| ▲ | vanillameow 4 hours ago | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Yeah I mean idk, my takeaway from OpenClaw was pretty much the same - why use someone's insane vibecoded 400k LoC CLI wrapper with 50k lines of "docs" (AI slop; and another 50k Chinese translation of the same AI slop) when I can just Claude Code myself a custom wrapper in 30 mins that has exactly what I need and won't take 4 seconds to respond to a CLI call. But my reaction to this project is again: Why would I use this instead of "vibecoding" it myself. It won't have exactly what I need, and the cost to create my own version is measured in minutes. I suspect many people will slowly come to understand this intrinsic nature of "vibecoded software" soon - the only valuable one is one you've made yourself, to solve your own problems. They are not products and never will be. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | px43 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
"Open source" is no longer about "Hey I built this tool and everyone should use it". It's about "Hey I did this thing and it works for me, here's the lessons I learned along the way", at which point anyone can pull in what they need, discard what they don't, and build out their own bespoke tool sets for whatever job they're trying to accomplish. No one is trying to get you to use openclaw or nanobot, but now that they exist in the world, our agents can use the knowledge to build better tooling for us as individuals. If the projects get a lot of stars, they become part of the global training set that every coding agent is trained against, and the utility of the tooling continues to increase. I've been running two openclaw agents, and they both made their own branchs, and modified their memory tooling to accommodate their respective tasks etc. They regularly check for upstream things that might be interesting to pull in, especially security related stuff. It feels like pretty soon, no one is going to just have a bunch of apps on their phone written by other people. They're going to have a small set of apps custom built for exactly the things they're trying to do day to day. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | threethirtytwo 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
What I read is the unlimited token count. You get the most out of this when having it run on an autonomous loop where your interaction is much more minimal? But pinging the thing every minute in a loop is going to terminate your token limit so running the LLM locally is the way to get infinite tokens. The problem is local models aren't as good as the ones in the cloud. I think the success stories are people who spent like 2-4k on a beefy system to run OpenClaw or these chatbots locally. The commands they run are, I assume like detailed versions of prompts that are essentially: "build my website." "Invest in stocks." And then watch it run for days. When using claude code it's essentially a partnership. You need to constantly manage it and curate it for safety but also so the token count doesn't go overboard. With a fully autonomous agent and unlimited token count you can assign it to tasks where this doesn't matter as much. Did the agent screw up and write bad code? The point is you can have the system prompt engage in self correction. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | CuriouslyC 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
So, as an OpenClaw disliker, the agent harness at the core of it (pi) is really good, it's super minimal and well designed. It's designed to be composed using custom functionality, it's easy to hack, whereas Claude Code is bloated and totally opinionated. The thing people are losing their shit over with OpenClaw is the autonomy. That's the common thread between it, Ralph and Gastown that is hype-inducing. It's got a lot of problems but there's a nugget of value there (just like Steve Yegge's stuff) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | sumitkumar 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
It is not about making it yourself but a tradeoff between how much it can be controlled and how much has seen the real world. Adding requirements learned by mistakes of others is slower in self-controlled development vs an open collaboration vs a company managing it. This is the reason vibe-coded(initial requirements) projects feels good to start but tough to evolve(with real learnings). Vibe-coded projects are high-velocity but low-entropy. They start fast, but without the "real-world learnings" baked into collaborative projects, they often plateau as soon as the problem complexity exceeds the creator's immediate focus. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | pelagicAustral 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
I mean, in not vibecoding it yourself you are already saving tokens... Personally, I see no benefit in having an instance of something like this... so, I wouldn't spend tokens, and I wouldn't spend server-time, or any other resource into it, but a lot of people seem to have found a really nice alternative to actually having to use their brains during the day. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||