193 pointsby xngbuilds7 hours ago21 comments
  • redfloatplane5 hours ago
    I (and I'm sure many others) have been thinking about this a lot over the last couple of months. I called it "Extremely Personal Software" in a blog post a few months ago (https://redfloatplane.lol/blog/14-releasing-software-now/) but there are lots of names and concepts floating about for the same basic idea.

    I think it's possible the amount of new software that will be written for an audience of 1-10 will be greater in 2026 than in any previous year, and then the same again for many years to come. I also think a lot of this software will be essentially 'hidden' - people just writing this stuff for themselves because the cost to say things to an agent is very low compared with the cost of actually planning out a software design and so forth.

    Interoperability will probably be important in the next few years and I wonder if this is something solvable at the agent/LLM level (standing instructions like 'typically, use sqlite, use plaintext, use open standards' or whatever). I also think observability and ops will be pretty important - many people who want personal software but don't care for the maintenance and upkeep.

    • Agingcoder3 hours ago
      Agreed I’ve already started writing software for myself using Claude. I would never have done this if it weren’t for AI - I simply don’t have the time otherwise .

      I now have tailor made apps with all kinds of bells and whistles that commercial products can’t offer easily ( I fall under non commercial usage which opens a lot of doors ), and that free software might offer, but later.

      I have also learnt a lot technically in the process, since I’ve been able to venture into what was for me unknown territory but at controlled cost

      I plan to create more such apps in the future. What is certain though is that my cooking app has immediately displaced all the others on the market , because none of the others cater to my requirements.

      The production side is indeed of specific interest - most users don’t run production software so I had to think about that one. Tailscale and Cloudflare came in quite handy and there is indeed a market here

    • 8 minutes ago
      undefined
    • vessenes3 hours ago
      I had the same reaction. We're headed into a period where you can shape your tools exactly as you like them; artisanal rather than factory-created workshops, essentially.

      I think the instinct that APIs, validation layers, and so on take on a much higher importance is right.. I have a few internal tools that made sense to make libraries out of, and once the first library is good, and a test suite is comprehensive, porting to a bunch of different languages is extremely simple.

      Everting that, it's also going to be simple for someone to hook up to this library with custom tooling.

      Really interesting period in computing, for sure.

      • chrisweeklyan hour ago
        "Everting"?
        • setopt29 minutes ago
          I had to check it up too. Appears to be a synonym for "inverting" used in some fields like biology and medicine.
    • geir_isene5 hours ago
      A really good and thoughtful response. Thanks.
    • sandworm1012 hours ago
      I shudder to think about the security implications of everyone rolling thier own software. I trust my OS/browser/file system is secure because thousands of people are invovled in a complex network of interests in keeping it secure, from the kid contributing his first bit of code to the PHds at NSA writing encryption standards. The idea that any one person can replace that network is laughable.
      • jpeasean hour ago
        Just to be contrarian, perhaps some measure of risk is reduced by the scale of one.

        Identifying a vulnerability that can be exploited against many thousands or millions of targets is perhaps more attractive than a single one of individually low value.

        This of course would assume that vulnerabilities are in fact unique (which is admittedly questionable).

        • tonyarklesan hour ago
          I had the exact same thought. Pretty low probability that there's going to be a script-kiddie exploit for your custom tools. Pretty decent probability that there will be vulnerabilities present if someone cares enough to target you.
          • girvo6 minutes ago
            The counterpoint to that is that the exact same tools that are allowing this personal software creation at massive scale are also excellent at black box vulnerability analysis…
      • 9dev2 hours ago
        That seems like a naive view to me. Most modern software development is gluing vendor code and libraries into a CRUD app, and I don't see why that would change with agents doing the majority of programming. If anything, there's an even bigger market for solid libraries and interoperability, plugging things together like LEGO - only for real this time.
    • theturtletalks39 minutes ago
      [dead]
  • vidarh4 hours ago
    While I wouldn't do asm, I love the approach and do much the same myself but in Ruby instead.

    My wm, shell, terminal, editor, file manager, pop-up menu (dmenu-like) are all pure ruby (including font rendering and X11 bindings). These all started before I started using Claude to improve them, so they're still mostly hand-written, but that is changing.

    They're messy, they have bugs and "misfeatures" that works for me but likely would be painful for others.

    Like OP, I don't really recommend anyone else use my code, at least not directly, and that is extremely liberating.

    Overall, the projects covers the largest surface of what I use beyond the kernel, a browser, and Xorg (I'm so, so tempted, but I think an LLM will need to get a lot further first before I could fit it into my schedule).

    It doesn't need to be polished because it's mostly for me. It's okay for them to have bugs as long as they work better for me than the alternatives.

    I strongly believe more people should do this. It's both a great learning experience, and it gives you a system that has exactly the features you actually want and use.

    And it's only going to get easier to do this.

  • nine_k6 hours ago
    This is very cool. I wonder how much time did it actually take, and how much did it cost, because Clause Code is very much not free [1] [2]. It's more like hiring a robotic contractor, very fast, but with a serious hourly rate.

    [1]: https://fortune.com/2026/04/28/nvidia-executive-cost-of-ai-i...

    [2]: https://www.briefs.co/news/uber-torches-entire-2026-ai-budge...

    • geir_isene5 hours ago
      I'm on Claude Max, so it didn't cost me anything more than the subscription I already have. Had to use it for Something. As for time - for the full CHasm and Fe2O3 suite of sw, I started the work 2026-03-29 and have probably spent 60h or so of my time. But then again I have a very tailored CC setup that I have fine-tuned since last summer with more than 70 CC projects helping me get it the way I need it to be since then.
      • nine_k5 hours ago
        So, it's at most $400 in Claude expenses for a fully custom suite of software in 2 months. Even if your time is 300/h, it's less than $2k in your own time (which, I would expect, you enjoyed spending). That's insanely impressive.
        • geir_isene5 hours ago
          I need Claude Max in any case for my work, so the cost is effectively null. And I do creative stuff in my spare time regardless, and I don't really think about my hourly rate when I play with my kids either ;)
          • 5 hours ago
            undefined
        • robotresearcher3 hours ago
          Did you miss a factor of 10 in that time-cost calculation?

          As a hobby, normal rates don’t apply, but just not to be misleading on the equivalent cost.

          • nine_k2 hours ago
            Indeed, I forgot it. Must be $10-20k worth of human engineering time.
      • topaz022 minutes ago
        Do you know how much it would have been at API prices?
  • vbernat5 hours ago
    I find this fascinating. I also like to customize my desktop experience with my own code, but it's more assembling stuff with some additional code as glue.

    A word of warning: a reliable lock tool for X11 is difficult. You should look at XSecureLock, which uses a multiprocess approach to avoid leaving the desktop unprotected in case of crash. It also implements a number of countermeasure to ensure the desktop stays locked and the locker stays in the front of the display. It's small too, so easy to audit (but written in C).

    • geir_isene5 hours ago
      Thanks. I'll look into it and borrow whatever is useful there into bolt.
      • 5 hours ago
        undefined
  • dadoum5 hours ago
    Sorry I have a question that is a little off-topic: what's the value of generating an image of a laptop on a desk? That's not like it's particularly relevant, when you could have integrated a screen shot of your set-up (like the same one you put on a few of your repos) or something more unique, and even if you want to show that, it's easy to find similar images with the same vibe, so I guess it's for some fun I missed in the process?
    • geir_isene3 hours ago
      I like the image. It was simple.
  • robotresearcher6 hours ago
    I’m inspired by the message.

    On this software itself: I’d like to know how this feels to use. It’s so very lightweight. Does it feel categorically different to what we are used to?

    One of the things I miss about the 1980s home computers is that they booted into a usable command line in a handful of seconds, from a few KB in ROM. Imagine what today’s HW could do if we’d retained that level of efficiency.

    • salvesefu6 hours ago
      we are there now. depending on boot loader/os combination, one can get to the sub 1-5 sec range, if its cli-only.
    • geir_isene6 hours ago
      It feels very different. It's all damn instant. Me happy.
      • robotresearcher5 hours ago
        That’s wonderful! I’ve made ultra-lightweight web apps of my own to replace bloated, slow, and poor UIs. It’s a night and day difference when the dependencies are few-to-none. And that’s on a fat browser stack. Your ASM desktop must zip!
        • chrisweeklyan hour ago
          Related tangent: https://smolmachines provides microvms with cold-start bootup times around 200ms, and a "pack" utility and format to create self-contained binaries. No affiliation, but I just discovered it a few days ago, sharing bc I find it kind of exciting.
  • noashavit2 hours ago
    I feel like build vs buy is the conversation now. I’m not a developer but I’ve built agents I use daily. When most people can vibe code their way to a custom app, value will most likely hinge on support and other “services”. Just my 2 cents, feel free to tell me I’m wrong!
  • mettamage3 hours ago
    I use code that hooks into existing programs so that I can customize the existing programs to what I want
  • beanjuiceII40 minutes ago
    everyone is finally coming around to emacs way of doing things after all these years :D
  • jstanley6 hours ago
    Why did you choose to have Claude write it in assembly language?

    There are big benefits to using a language that has good static analysis with LLMs.

    • cultofmetatron6 hours ago
      seriously.... we already have a constellation of good deterministic tooling for taking a relatively high concept spec to low level assembly. what does an llm offer in generating optimized asm that rust wouldn't??
      • geir_isene6 hours ago
        Less memory footprint. No reliance on libs. Pure first-person control. No wasted CPU cycles is the target here for me. And if you read the post, the asm set is only for the desktop itself. The tools I use are in Rust. Result is: Laptop now runs at between 5-6W (down from ~9W) [XPS14 latest hw] on Ubuntu 26.04 - giving me around 3.5h extra battery life.
        • jstanley4 hours ago
          My guess is you're likely to waste more cycles on development time, and on suboptimal algorithms because the implementation is harder, than you would waste on rust-related bloat.

          Still a cool project, thanks for sharing.

          I have wondered about having LLMs output machine code directly and skipping the compiler/assembler altogether. Then you'd just commit your spec/prompt and run it through the LLM to get your binary.

        • cultofmetatron6 hours ago
          > Less memory footprint. No reliance on libs.

          rust can do that. You can run a hyper stripped down rust that was made for embedded devices specifically because those devices don't have room for a runtime.

          • geir_isene5 hours ago
            I'm sure I can. The original challenge was more in line of "I wonder if CC can do this now?"

            And it apparently can. And very well.

            One advantage seems to be that the complete asm file fits easily into CC context window.

            • cultofmetatron4 hours ago
              > The original challenge was more in line of "I wonder if CC can do this now?"

              well, I can respect that for sure

  • cyberpunk7 hours ago
    Some screenies and the code at 0…

    I struggle to understand why, though.

    0: https://github.com/isene/chasm

    • thom5 hours ago
      Same reason people muck about with knowledge management systems... to put off the day when you have to sit down at your desk and actually do something.
  • onetom3 hours ago
    The agent sessions (traces) would be very educational too.

    Would it be possible to share the jsonl files too, like how Mario Zechner shared his chats with the AI, while working on his Pi coding agent?

    https://x.com/badlogicgames/status/2041151967695634619?s=46

    • geir_isene3 hours ago
      That would be a huge payload with a few thousand prompts...
  • thatxlineran hour ago
    Note that Rust is not in fact named after Fe2O3; it’s named after a resilient fungus of the same name
    • geir_isenean hour ago
      Just goes to show how little I know about Rust.
  • cloudhead2 hours ago
    Did you have to look or review any of the code produced, to get the performance/capabilities that you wanted, or were all interactions through CC? In other words, did you hit any walls with the pure agentic workflow?
    • geir_isene2 hours ago
      I monitored the process very tightly. I have programmed my fair share of asm (and some 30 other programming languages), but for this I did not read any code. I hit lots of obstacles on this road, lots. In the process we also created a complete TTF rasterizer on par with what kitty gives me, and that was a true deep-dive.
      • cloudhead19 minutes ago
        Thanks for explaining!
  • shampoo_capital3 hours ago
    Is this an advertisement for Claude Code? It sure seems like it.
    • yrds962 hours ago
      The fact where all posts of this blog make sure to state that claude code is a life changer, i wouldn't doubt about it
    • uncircle3 hours ago
      They all are.
    • badgersnake3 hours ago
      If it is, it’s not a good one. I just thought “You moron”.
  • grebc4 hours ago
    So how productive are you now vs. before? I assume this was the reason for doing this?
    • sorenjan4 hours ago
      I think it's more like gardening.
    • zem4 hours ago
      I would think the reason was to enjoy using their system as much as possible.
  • analogpixel3 hours ago
    I think this is going to be the OS of the future. You tell the computer what you want to do, and it uses the OS's APIs to create your program for you. No more copilot embedded in notepad unless that what you ask for.

    Most software is done after the first or second version and the developers just keep working on it to justify their job; adding features no one needs and just get in the way or make the program worse. It'll be nice when the software I have does exactly what I need and doesn't change until I tell it to change for something I need.

    The only feature Macos has shipped in the past 10 years that I actually like is air-drop. Everything else is a PITA annoyance, or as I've found out from upgrading, just bug ridden slop that doesn't work well anymore.

  • arjie2 hours ago
    Haha, it's funny that we've all reached the same conclusion. I, too, believe in the same idea[0][1]. What is fascinating to me is how many things can now be elided from software. I don't use configuration files or things like that. I can simply hardcode everything in because there is only one user. If I want to configure it the other way, I just modify it and rebuild it.

    The other thing is that other people's applications are rarely useful. Their libraries are, the feature description READMEs are, but the software itself is full of attempts at generality that make them overly annoying for me to use. Instead I have extremely idiosyncratic software - anyone else would find it insufferable.

    The wild thing, though, is that my software is outrageously useful for me. I can see why Anthropic and OpenAI are (or shortly will be) the trillion-dollar behemoths they are. They are enabling a personal productivity increase of epic proportions[2]. The highly specific functionality also means strange things performance wise. I don't need to use Electron or Tauri or whatever. Instead, my thing is Rust with objc2 and it starts instantaneously. On my M1 Max, it's the fastest text viewer I can start. 100s of megabytes of JSON and it's launching is imperceptible for my tool, pretty-printing is instantaneous, breadcrumbs are live.

    Because I can make it do only the thing I want it to do. It can't do other things. I cannot edit or auto-complete or anything. And this is great. Useless to others and fantastic to me.

    Likewise, my blog is on Mediawiki (which I like so anyone can edit) but the authoring flow is kind of annoying. Uploading images causes a break from writing, and requires a lot of form-filling that interrupts my thought. So I now have this software that does everything I want: link autocompletion, background image uploads, post-hoc publishing, previews and diffs, built-in Wikipedia search to interwiki link. Who would want this but me? It only brings me pleasure.

    What a revolution in software.

    0: https://wiki.roshangeorge.dev/w/Blog/2026-04-25/The_rise_of_...

    1: https://wiki.roshangeorge.dev/w/Blog/2026-04-30/Personal_Sof...

    2: Predictably, I have chosen to use the spare time on leisure

    • geir_isene2 hours ago
      Cool reply & thanks for the links.
  • mempko5 hours ago
    I've been building an object oriented system re-imagined in a world with LLMs called Abject (https://abject.world) and one thought I had was to build an OS that boots into my project. One way to do it would be a minimal linux distro (think firefox os or similar). Has anyone done something like this with their projects?
  • nullsanity3 hours ago
    [dead]
  • gbgarbeb7 hours ago
    Did OP write this by hand? It reads like language written by a human overfitted on GPT 4o or Claude.
    • geir_isene6 hours ago
      OP did this: Prompted CC for all the points I wanted included (something like a 200 word prompt) and asked CC to draft it, including all the links added to the table I furnished. Then I edited the draft (about 50% then edited). Then asked CC to spellcheck and fixed the 5 it found.
      • gbgarbeb4 hours ago
        Thank you. It would have been nice to see you personalize the hook and show your storytelling voice the way you personalized your computer in the story, but we aren't all poets.
    • jgilias6 hours ago
      If they basically generated a desktop for themselves, what’s the chance they didn’t generate the article? I think pretty slim.

      Also, reading it is probably not the intended use. It’s probably: “Hey Claude, give me a TLDR of this”

      • swaits5 hours ago
        Who cares? It’s their content. If they hired an editor to help them, cool. If the content doesn’t suit you, move on.

        But the incessant “AI was used here, thus is it garbage” is long past time to enter the grave.

        • nananana92 hours ago
          Many people care, with good reason. We learned to notice LLM-isms is because they are, in fact, a very strong predictor that a piece of text is in fact garbage that's not worth your time reading.

          I usually stop reading at the first LLM-ism, but I found the premise of this post interesting enough to keep going - and guess what, the entire article was literally just "I prompt CC to make software tailored for me" blown out to 8 sections.

        • wiseowisean hour ago
          > Who cares?

          The parent comment does. Why do you care that they care?

        • geir_isene5 hours ago
          ^^ some anti-luddism right there
          • wiseowisean hour ago
            Luddism is when you don't bother reading what someone didn't bother to write.
            • geir_isenean hour ago
              Dictionaries on the second row down that aisle.
              • gbgarbeb21 minutes ago
                Not a good look to be here fighting in the comments when you could have been writing something that reads like anything other than Claudeslop.
        • jgilias4 hours ago
          I agree, yeah
        • nullsanity3 hours ago
          [dead]
        • gbgarbeb4 hours ago
          [flagged]