Writing
Specific numbers, concrete bugs, real decisions. No vendor copy, no hype.
-
What my own Claude Code was doing wrong
I wrote a lint for my Claude Code session logs. 41 findings in a week: a runaway session that ate 31% of my budget, 99.6% of spend on Opus, an agent stuck on Bash for 50 turns. 12 rules, MIT.
-
Why Apple Review can't be your QA (and what to do about it)
A user pasted a raw CKError into my inbox. Apple Review approved the build. Ten QA agents missed it across three releases. Here is the post-mortem and the static rule I wrote so it does not happen again.
-
My detector app needed a hardware demo video. It was 100% software.
Apple Review rejected my software-only stud finder for not including a video of it pairing with hardware. The fix lives in the first sentence of the App Store description.
-
Apple rejected my privacy manifest. The problem was a CocoaPod I never added.
A real Apple Review rejection over a missing NSPrivacyAccessedAPI declaration — except none of my own code touched the API. The leak was a transitive CocoaPod dependency.
-
Where my Claude Code spend actually went last week
I instrumented my Claude Code session logs by project. 50% of a $13K shadow-cost week goes to one codebase. The other six combined did not break $200.