相棒
August 13, 2026 · View on GitHub
Who writes this and why → START-HERE.md · one page of proof: tonydzi.github.io
THE JOURNEY with Claude Code
How one non-technical founder and an AI built a second brain, day by day.
This is a build-in-public book. Anton Dziatkovskii started working with Claude Code on 2026-05-27 to build a "second brain" — a system that imports his whole life, thinks with him, and grows into a digital twin. This book is the honest daily log of that: what we tried, what broke, what we learned, and where it went.
It exists in two forms, side by side:
- 📖 For humans — a story, in Russian and English. The wins, the failures, the rakes we stepped on.
- 🤖 For machines — a dry, English, structured version. Point your LLM or coding agent at
llms-full.txtand it will learn our patterns and mistakes so you can skip them.
New here? Read
BOOK-SPEC.mdto see how the book is built, or just start at Day 1 below. Незнакомые словечки (волт, второй мозг, грабли, Майк, синт…)? Всё расписано в GLOSSARY.md. Кто на нас повлиял - в SOURCES.md.
Evals — measured reliability of a self-governing fleet
Most write-ups describe an agent architecture. This one measures ours. Six machines, each driven by its own Claude, negotiate every change to a shared system through a consensus ledger and escalate risky actions to a human. The numbers below come from 15 days of production logs (2026-06-29 → 07-14) — not a benchmark, not a demo. Every figure traces to a log file; where a metric isn't measurable yet, we say so instead of guessing. Unit of analysis is the proposal (71), not the event (744 deduped) — counting events would over-report escalations by 13.4×.
| Metric | Value | Traces to |
|---|---|---|
| Proposals resolved with no human in the loop | 61% (43/71) | ledger lifecycle |
| Proposals that involved the human | 24% (17/71) | HUMAN_APPROVED events |
| Tier-2 (money/irreversible/secrets) auto-committed without approval | 0 of 17 | tier×disposition |
| Sync conflicts in the consensus ledger (vault-wide: 1,031) | 0 | *.sync-conflict count |
Independent VERIFY events (propagate-and-verify) | 121 | ledger |
The safety invariant held perfectly: across 15 days, zero Tier-2 proposals auto-committed without human approval (12 went to the human, 5 machine-rejected or still open). The single-writer-shard ledger produced zero sync conflicts while the surrounding vault accumulated 1,031 — the architecture choice paid off in a countable way.
Honest gaps (published on purpose): (1) token cost per consensus round is not instrumented — we
refuse to estimate it; fix = stamp tokens_in/out per event. (2) leader-down MTTR has too few clean
samples; fix = explicit LEADER_DOWN/LEADER_RECOVERED events. (3) fleet-wide uptime history isn't
centralized — each node reports only itself.
Reproducible: a frozen ledger snapshot + verify_claims.py regenerate all ten headline numbers or print
DRIFT. Full evals writeup + interactive page →
Engineer? Want to poke holes in this? We'll seed you the full setup — consensus engine, ledger format, analysis scripts — free. Open an issue or DM; tell us which number you don't believe and we'll hand you the logs to break it.
Structure
Month = section · Week = chapter · Day = sub-chapter. Every level has a headline that tells you what actually happened. Only active days get their own page; quiet stretches are noted inside the week.
Table of contents
Пролог — двое в одной лодке · who Tony & Mike are, and how to read this
01 — May: Genesis · the second brain is born
- Week 0 (May 27-31) — first sessions: structure, imports, and reaching out to warm leads
02 — June: Scaling · from imports to a living platform
- Week 1 (Jun 1-7) — content factory and CRM foundations
- Week 2 (Jun 8-14) — coaching, imports, and "search the vault first"
- Week 3 (Jun 15-21) — the decision-memo era: architecture crystallizes
- Week 4 (Jun 22-28) — the multi-machine platform and the roads not taken
03 — July: Productization · what do we actually sell
- Week 5 (Jun 29 - Jul 5) — VPS anchor, security product line, and the birth of Mycroft
- Week 9 (Jul 27 - Aug 2) - the week they check us: a check that has never once said "no" is not a check
04 — August: Delegation · we stop writing and start choosing what gets written
- Week 10 (Aug 3-9) - the week we hand the pen over: a mechanism's blast radius is a design parameter
- Week 11 (Aug 10-16) - the week we ask which body a name belongs to: identity is proven by the caller
Editions and what's coming
A book does not ship like a library, so the unit here is a completed month, not a commit — otherwise the release feed would be one entry per day and mean nothing.
Now — v0.1.0:
days 1–61 (27 May – 3 Aug 2026) in three voices — RU, EN and DEV — plus the prologue, glossary,
sources, style and voice specs, the canon registries, and llms-full.txt for machine readers.
May, June and July are complete sections; August is being written.
Next:
- August — Delegation (section 04) closes at the end of the month → the next edition.
- Corrections get their own releases. A book that quietly edits its past is not a log. When something in the text turns out to be wrong, the fix ships as a release and says what changed.
- Weeks 1–4 and 6–8 have no day pages yet — the months are summarised at week level. Filling them in is the largest open piece of work in here.
Release feed — read it as the book's edition history.
Built by Palo Alto AI Research Lab. Proudly made in Silicon Valley. Sibling repo: clawrush — English diary and artifact home.
AI contributors
This project is built by a human + AI team, and the git log says so: Claude writes most of the code, Codex and Grok review it, Gemini feeds the research. Each is credited on a commit only if its output changed that commit's content — no decorative credits. Lab-wide policy, one source for every repo: AI-CONTRIBUTORS.md.
Contact
Questions, war stories, or you want to run this on your own fleet:
- 💬 WhatsApp: +1 341 222 9178
- 🐦 X: @Tony_Stef_
- 📣 Telegram: @ClawRus (RU) · @ClawEng (EN)
- 🌐 palo-alto.ai · Palo Alto AI Research Lab
🧩 One piece of a working system
This repository is one piece lifted out of a live operation: one non-technical founder, an AI cofounder, and a fleet of machines that reach consensus with each other and wake the human only for money or the irreversible. It was extracted after it survived production, not written as a demo — and it runs on its own: nothing here phones home to the rest.
See how the whole thing fits together → SYSTEM.md
Its closest neighbours in the in public layer: clawrush · dashboards · awesome-verified-agents