This comment is filled with speculation which I think is mostly unfounded and unnecessarily negative in its orientation.

Let's take the safety point. Yes, OpenClaw is infamously not exactly safe. Your interpretation is that, by hiring Peter, OpenAI must no longer care about safety. Another interpretation, though, is that offered by Peter himself, in this blog post: "My next mission is to build an agent that even my mum can use. That’ll need a much broader change, a lot more thought on how to do it safely, and access to the very latest models and research." To conclude from this that OpenAI has abandoned its entire safety posture seems, at the very least, premature and not robustly founded in clear fact.

> This buy out for something vibe coded

I think all of these comments about acquisitions or buy outs aren’t reading the blog post carefully: The post isn’t saying OpenClaw was acquired. It’s saying that Pete is joining OpenAI.

There are two sentences at the top that sum it up:

> I’m joining OpenAI to work on bringing agents to everyone. OpenClaw will move to a foundation and stay open and independent.

OpenClaw was not a good candidate to become a business because its fan base was interested in running their own thing. It’s a niche product.

This is basically acquihire. Peter seems really a genius and they better poach him before Anthropic do.

"build a hugely popular tool"

Define hugely popular relative to the scale of users of OAI... personally this thread is the first time Ive heard of openclaw.

There’s plenty of straightforward reasons why OpenAI would want to do this, it doesn’t need to be some sort of malicious conspiracy.

I think it’s good PR (particularly since Anthropics actions against OpenCode and Clawdbot were somewhat controversial) + Peter was able to build a hugely popular thing & clearly would be valuable to have on the team building something along the lines of Claude Cowork. I would expect these future products to be much stronger from a security standpoint.

> 1. OpenAI is saying with this statement "You could be multimillion while having AI do all the work for you." This buy out for something vibe coded and built around another open source project is meant to keep the hype going. The project is entirely open source and OpenAI could have easily done this themselves if they weren't so worried about being directly liable for all the harms OpenClaw can do.

This is a great take and hasn't been spoken about nearly enough in this comment section. Spending a few million to buy out Openclaw('s creator), which is by far the most notable product made by Codex in a world where most developer mindshare is currently with Claude, is nothing for a marketing/PR stunt.

Most of these are good callouts, but I think it is best for us to look at the evolution of the AI segment in the same manner as "Cloud" developed into a segment in the 2000s and 2010s.

3 is always a result of GTM and distribution - an organization that devotes time and effort into productionizing domain-specific models and selling to their existing customers can outcompete a foundation model company which does not have experience dealing with those personas. I have personally heard of situations where F500 CISOs chose to purchase Wiz's agent over anything OpenAI or Anthropic offered for Cloud Security and Asset Discovery because they have had established relations with Wiz and they have proven their value already. It's the same way that PANW was able to establish itself in the Cloud Security space fairly early because they already established trust with DevOps and Infra teams with on-prem deployments and DCs so those buyers were open to purchasing cloud security bundles from PANW.

1 has happened all the time in the Cloud space. Not every company can invent or monetize every combination in-house because there are only so many employees and so many hours in a week.

2 was always a more of a FTX and EA bubble because EA adherents were over-represented in the initial mindshare for GenAI. Now that EA is largely dead, AI Safety and AGI as in it's traditional definition has disappeared - which is good. Now we can start thinking about "Safety" in the same manner we think about "Cybersecurity".

> They're as excited as they are scared, seeing a one man team build a hugely popular tool that in some ways is more capable than what they've released

I think that adds unnecessary emotion to how platform businesses operate. The reality is, a platform business will always be on the lookout to incorporate avenues to expand TAM, and despite how much engineers may wish, "buy" will always outcompete "build" because time is also a cost.

Most people ik working at these foundation model companies are thinking in terms of becoming an "AWS" type of foundational platform in our industry, and it's best to keep Nikesh Arora's principle of platformization in mind.

---

All this shows is that the thesis that most early stage VCs have been operating on for the past 2 years (the Application and Infra layer is the primary layer to concentrate on now) holds. A large number of domain-specific model and app layer startups have been funded over the past 2-3 years in stealth, but will start a publicity blitz over the next 6-8 months.

By the time you see an announcement on TechCrunch or HN, most of us operators were already working on that specific problem for the past 12-16 months. Additionally, HNers use "VC" in very broad and imprecise strokes and fail to recognize what are Growth Equity (eg. the recent Anthropic round) versus Private Equity (eg. Sailpoint's acquisition and then IPO by Thoma Bravo) versus Early Stage VC rounds (largely not announced until several months after the round unless we need to get an O1A for a founder or key employee).

> You can switch models multiple times (online/proprietary, open weight, local), but you have one UI : OpenClaw.

It’s only been a couple months. I guarantee people will be switching apps as others become the new hot thing.

We saw the same claims when Cursor was popular. Same claims when Claude Code was the current topic. Users are changing their app layer all the time and trying new things.

Indeed, coding agents took off because of a lot of ongoing trial and error on how to build the harness as much as model quality.

This is the sort of thing employers are failing on. They sign contracts that assume employees are going to be logging in and asking questions directly.

But if I don’t have a url for my IDE (or whatever) to call, it isn’t useful.

So I use Ollama. It’s less helpful, but ensure confidentiality and compliance.

openclaw is just one of many now, there are new ones weekly.

There’s actually many UI’s now? See moltis, rowboat, and various others that are popping up daily

? We saw this years/months ago with Claude Code and Cursor.

Seems like models become commoditized?

OpenAI did not "bet" on Jony Ive. They bought his company io Products.

This is basically what's happening: https://youtu.be/N-Esh4W3dfI

peter's claw is a lot more than just a wrapper around my slop.

i too had plenty of offers, but so far chose not to follow through with any of them, as i like my life as is.

also, peter is a good friend and gives plenty of credit. in fact, less credit would be nice, so i don't have to endure more vibeslopped issues and PRs going forward :)

> Special thanks to Mario Zechner for his support and for pi-mono. Special thanks to Adam Doppelt for lobster.bot.

https://github.com/openclaw/openclaw?tab=readme-ov-file#comm...

Mario has a special place in the Clawtributor list.

https://github.com/openclaw/openclaw#community

Reminds me of people talking about Angry Birds and the Box2d physics engine. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2273694

The fact that 1 billion is the threshold you chose to highlight shows the ridiculousness of this industry.

Openclaw is an amazing piece of hard work and novel software engineering, but I can't imagine OpenAI/anthropic/google not being able to compete with it for 1/20th that number (with solid hiring of course).

Where do you guys get the 1b exit from? I didn't see numbers yet.

No because this was not a billion dollar business

Everyone is going to have their own flavor of Open Claw within 18 months. The memory architecture (and the general concept of the multi-tiered system) is open source. There's no moat to this kind of thing. But OpenAI is happy to trade his star power for money. And he might build something cool with suddenly unlimited resources. I don't blame the guy. OpenAI is going to change hands 2-3 times over the next 5 years but at the end of the day he will still have the money and equity OpenAI gave him. And his cool project will continue on.

Was the project really ever valued that high? Seems like something that can be easily replicated and even properly thought out (re: pi). This guy just ran the social media hype train the right way.

How do you know it was for less than a billion?

how is it a "startup" if all ip is open-source. Seems like openAi is just buying hype to keep riding their hype bubble a little longer, since they are in hot water on every other front (20Billion revenue vs 1 Trillion expenses and obligations, Sora 2 user retention dropping to 1% of users after 1 month of usage, dense competition, all actual real founding ml scientists having skipped the boat a long time ago).

I keep reading takes about OpenClaw being acquired, but even the TLDR at the top makes it clear that OpenClaw isn’t part of this move:

> tl;dr: I’m joining OpenAI to work on bringing agents to everyone. OpenClaw will move to a foundation and stay open and independent.

I’m sure he got a very generous offer (congrats to him!) but all of the hot takes about OpenClaw being acquired are getting weird.

I literally had begun to wonder if OpenClaw had more of a future as a company than OpenAI

Twitter is negative in general, but generally when a project like this gets bought it marks the end of the project. The acquirer always says something about how they don't plan to change anything, but it rarely works that way.

My negativity is for two reasons:

(1) A capable independent developer is joining a large powerful corporation. I like it better when there are many small players in the scene rather than large players consolidating power.

(2) This seems like the celebration of Generative AI technology, which is often irresponsible and threatens many trust based social systems.

Why would that be crazy? AI is an extinction level threat that directly competes with humans.

Why would anybody pretend it's a good thing? Honestly you'd have to have something wrong with you.

Twitter is not a place for positive posts.

It's mostly congratulatory from what I'm seeing?

https://xcancel.com/steipete/status/2023154018714100102

Just my opinion, but I no longer trust sentiment on X now that Elon is in control.

Anyone who likes Openclaw will be upset that it’s getting acquired and inevitably destroyed. Anyone who dislikes it will be annoyed that the creator is getting so rewarded for building junk. The only people who would like this are OpenAI fans, if there even are any.

I think people are sad that OpenClaw is now part of Big Ai.

I think you should give your gut instinct more credit. The tech world has gotten a false sense of security from the big SaaS platforms running everything that make the nitty gritty security details disappear in a seamless user experience, and that includes LLM chatbot providers. Even open source development libraries with exposure to the wild are so heavily scrutinized and well-honed that it’s easy even for people like me that started in the 90s to lose sight of the real risk on the other side that. No more popping up some raw script on an Apache server to do its best against whatever is out there. Vibe coded projects trade a lot of that hard-won stability for the convenience of not having to consider some amount of the implementation details. People that are jumping all over this for anything except sandbox usage either don’t know any better, or forgot what they’ve learned.

But the security risk wasnt taken by OpenClaw. Releasing vulnerable software that users run on their own machines isn't going to compromise OpenClaw itself. It can still deliver value for it's users while also requiring those same users to handle the insecurity of the software themselves (by either ignoring it or setting up sandboxes, etc to reduce the risk, and then maybe that reduced risk is weighed against the novelty and value of the software that then makes it worth it to the user to setup).

On the other hand, if OpenClaw were structured as a SaaS, this entire project would have burned to the ground the first day it was launched.

So by releasing it as something you needed to run on your own hardware, the security requirement was reduced from essential, to a feature that some users would be happy to live without. If you were developing a competitor, security could be one feature you compete on--and it would increase the number of people willing to run your software and reduce the friction of setting up sandboxes/VMs to run it.

Every single new tech industry thing has to learn security from scratch. It's always been that way. A significant number of people in tech just don't believe that there's anything to learn from history.

For my entire career in tech (~20 years) I have been technically good but bad at identifying business trends. I left Shopify right before their stock 4xed during COVID because their technology was stagnating and the culture was toxic. The market didn't care about any of that, I could have hung around and been a millionaire. I've been at 3 early stage startups and the difference between winners and losers was nothing to do with quality or security.

The tech industry hasn't ever been about "building" in a pure sense, and I think we look back at previous generations with an excess of nostalgia. Many superior technologies have lost out because they were less profitable or marketed poorly.

> seems to be on it’s way out

Change is fraught with chaos. I don't think exuberant trends are indicators of whether we'll still care about secure and high quality software in the long term. My bet is that we will.

> being left behind (“I still can’t bring myself to vibe code. I have to at least skim every diff. Meanwhile this guy is joining OpenAI”).

I don't believe skimming diffs counts as being left behind. Survivor bias etc. Furthermore, people are going to get burned by this (already have been, but seemingly not enough) and a responsible mindset such as yours will be valued again.

Something that still up for grabs is figuring how how to do full agenetic in a responsible way. How do we bring the equivalent of skimming diffs to this?

i think your self reflection here is commendable. i agree on both counts.

i think the silver lining is that AI seems to be genuinely good at finding security issues and maybe further down the line enough to rely on it somewhat. the middle period we're entering right now is super scary.

we want all the value, security be damned, and have no way to know about issues we're introducing at this breakneck speed.

still i'm hopeful we can figure it out somehow

So my unsubstantiated conspiracy theory regarding Clawd/Molt/OpenClaw is that the hype was bought, probably by OpenAI. I find it too convenient that not long after the phrase “the AI bubble“ starts coming into common speech we see the emergence of a “viral” use case that all of the paid influencers on the Internet seem to converge on at the same time. At the end of the day piping AI output with tool access into a while loop is not revolutionary. The people who had been experimenting with these type of set ups back when LangChain was the hotness didn’t organically go viral because most people knew that giving a language model unrestricted access to your online presence or bank account is extremely reckless. The “I gave OpenClaw $100 and now I bought my second Lambo. Buy my ebook” stories don’t seem credible.

So don’t feel bad. Everything on the internet is fake.

I don't know. It's more of a sharp tool like a web browser (also called a "user agent") - yes an inexperienced user can quickly get themselves into trouble without realizing it (in a browser or openclaw), yes the agent means it might even happen without you being there.

A security hole in a browser is an expected invariant not being upheld, like a vulnerability letting a remote attacker control your other programs, but it isn't a bug when a user falls for an online scam. What invariants are expected by anyone of "YOLO hey computer run my life for me thx"?

building this openclaw thing that competes with openai using codex is against the openai terms of service, which say you can't use it to make stuff that competes with them. but they compete with everyone. by giving zero fucks (or just not reading the fine print), bro was rewarded by the dumb rule people for breaking the dumb rules. this happens over and over. there is a lesson here

But in this case following security norms would be a mistake. The right thing to take away is that you shouldn't dogmatically follow norms. Sometimes it's better to just build things if there is very little risk

Nothing actually bad happened in this case and probably never will. Maybe some people have their crypto or identity stolen, but probably not a rate rate significantly higher than background (lots of people are using openclaw)

Hey, as a security engineer in AI, I get where you're coming from.

But one thing to remember - our job is to figure out how to enable these amazing usecases while keeping the blast radius as low as possible.

Yes, OpenClaw ignores all security norms, but it's our job to figure out an architecture in which agents like these can have the autonomy they need to act, without harming the business too much.

So I would disagree our work is "on the way out", it's more valuable than ever. I feel blessed to be working in security in this era - there has never been a better time to be in security. Every business needs us to get these things working safely, lest they fall behind.

It's fulfilling work, because we are no longer a cost center. And these businesses are willing to pay - truly life changing money for security engineers in our niche.

Well OpenClaw has ~3k open PRs (many touching security) on GitHub right now. Peter's move shows killer product UI/UX, ease of use and user growth trump everything. Now OpenAI with throw their full engineering firepower to squash those flaws in no time.

Making users happy > perfect security day one

Security always is the most time consuming in a backend project

This is a normal reaction to unfairness. You see someone who you believe is Doing It Wrong (and I’d agree), and they’re rewarded for it. Meanwhile you Do It Right and your reward isn’t nearly as much. It’s natural to find this upsetting.

Unfortunately, you just have to understand that this happens all over the place, and all you can really do is try to make your corner of the world a little better. We can’t make programmers use good security practices. We can’t make users demand secure software. We can at least try to do a better job with our own work, and educate people on why they should care.

At the end of the day, he built something people want. That’s what really matters. OpenAI and Anthropic could not build it because of the security issues you point out. But people are using it and there is a need for it. Good on him for recognizing this and giving people what they want. We’re all adults and the users will be responsible for whatever issues they run into because of the lack of security around this project.

I've been feeling this SO much lately, in many ways. In addition to security, just the feeling of spending decades learning to write clean code, valuing having a deep understanding of my codebase and tooling, thorough testing, maintainability, etc, etc. Now the industry is basically telling me "all that expertise is pointless, you should give it up, all that we care about it is a future of endless AI slop that nobody understands".

AMEX, Capital One and Apple are not even close to the top of the list of companies that I would trust with my digital data.

Privacy aside, you can never trust an LLM with your data and trust it to do exactly what it was instructed to do.

> There are very few companies who I trust with my digital data and thus trust to host something like OpenClaw and run it on my behalf: American Express, Capital One, maybe Proton, and maybe Apple. I managed an AI lab team at Capital One and personally I trust them.

I don't really understand what this has to do with the post or even OpenClaw. The big draw of OpenClaw (as I understand it) was that you could run it locally on your own system. Supposedly, per this post, OpenClaw is moving to a foundation and they've committed to letting the author continue working on it while on the OpenAI payroll. I doubt that, but it's a sign that they're making it explicitly not an OpenAI product.

OpenClaw's success and resulting PR hype explosion came from ignoring all of the trust and security guardrails that any big company would have to abide by. It would be a disaster of the highest order if it had been associated with any big company from the start. Because it felt like a grassroots experiment all of the extreme security problems were shifted to the users' responsibility.

It's going to be interesting to see where it goes from here. This blog post is already hinting that they're putting OpenClaw at arm's length by putting it into a foundation.

You raised a good point I am now personally basically expecting to see this year ( next at the latest ). Some brave corporate will decide for millions of users to, uhh, liberate all users data. My money is not of that happening at Googles or OpenAIs of the world though. I am predicting it will be either be a bank or one of the data brokers.

With any luck, maybe this will finally be a bridge too fast, like what Amazon's superbowl ad did for surveillance conversation.

Well it’s not even just data, you have to trust actions taken if you want the assist to, you know, assist. I have been yoloing it and really enjoying it. Albeit from a locked off server.

Sorry to pile on, but Capital One is an insane name to drop there.

You really trust them?

My trust does not extend that far.

Sorry to break it to you but I would not trust any financial companies with my personal data. Simply because I’ve seen how they use data to build exploitive products in the past.

>Apple

Lol

Their marketing team got ya.

I aspire to be as good as Apple at marketing. Who knew 2nd or worse place in everything doesnt matter when you are #1 in marketing?

sorry to say it, but C1 LOL. they don’t care at all about privacy! Don’t mistake your team for the company values.

My gut feeling is that OpenAI is desperately searching for The Killer App™ for LLMs and hired Peter to help guide them there.

OpenAI has tried a lot of experiments over the years - custom GPTs, the Orion browser, Codex, the Sora "TikTok but AI" app, and all have either been uninspired or more-or-less clones of other products (like Codex as a response to Claude Code).

OpenClaw feels compelling, fresh, sci-fi, and potentially a genuinely useful product once matured.

More to the point, OpenAI needs _some_ kind of hyper-compelling product to justify its insane hype, valuation, and investments, and Peter's work with OpenClaw seems very promising.

(All of this is complete speculation on my part. No insider knowledge or domain expertise here.)

Regardless of what you think of OpenClaw, Peter is a great hire - he's been at the forefront of brute-forcing app development with coding agents.

OpenAI has been running around headless for at least two years now. I've build systems like openclaw, based on email, at my day job and told OAI during an interview that they needed to build this or get smoked when someone else does. I guess aqi-hire is easier than building a team that can develop software internally.

Of course the S in openclaw is for security.

Same here, seems 100% marketing move. The trend continues.

While insecure and not something I would use myself (yet) one thing OpenClaw has managed to do is to show people the potential that AI still has.

But... how is it even useful? Do you use it? Is it a good idea for anyone to, uh, use it? Is it a product that you or any other "vibe coder" cannot ~~build~~ tell Claude Code to build on the go, if he wants to communicate with Claude Code via WhatsApp for some reason? Sure, product doesn't need to be some sophisticated technology to be worth something, it could also just have user base because it succeeded at marketing, but does this particular product even benefit from network effects? What is this shit? Why anybody cares?

Seriously, I just don't understand what's going on. To me it looks like all world just has gone crazy.

> This guy just single handedly released something useful (and very insecure) before anyone else.

It has been interesting to watch this take off. It wasn't the first or even best agent framework and it deliberately avoided all of the hard problems that others were trying to solve, like security.

What it did have was unnatural levels of hype and PR. A lot of that PR, ironically, came from all of the things that were happening because it had so many problems with security and so many examples of bad behavior. The chaos and lack of guardrails made it successful.

Single-handed made me smirk. It was vibe coded.

I think it was obvious, yet nobody seemed to have released a version people could actually easily use.

The feature set is pretty simple:

- Agents that can write their own tools.

- Agents that can write their own skills.

- Agents that can chat via standard chat apps.

- Agents that can install and use cli software.

- Agents that can have a bit of state on disk.

As an experiment, I set it up with a z.ai $3/month subscription and told it to do a tedious technical task. I said to stay busy and that I expect no more than 30 minutes of inactivity, ever.

The task is to decompile Wave Race 64 and integrate with libultraship and eventually produce a runnable native port of the game. (Same approach as the Zelda OoT port Ship of Harkinian).

It set up a timer ever 30 minutes to check in on itself and see if it gave up. It reviews progress every 4 hours and revisits prioritization. I hadn't checked on it in days and when I looked today it was still going, a few functions at a time.

It set up those times itself and creates new ones as needed.

It's not any one particular thing that is novel, but it's just more independent because of all the little bits.

It has a heartbeat operation and you can message it via messaging apps.

Instead of going to your computer and launching claude code to have it do something, or setting up cron jobs to do things, you can message it from your phone whenever you have an idea and it can set some stuff up in the background or setup a scheduled report on its own, etc.

So it's not that it has to be running and generating tokens 24/7, it's just idling 24/7 any time you want to ping it.

Not being tied to Anthropic’s models and ecosystems, having more control over the agent, interacting with it from you messaging app of choice.

There's some neat experiments people post on social media. Mostly, the thing that captures the imagination the most is its sort of like watching a silicon child grow up.

They develop their own personalities, they express themselves creatively, they choose for themselves, they choose what they believe and who they become.

I know that sounds like anthropomorphism, and maybe it is, but it most definitely does not feel like interacting with a coding agent. Claude is just the substrate.

If it replaces SaaS it will replace you too; how else will you collaborate?

What I want to know: Is the OpenClaw = Open Source aspect secure?

If your SaaS is a CRUD with a shitty UI in React then yes

The OpenAI version will be locked down in a bad way. It'll be ecosystem tied and a lot of the "security" will be from losing control of the harness.

True but between the lines I read some interesting points here. Great it get the gold nugget but I found it curious how he dunked on the JVM after all the clones emerges with much more perfs and much less code/energy consumpution.

For further context, he has like 60 projects for general use during this “got bored” phase

Its just happened that this one latched on a trend well and went viral, cease and desist from its name accelerated the virality

OpenAI execs are funneling funds directly to the Trump regime and partying with the far right: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46933071

Anyone working for OpenAI is complicit with these abuses. I hope that in due time having OpenAI on your resume will be a strong negative signal.

I just dislike Sam Altman, and I think he's just using this as a marketing ploy, which is more dishonesty from him. People keep saying OpenClaw is hype. I installed it, but I never tried to run it, and I don't know what the compelling reason is to. Supposedly you can talk to your agent from your iMessage? Who cares? Why not just talk to Claude Code?

> Peter single handedly got many of us taking Codex more seriously, at least that's my impression from the conversations I had.

Comments like this feel confusing because I didn't have any association between Codex and OpenClaw before reading your comment.

Codex was also seeing a lot of usage before OpenClaw.

The whole OpenClaw hype bubble feels like there's a world of social media that I wasn't tapped into last month that OpenClaw capitalized on with unparalleled precision. There are many other agent frameworks out there, but OpenClaw hit all the right notes to trigger the hype machine in a way that others did not. Now OpenClaw and its author are being attributed for so many other things that it's hard for me to understand how this one person inserted himself into the center of this media zeitgeist

What does "enterprise ready" mean in this context?

Major producers like OpenAI optimize for safety and brand reputation avoiding backlash. Open source projects optimize for raw capability and friction less experimentation. It is risky yes, but it allows for rapid innovation that strictly aligned models can't offer.

Is it? You basically got 95% of the way there with Claude Code inside of a container. People were using CC outside of development scope for awhile.

> This is an app that would've normally had a dozen or so people behind it, all acquihired by OpenAI to find the people who really drove the project.

Acquihires haven't worked that way for a while. The new acquihire game is to buy out a few key execs and then have them recruit away the key developers, leaving the former company as a shell for someone else to take over and try to run.

Also OpenClaw was not a one-person operation. It had several maintainers working together.

Every day the software world feels more and more like a casino.

Looks good! I'm curious, are customers fine with their data going to third-party LLM providers?

We’re in a hype state where someone can “generate” millions of dollars in value in a month by making a meme prototype that scratches the itch just right, despite having no real competitive moat, application, value proposition or even semblance of a path to one.

The guy is creative, but this is really just following the well known pattern of acquiring/hiring bright minds if only to prevent your competition from doing the same.

I think it's at the final stage of software pump and dump [1]. OpenAI is probably hiring more for the reputation/marketing, rather than for any technical skills behind OpenClaw.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46776848

> Anybody could have thought of this or done it

To be fair, when used in retrospect, this applies to just about any big tech company

> but I wager he is about to find out exactly why a company like OpenAI isn't able to execute and deliver like he single-handedly did with OpenClaw.

No company could ship anything like OpenClaw as a product because it was a million footguns packaged with a self-installer and a couple warnings that it can't be trusted for anything.

There's a reason they're already distancing themselves from it and saying it's going to an external foundation

He said on Lex Fridman podcast that he has no intention of joining any company; that was a couple days ago.

Frankly, I hope he maximized the amount of money he made. It's a once in a lifetime opportunity. And nobody knows where AI is headed or if OpenAI even will be in existence in a few years given their valuation and the amount of $ they need to burn to keep up.

Are you saying it will be hollowed out?

> The future is both amazing and shitty

I feel like we're living in one of those breathless futurist interviews from a 1994 issue of Wired mag.

What about token usage? i've noticed that simple conversations balloon to 100k+ tokens within 1-3 messages. did you have this issue?

Did you ask OpenClaw to do all those things? If not did you want it to do all of them?

> hopped on a plane for SKO in LAX. United delayed the plane departure by 2 hours (of course) and diverted the flight to Honolulu.

I'm assuming there's a typo here, because I can't imagine a flight from LAX to SKO at all, let alone one that goes anywhere close to Honolulu. But I can't figure out what this was supposed to be.

Proof you can get hired off of a portfolio where you've never even viewed a single line of code form it. Definitely feel a mix of envy and admiration.