. The line is blurring. I'm by far not the first to think about this. Multiple teams at Anthropic have been working on Agentic experiences for months. Claude not just as a chat partner, but as something that helps you do real work. Boris Czerny, who editor's note was the creator of Claude Code, nudged me. Can we take what we've built internally and ship an early scoped down version in a few days? So we took a small team, set an aggressive deadline Monday, sound good? And got to work. Boris himself also talked about the inspiration he posted. Since we launched Claude code, we saw people using it for all sorts of non coding work. Doing vacation research, building slide decks, cleaning up your email, canceling subscriptions, recovering wedding photos from a hard drive, monitoring plant growth, controlling your oven. These use cases are diverse and surprising. The reason is that the underlying Claude agent is the best Agent and Opus 4.5 is the best model. Today then, Boris continues, We're so excited to introduce Cowork, our first step towards making Claude code work for all your non coding work. So what are the features? With Cowork, as opposed to just regular Claude, you're actually giving the system access to local files on your computer. Claude can then interact with those files, including reading, editing, or even creating new ones. This obviously creates a whole different set of use cases. Anyone who's ever dragged more than 10 documents into a chat conversation only to be frustratingly told that there are limits. And yes, I know there are different workarounds for that, but being able to give access to everything in a folder that has potentially hundreds of files. Think about my massive screenshots folders, for example, on this computer, and you start to see how different things could open up. As the Anthropic team points out, when you're using Cowork, Claude also completes the work that you give it with, as they put it, more agency than you'd see in a regular conversation. They write. Once you've set it a task, Claude will make a plan and steadily complete it, while looping you in on what it's up to. From there, you can give Cowork access to connectors, which are Anthropic's ways of connecting to data sources like Google Drive. If you pair it with Claude and Chrome, Cowork can then also complete tasks that require browser access too. And of course it's also powered by Anthropic's skill system. Now the more agency that Cowork has really is part of the value proposition they write. You don't need to keep manually providing context or converting Claude's outputs into the right format. Nor do you have to wait for Claude to finish before offering further ideas or feedback. You can queue up tasks and let Claude work through them in parallel. It feels much less like a back and forth and more like leaving messages for a coworker. So let's talk about how people reacted to it and what they started to do with it. I will say first that there were a lot of especially developers and technical folks that were, to use a word, underwhelmed Claude. Cowork didn't really add anything new, but they were of course not the actual target. Olivia Moore for a 16Z gets it when she writes Watershed moment for Claude and Anthropic. Claude has always been a fantastic product with arguably the best agentic models, but has struggled to make these advantages usable for the mainstream consumer. This feels like the first concentrated effort to change that. Greg Eisenberg says, send this to every normal person you know, because normal people don't want to touch a terminal and this will make them 100x more powerful and productive at whatever it is they do. Indeed, speaking to how much more inviting this user interface is, Avatar shared a screenshot of the new Claude cowork on his desktop saying, let's knock something off your list with a highly action oriented UI that suggests creating a file, crunching data, organizing files, making a prototype, prepping for the day, or sending a message, he wrote, even as a cloud code diehard, I'm excited to play around with it more. So what have people been doing? Well, Kat Wu, who works on Claude codedanthropic, wrote, I've been delegating a lot of my tasks to Cowork. Today, Cowork filed a workplace ticket for a coffee spill, prepped me for upcoming meetings, looked up Salesforce data via Chrome tool, and helped me buy a new down jacket. Lenny Rich has been trying out a number of different use cases. In one, he said, I asked it to go through every Lenny's podcast episode and pull out the 10 most important themes and lessons for product builders. Then the ten most counterintuitive truths. I gave it access to a folder with 320 transcripts. First it said, this is a substantial task, 320 podcast transcripts to analyze. Fifteen minutes later he had his list, so I think it's worth pausing and double clicking on this. This is of course a type of use case that lots of people use existing tools for. In other words, taking the context of one set of content and turning it into other content. The difference here is of course the scale. Lenny's episodes are dense, they're long. 320 transcripts is going to be between 450 and 600 hours of content, if not more, which is not something that would have been easily possible with other types of tools. In many ways, a lot of the core and differentiating use cases can be summed up as stuff that needs access to local files on your computer. As Off Menu's Hunter Hammonds wrote, irony is every productivity app pouring billions into mediocre AI implementations just for local first files to become the chosen one. So what else worked? Well Joseph on X writes, Cowork is magical. Seeing the context and the artifacts on the right side feels unreal. I got a flight canceled for no reason and Claude is filling out all my claims. There are lots of compliments about the user experience. Paperclippers writes, just started testing it now, but I'm really liking the Claude coworker UI so far. Really nice for doing research and quickly turning it into files for later reference. And yet it didn't take long for people to remember that this was a research preview. Brian Levin writes, one of the featured workflows for Claude Cowork is to help you plan your day and week. This is the default experience. Feels like it didn't fully bake and he shared a screenshot of Cowork just not quite being able to actually use the connectors like Gmail, Google Calendar and GitHub, even though technically they were connected. Mahalmohan writes, Just tried Claude coworker and it's basically unusable for me. Claude co did the work in two minutes. Co worker is stuck on the screen for multiple minutes, as Ed from Stripe pointed out. However, considering they said it was a research preview, I don't think anything should be considered fully baked. And indeed the team behind it made that point clearly. Back to that post from Felix, he writes, we're releasing Cowork early. It has rough edges, but figuring out what to build is increasingly the hardest part of software engineering, and we think getting feedback early and hearing what users actually need is how we build something truly good. Now, outside of just things breaking, there are some concerns that people have Ben Hylak jokingly summed up Anthropic is constantly pushing the frontiers of giving an LLM root access to your computer and indeed the risks here were part of Anthropic's announcement. In their announcement post they In Cowork you can choose which folders and connectors Claude can see. Claude can't read or edit anything. You don't give it explicit access to. Claude will also ask before taking any significant action, so you can steer or course correct it as you need. That said, there are still things to be aware of before you give Claude control. By default, the main thing to know is that Claude can take potentially destructive actions, such as deleting local files if it's instructed to. Since there's always some chance that Claude might misinterpret your instructions, you should give Claude very clear guidance around things like this. Now, when folks went and looked how this was executed, some of their concerns were alleviated. Ben Hylak actually reposted himself and said spoke too soon. It's running in a vm. To be clear, there are many, many risks, especially when you're talking about giving access to normies, but strictly speaking, safer than Claude code. Simon Willison in his blog post about it, said, Anthropics say that Cowork can only access files you granted access to. It looks to me like they're mounting those files into a containerized environment, which should mean we can trust Cowork not to be able to access anything outside of that sandbox. However, even with that, there is another concern. In a section called the Ever Present Threat of Prompt Injection, Simon writes, with features like this, my first thought always jumps straight to security how big is the risk that someone using this might be hit by hidden malicious instructions somewhere that break their computer or steal their data. He points out that Anthropic actually discussed this in that announcement as well, writing, you should be aware of the risk of prompt injections, attempts by attackers to alter Claude's plans through content it might encounter on the Internet. We've built sophisticated defenses against prompt injections, but agent safety that is the task of securing Claude's real world actions is still an active area of development in the industry. One of their suggestions to minimize risks is to quote, monitor Claude for suspicious actions that may indicate prompt injection. But as Simon points out, extremely I don't think it's fair to tell regular non programmer users to watch out for suspicious actions that may indicate prompt injection. Now ultimately he concludes that Anthropic are being honest with their warnings and that they can of course provide total guarantees. One of the other concerns for some is the cost. Right now Cowork is only available in Research Preview to people with Max accounts, which start at 100 bucks a month. Nick Torres writes, alright, coworker looks amazing and extremely helpful, but how does a company of 150/actually implement it without immediately paying $100 to $150 a user out of the gate? How have others started training users on it now? I think this is a totally reasonable concern, but I also think that the Max Plan gating is very much about the rollout of this product rather than an ultimate intention. In other words, I think they needed to have a relatively small set of people be able to test it. And the Max Plan subscription provides as good of a filter as any, especially considering that those are people who are going to be a little bit more adept with, or at least engage with Claude in general, One of the best summaries of Cowork overall came from Claire Vo, the host of the How IAI AI podcast. She wrote an article on Twitter called who is Cowork for Exactly? She talks about what exactly it is, providing a slightly more technical look at all the different pieces of the system, and reaffirms that this is an action oriented tool, saying every chat is now a task focused on doing a thing. She writes, you ask Cowork to do a variety of tasks and it takes a very Claude code approach to executing your task. For her, she tried Task one Prep me for My Day, which was one of the starter prompts in Cowork, and unfortunately had some issues. Claire writes, I didn't have the Google Calendar connector set up at the time, but no big deal, right? There's a connector button right there. Unfortunately, Cowork couldn't recognize my Google Calendar connector once authed and refreshed and restarted and so it tried to use Claude Chrome plugin to open my browser and view my calendar. I banged my head against this problem a few times, but ultimately gave up on this task. Cowork seemed to know that it could call tools but for some reason couldn't connect. Womp womp. Task two was to make a competitive research brief and she said this one went a little bit better. She writes, after clarifying my needs, it made a basic plan to do some web research and use the docx skill to make a doc. It took probably five minutes to run the whole thing. Task three was to make a presentation from a document, which it did proficiently, although she thought that the UI suffered from showing her too much about what was going on in the background or as she put it, how the sausage was made. Ultimately, she thought the UI was a nice upgrade, but a lot was broken on the main question though of was this meaningfully better than just doing a straight chat? She said despite its flaws, it did create better outputs than straight chat. Still, she ended with an interesting who is this for? And her answer was that she's not sure. Claire writes, I can't imagine a Claude max user on OSX who knows WTF to do with an agent and also would prefer a limited desktop app experience versus loading up the terminal. I understand that it's just in Research Preview right now, but the overlap between claude code and cowork users right now is probably a circle. The challenge with this sort of thin wraparound claude code UX is that it's not quite optimized for the non technical and too kneecapped for the tui pilled Cowork right now sits in the fuzzy middle and the team is going to need to optimize for one or the other to win over a new audience. Most marketing teams aren't short on ideas, but what they are short on is time. And that's exactly what Optimizely Opal gives you back with AI agents that handle real marketing workflows. You know like creating content and checking compliance, generating experiment variations, personalizing user experiences, analyzing pages for geo, even tasks like approvals and reporting. It's your AI agent orchestration platform for marketing in digital teams, plugging seamlessly into the tools you already use, handling the boring busy work and keeping everything on brand. That leaves you marketers with more time to do your actual job. See what Opal can automate for your team by signing up for a free enterprise agentic AI workshop with Optimizely. Learn more at optimizely.com theaidaily Brief if you're using AI to code, ask yourself, are you building software or are you just playing prompt roulette? We know that unstructured prompting works at first, but eventually it leads to AI slop and technical debt. Enter zenflow zenflow takes you from vibe coding to AI first engineering. It's the first AI orchestration layer that brings discipline to the chaos. It transforms freeform prompting into spec driven workflows and multi agent verification where agents actually cross check each other to prevent drift. You can even command a fleet of parallel agents to implement features and fix bugs simultaneously. We've seen teams accelerate delivery 2x to 10x. Stop gambling with prompts, start orchestrating your AI. Turn raw speed into reliable production. Grade output at Zenflow Free if you're building anything with Voice AI, you need to know about Assembly AI. They've built the best speech to text and speech understanding models in the industry. The quiet infrastructure behind products like Granola, Dovetail, Ashby and Clulee. Now, as I've said before, voice is one of the most important modalities of AI. It's the most natural human interface and I think it's a key part of where the next wave of innovation is going to happen. Assembly AI's models lead the field in accuracy and quality, so you can actually trust the data your product is built on. And their speech understanding models help you go beyond transcription and uncovering insights, identifying speakers and surfacing key moments automatically. It's developer first. No contracts, pay only for what you use and scales effortlessly. Go to semblyai.combrief, grab $50 in free credits and start building your voice AI product today. Today's episode is brought to you by Superintelligent. Superintelligent is a platform that, very simply put, is all about helping your company figure out how to use AI better. We deploy voice agents to interview people across your company, combine that with proprietary intelligence about what's working for other companies, and give you a set of recommendations around use cases, change management initiatives that add up to an AI roadmap that can help you get value out of AI for your company. But now we want to empower the folks inside your team who are responsible for that transformation with an even more direct platform. Our forthcoming AI Strategy Compass tool is ready to start to be tested. This is a power tool for anyone who is responsible for AI adoption or AI transformation inside their companies. It's going to allow you to do a lot of the things that we do at superintelligent, but in a much more automated, self managed way and with a totally different cost structure. If you are interested in checking it out, go to aidaily Brief AI Compass, fill out the form and we will be in touch soon. I think this is a super on point critique and perhaps super to be expected for this stage of the release. I think Claire's right that they're going to have to lean even harder, probably away from the cloud code interface and into some real serious regular value use cases to attract people who aren't just going to upgrade to Claude code right away anyways. For me myself I do everything in the cloud and so outside of this trying for my own personal interest, a lot of the use cases that people are getting value from don't super resonate right out of the gate. Although certainly seeing the types of things that Lenny is doing with all of his transcripts could inspire some new activities, but I certainly think we're at the very beginning stages of figuring out exactly what this particular slice of the AI assistant experience is useful for. Riley Brown referenced this saying, not convinced the best agent tools for work will run locally on your desktop. I think they will run in virtual computers that you can share with your team. Now here's really important context for all of this though. As people give their reviews, they figure out what's broken and they share where they think things need to go for this to find its right home with its expected audience. This product was built in the last week and a half when Thursday AI's Alex Volkov wrote I wonder how much of this was Claude code. Boris Charity confirmed that basically all of it was written by Claude Code. In other words, this thing that we're excitedly talking about and having a bunch of ideas for what it could do in the future was a week and a half long project entirely written by AI. As Tinejaypura put it, Insane Velocity. So what are the implications? First of all, whenever we get a new product from the big labs, everyone jumps to how many startups it kills right away. And Sean Wang AKA Swix does point out that Anthropic took a different approach than many startups, and in a way that's currently looking pretty good. Swix writes, so many ambitious startups making the LLM OS tried all these fancy UXS and failed. So many ambitious startups making the AI browser tried to book your flights for you and failed. Meanwhile, Claude code started unpretentiously as a CLI and can now run your browser and operate your system. Classic disruption theory. And yet of course Sean is not implying that that means that all those startups are dead. No, for that we have to leave it to other people. However, at this stage this knee jerk reaction has become so commonplace that actually the first thing that we get isn't the people saying look at how many startups it killed, but instead first explaining why it didn't kill all those startups. Conor Brennan Burke writes lots of posts saying Claude cowork just killed hundreds of startups. By the way, editor's note I actually couldn't find any, which is why I'm saying that we've now shifted and this becomes the average response. But for the sake of the argument, we continue with they're wrong and here's why. We've seen this narrative before. It makes a clean, simple story, but it's not how markets actually work. OpenAI Dev Day 2023 text to speech launch people said it would kill 11 labs and similar startups. In reality, demand for voice exploded and the category expanded into more specialized tools. 11 Labs is doing better than ever. ChatGPT Enterprise people said it would kill B2B AI startups. Reality it unlocked budgets, made AI procurement safe, and created demand for everything it didn't cover. Big labs ship a default experience that gives massive free education and proves that behavior actually works. Users try the flagship then immediately ask for more vertical focus, deployment, control, privacy, multimodal deeper integrations. My prediction 10x more workplace agent startups next year because of Claude Cowork. So at least for now we have a bet that the startups aren't going to at least immediately die and in fact even some who think that this leads to an expansion now. Another implication of this is around the productization phase of AI. Austin Allred represented lots of people when he tweeted I'm a little confused at the hype around this. Isn't this exactly what Claude does already and has done for a long time? Is this just marketing to let non technical people know they can use it too? I must be missing something, and the point of course is that he's not exactly But UI shifts aren't just UI shifts. If they open up entirely new categories of use cases for entire new sets of users because they wouldn't interact with the previous UI for some perceived a real technical barrier. Robin Farage writes, Finally, Claud Cowork is out and it's basically nothing new. I've been using Claude code for anything on my file system for a while now, but Claude code makes this more user friendly now and more accessible to the broad. Simon Willison included an entire section in his post called Isn't this just Claude Code? And the answer is basically yeah. But as Simon writes, Claude code has an enormous amount of value that hasn't yet been unlocked for a general audience, and this seems like a pragmatic approach. Prinz writes, as to Claud Cowork, I personally am very excited about its ability to search my local files, which seems to come with a nice ui. Yes, I know that Claud code can do that too, but the percentage of lawyers who will be comfortable with using a command line interface is probably less than 1%, and so nice UI is critical. Nice UIs will eventually win over us non technical people. Now another implication that follows from all this is a continuation of the pattern that we've been talking about a lot as we transition from 25 to 26, where a lot of 26 for non technical folks is going to be speedrunning through a process that developers went through last year. Lean Zabretzky writes. Welcome the non developers to using Claude code as your coworker. We've been doing it since the beginning of December. Feels so distant now. Nicholas Cole writes, Whenever I see stuff like this, I think about when my wife worked at this huge nonprofit and their training instructions for how to use the Internet included. Make sure both feet are planted firmly on the ground. Sit upright in your desk chair. Do not hurt your back. Hold the mouse tight with your hand. Don't let it fall. Anyone on this side of the Internet thinks we're living in the future, and we are. But everybody else is still in the stone age. Most companies don't have a single no code zapier automation running and most everyday consumers don't know how to set up a basic filter inside Gmail. All of this new tech is super exciting, but don't forget 99.9% of companies and people still need help solving way, way, way simpler problems. Claire Vo again, I think takes this in an important direction when she writes effectively that ui, as much as it is a part of this isn't enough that this is in fact an entire product design process, which is why productization is so important. Claire writes, the problem with AI products for normies is that too many technical people have seen the AGI God and think everyone will want this and it must be a UI issue. But guess what? No they don't and no it isn't. We shouldn't be asking how to make agents more accessible or the terminal less scary. If you want to increase the TAM of an AI product, you need to either a discover existing pain points or b inspire the art of the possible. Remember, existing pain points have to be real, not just better, but omfg. How would I do it any other way? This looks like I have to do this for work and you've made it 10x faster and less painful. My computer is slow and broken and now it works. I've been working around this thing for ages and you made it go away. I'm too tired or busy to learn this and you taught it to me in two minutes. Once you find these problems, don't give users a general platform, give them a button to a Golden Path. Your mom is not going to spontaneously vibe code a family photo sharing app. Your uncle is not going to reach for a coding agent to debug the washing machine. Your kids aren't allowed to write with AI at school. You need to hit users over and over and over with good ideas and use cases plus your brand so when they finally have a novel problem, you're top of mind as a solution. 99% of people do not want agents or models or primitives or skills or artifacts or file access or tools or connectors or MCPs or APIs. They want to not get fired, save time, make money, not be annoyed, entertain themselves, express themselves and feel good. Start there, then build ui. Now another interesting implication is around the competition between the labs. This isn't something I'm seeing a ton of discussion on, but I think even Malik made a really salient point when he wrote Claude's gaps in image creation and voice became less important when Claude code just uses APIs to go to nanobanana or chatgpt imagegen whenever it needs a picture made or 11 labs API whenever it needs a voice. The anonymous I rule the world account responded, who'd have thought just making the AGI would be the thing to do now? Even if we are in early days when it comes to shifting a new set of consumers onto these types of tools, I think people do have a sense that we're opening up a new era for normal non technical users as Dan Schipper did async AI for the rest of us, or as John McBurney intimated, the Jarvis area for the broad public. Referencing a post from Dan Shipper, John writes Claude code in a trench code. I think perfectly describes the most interesting opportunity that I felt in the last six months. Claude code represents a paradigm shift, a move towards a personal AI assistant like Jarvis from Ironman, and the packaging of AI and tools in this way is a key product insight that I think will define the next big thing. Now some are betting that all the other labs are going to have to follow suit. Lord of a Few writes, this is a moment in time. OpenAI will be close behind, followed by Google. Microsoft will do something similar and distribute to billions instantaneously. Apple will incorporate a similar technique and like that the entire world economy will shift over 12 months. The promise of what has been told to you for the past three years is here and it's this ergonomics agents on your Mac and PC operating on files like how you work. What a time to be alive. Stop scrolling and start building the future. By the way, when it comes to building, one of my strongest arguments is that something pretty fundamental has shifted over the last few months. I talked about it a few times on this show where all the developers and super enfranchised AI users went back over the holiday actually took the time to vibe code a bunch of side projects and realized that AI and agent decoding had gotten so good that they could do way more than they thought was possible before now, even though there are still some holdouts right now, many holdouts in fact, who still try to draw a thick line between vibe coding things that you can use for not production and prototypes and non vive coded things that are ready for production. I am firmly in the camp that that line is basically already gone and if not is going to explode in the next several months. Dididas of Menlo Venture seems to agree. After Boris shared that all of this had been written by Claude Code. Didi writes, today was proof that fully polished new product can be built entirely with vive coding tools like Claude Code. Many people, especially in big tech who still don't believe it. You haven't tried the latest models, you don't have the right setup, your code base is still too large, your code style is not well represented in the training data. All four of these are entirely self imposed problems. You will be outrun on product velocity if you aren't adopting these tools. This is something that I'm going to explore in much more depth in and around this show throughout this year, so keep your eyes peeled for that. And in the meantime, if you do happen to have a MAX account, go check out Claude Cowork. Once you do, if you have ideas for how to make it work, share them with the team. One thing Anthropic is doing really well right now and in fact I think you have to give credit to all the major labs for is they are all floating all around X all the time, actively engaging with and listening to the suggestions of users. Felix Riesberg of Anthropic even requests to be tagged in that feedback saying we want to iterate very quickly and make it a little bit better every day. Ultimately, for all of its faults and challenges I think this is a huge step forward. Goodness knows if you're listening to the show you probably have felt like people have been beating you over the head with how good Claude Code is for months now. And with Cowork there is increasingly going to be a UI for everybody who's not a developer try to get all those benefits. I will certainly continue to be trying it out and sharing it as I figure use cases out for now though, that's going to do it for today's AI Daily brief. Appreciate you listening as always and until next time.

0:00