back to top
HomeTechPicksI Use Claude Code But Not for My Personal Projects — Here's...

I Use Claude Code But Not for My Personal Projects — Here’s What I Use Instead

- Advertisement -

I like Claude Code. But for some of my personal projects, the last thing I want is my code touching a cloud server I don’t control. So I went looking for an open source alternative and found this absolute beast.

It’s called Goose. Honestly surprised it took me this long to find it.

So what is Goose exactly?

goose ai coding

Think of it as an AI agent that lives on your machine. Not a chatbot that gives you code suggestions. An actual agent that can create files, edit code, run commands, debug errors, and work through multi-step tasks on its own.

The part that makes it different from most AI coding tools is the model flexibility. Goose doesn’t care what LLM you use. Connect it to Claude, GPT-4, Gemini, Groq or if you want everything fully local with zero internet, plug in an Ollama model like GLM-5 or Kimi K2. Your choice, your data.

How it’s different from Claude Code

Claude Code is built around Anthropic’s own models and needs an account to run even with local models. Goose has none of that, its fully open source, no account needed. The difference seems small. In practice for personal projects it changes everything.

FeatureClaude CodeGoose
Requires accountYesNo
Fully local optionPartialYes
Model flexibilityLimitedAny LLM or Ollama
Open sourceNoYes (Apache 2.0)
Approval gatesYesMinimal
Internet requiredYesOnly if using cloud models
Desktop appYesYes
CLI supportYesYes
CostPaidFree

Your model, your choice

Goose doesn’t care what model you use. Connect it to Claude, GPT-4, Gemini, or Groq if you want cloud performance. Or point it at a local Ollama model if you want everything staying on your machine. Both work. It just depends on your hardware and what you actually need from the session.

I personally use GLM-5 for most of my personal projects. Is it as good as Claude Opus? No. But it’s good enough for what I’m building, it runs locally, and my code never leaves my machine. That tradeoff works for me.

The part I actually appreciate though is how easy it is to switch. If I hit something complex that needs heavier reasoning I just change the model in settings and keep going. No reinstalling, no reconfiguring, no starting over. Same session, different model.

That kind of flexibility is rare in coding tools. Most lock you in. Goose just gets out of the way.

Getting started is simpler than you think

Goose installs like any normal app, download the binary for your system, open it, connect your model of choice and you’re running. Desktop app if you prefer a visual interface, CLI if you like staying in the terminal. Both work the same way.

Why I chose Goose for personal projects

Simple reason. I didn’t want my code leaving my system. I just have projects where the idea itself is something I want to keep to myself until it’s ready. That’s it.

Goose gives me that. My code stays on my machine, my ideas stay in my head, and I still get an AI agent that can actually work through problems autonomously.

Everyone has their own reasons for caring about this. Maybe it’s a client project with an NDA. Maybe it’s something you’re building that you don’t want anyone seeing yet. Maybe you just like knowing exactly where your data goes.

Whatever the reason, if you’ve been looking for an open source alternative to Claude Code that actually works, this one is worth trying.

Don’t miss any Tech Story

Subscribe To Firethering NewsLetter

You Can Unsubscribe Anytime! Read more in our privacy policy

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

YOU MAY ALSO LIKE
Open Source AI Assistants You Can Run Locally

5 Best Open Source AI Assistants You Can Run Locally

0
Somewhere between "just use ChatGPT" and "compile this from source," there's a category of AI tools that don't get talked about enough. Apps you download once, run on your own hardware, and never pay a monthly fee to use. No data leaving your machine. No API key. No usage limits that reset on the first of the month. The tools in this list aren't compromises. Some of them have millions of downloads. One was built by Mozilla. Another turns a 1B model into a desktop companion that reacts to your coding sessions. What they share is that after the initial setup, they answer only to you. If your current AI workflow depends on a subscription staying affordable and a company deciding your use case still matters next quarter, these are worth knowing about.
apple-sues-openai-stolen-secrets

OpenAI Paid $6.5 Billion to Build an iPhone Rival. Apple Says It Was Built...

0
Last year, OpenAI acquired io, Jony Ive's hardware startup, for $6.5 billion. The deal was widely read as OpenAI's clearest signal yet that it was serious about building a physical device, something that could sit in your pocket the way an iPhone does, powered by AI agents instead of apps. A direct challenge to Apple's most important product. On Friday, Apple filed a lawsuit suggesting that challenge was built on a foundation of stolen confidential information through what Apple describes as a coordinated operation directed from the top of OpenAI's hardware division, the same division now tasked with building the device meant to compete with Apple. Apple isn't just alleging that some employees walked out with files they shouldn't have taken. It's alleging that the people now running OpenAI's hardware ambitions actively ran a system to extract Apple's most guarded technical knowledge, and that the $6.5 billion acquisition sits on top of that foundation.
Anthropic Secretly Tracked Claude Code Users. Then Called It an Experiment

Anthropic Secretly Tracked Claude Code Users. Then Called It an “Experiment.”

0
There's a version of this story where Anthropic was trying to protect itself from large-scale model theft. There's another where one of the AI industry's biggest privacy advocates quietly crossed a line its own users never expected. What makes this headline important isn't just that hidden tracking code existed. It's that the company behind it was Anthropic. Just months ago, Anthropic publicly refused to let the Trump administration use Claude to surveil American users. The company defended that position in court, arguing that AI companies shouldn't become tools for government surveillance. That stance became part of Anthropic's identity. Then came a very different decision. In March, Anthropic quietly added hidden tracking markers to Claude Code that flagged users' timezones, proxy connections, and potential ties to Chinese AI labs. The code remained unnoticed until security researcher Thereallo discovered it last week. After the discovery went public, an Anthropic engineer confirmed it on X, described it as an "experiment" intended to combat account abuse and model distillation, and said the company had already planned to remove it. The tracker was taken down shortly afterward. The bigger question isn't whether Anthropic had a reason. It's whether a company that built its reputation on privacy can afford to hide surveillance from the very developers it asks to trust its tools.