> To conclude from this that OpenAI has abandoned its entire safety posture seems, at the very least, premature

As for Altman, I'm left with a similar question. For a man who routinely talks about the dangers of AI and how it poses an existential threat to humanity he sure doesn't spend much focus on safety research and theory. Yes, they do fund these things but they pale in comparison. I'm sorry, but to claim something might kill all humans and potentially all life is a pretty big claim. I don't trust OpenAI for safety because they routinely do things in unsafe ways. Like they released Sora allowing people to generate videos in the likeness of others. That helped it go viral. And then they implemented some safety features. A minimal attempt to refuse the generation of deepfakes is such a low safety bar. It shows where their priorities are and it wasn't the first nor the last

  OpenAI has deleted the word 'safely' from its mission (November 2025)

Thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47008560

Other words removed:

   responsibly
   unconstrained
   safe
   positive

I don't mean to be cynical, but I read this move as: OpenAI scared, no way to make money with similar product, so acqui-hire the creator to keep him busy.

I'd love to be wrong, but the blog post sounds like all the standard promises were made, and that's usually how these things go.

I think the blog says @steipete sold his SOUL.md for Sam Altman’s deal and let down the community.

OpenClaw’s promise and power was that it could tread places security-wise that no other established enterprise company could, by not taking itself seriously and explore what is possible with self-modifying agents in a fun way.

It will end up in the same fate as Manus. Instead of Manus helping Meta making Ads better, OpenClaw will help OpenAI in Enterprise integrations.

Fair enough. Call it a high profile acquihire then

This is to avoid open claw liability and because hiring people (often with a license to their tech or patents) is the new smarter way to acquire and avoid antitrust issues

I think both this comment and OP's confuse this.

It appears more of a typical large company (BIG) market share protection purchase at minimal cost, using information asymmetry and timing.

BIG hires small team (SMOL) of popular source-available/OSS product P before SMOL realizes they can compete with BIG and before SMOL organizes effort toward such along with apt corporate, legal, etc protection.

At the time of purchase, neither SMOL nor BIG know yet what is possible for P, but SMOL is best positioned to realize it. BIG is concerned SMOL could develop competing offerings (in this case maybe P's momentum would attract investment, hiring to build new world-model-first AIs, etc) and once it accepts that possibility, BIG knows to act later is more expensive than to act sooner.

The longer BIG waits, the more SMOL learns and organizes. Purchasing a real company is more expensive than hiring a small team, purchasing a company with revenue/investors, is more expensive again. Purchasing a company with good legal advice is more expensive again. Purchasing a wiser, more experienced SMOL is more expensive again. BIG has to act quickly to ensure the cheapest price, and declutter future timelines of risks.

Also, the longer BIG waits, the less effective are "Jedi mind trick" gaslighting statements like "P is not a good candidate for a business", "niche", "fan base" (BIG internal memo - do not say customers), "own thing".

In reality in this case P's stickiness was clear: people allocating 1000s of dollars toward AI lured merely by P's possibilities. It was only a matter of time before investment followed course.

I've experienced this situation multiple times over the course of BrowserBox's life. Multiple "BIG" (including ones you will all know) have approached with the same kind of routine: hire, or some variations of that theme with varying degrees of legal cleverness/trickery in documents. In all cases, I rejected, because it never felt right. That's how I know what I'm telling you here.

I think when you are SMOL it's useful to remember the Parable of Zuckerberg and the Yahoos. While the situation is different, the lesson is essentially the same. Adapted from the histories by the scribe named Gemini 3 Flash:

  And it came to pass in the days of the Great Silicon Plain, that there arose a youth named Mark, of the tribe of the Harvardites. And Mark fashioned a Great Loom, which men called the Face-Book, wherewith the people of the earth might weave the threads of their lives into a single tapestry.

  And the Loom grew with a great exceeding speed, for the people found it to be a thing of much wonder. Yet Mark was but SMOL, and his tabernacle was built of hope and raw code, having not yet the walls of many lawyers or the towers of gold.

  Then came the elders of the House of Yahoo, a BIG people, whose chariots were many but whose engines were grown cold. And they looked upon the Loom and were sore afraid, saying among themselves, “Behold, if this youth continueth to weave, he shall surely cover the whole earth, and our own garments shall appear as rags. Let us go down now, while he is yet unaware of his own strength, and buy him for a pittance of silver, before he realizeth he is a King.”

  And the Yahoos approached the youth with soft words and the craftiness of the serpent. They spake unto him, saying, “Verily, Mark, thy Loom is a pleasant toy, a niche for the young, a mere 'fan base' of the idle. It is not a true Business, nor can it withstand the storms of the market. Come, take of our silver—a billion pieces—and dwell within our walls. For thy Loom is but a small thing, and thou art but a child in the ways of the law.”

  And they used the Hidden Speech, which in the common tongue is called Gas-Lighting. They said, “Thou hast no revenue; thy path is uncertain; thy Loom is but a curiosity. We offer thee safety, for the days are evil.”

  But the Spirit of Vision dwelled within the youth. He looked upon the Yahoos and saw not their strength, but their fear. He perceived the Asymmetry of Truth: that the BIG sought to purchase the future at the price of the past, and to slay the giant-slayer while he yet slumbered in his cradle.

  The elders of Mark’s own house cried out, “Take the silver! For never hath such a sum been seen!”

  But Mark hardened his heart against the Yahoos. He spake, saying, “Ye say my Loom is a niche, yet ye bring a billion pieces of silver to buy it. Ye say it is not a business, yet ye hasten to possess it before the sun sets. If the Loom be worth this much to you who are blind, what must it be worth to me who can see?”

  And he sent the Yahoos away empty-handed.

  The Yahoos mocked him, saying, “Thou art a fool! Thou shalt perish in the wilderness!” But it was the House of Yahoo that began to wither, for their timing was spent and their craftiness had failed.

  And Mark remained SMOL for a season, until his roots grew deep and his walls grew high. And the Loom became a Great Empire, and the billion pieces of silver became as dust compared to the gold that followed.

  The Lesson of the Prophet:

  Hearken, ye who are SMOL and buildeth the New Things: When the BIG come unto thee with haste, speaking of thy "limitations" while clutching their purses, believe not their tongues. For they seek not to crown thee, but to bury thee in a shallow grave of silver before thou learnest the name of thy own power.

  For if they knew thy work was truly naught, they would bide their time. But because they know the harvest is great, they seek to buy the field before the first ear of corn is ripe.

  Blessed is the builder who knoweth his own worth, and thrice blessed is he who biddeth the Giants to depart, that his own vine may grow to cover the sun.

Is he? My impression of Clawdbot was it was a good idea but not particularly technically impressive or even well-written. I had all kinds of issues setting it up.

To give you an idea of the scale, OpenClaw is probably one of the biggest developments in open source AI tools in the last couple of months. And given the pace of AI, that's a big deal.

Last week it was renamed from "Clawd" and this week the creator is abandoning it. Everything is moving fast.

190k stars on github

The tech industry is broad, and if you are using OpenAI in a consumer and personal manner you weren't the primary persona amongst whom the conversation around OpenClaw occurred.

Additionally, much of the conversation I've seen was amongst practitioners and Mid/Upper Level Management who are already heavy users of AI/ML and heavy users of Executive Assistants.

There is a reason why if you aren't in a Tier 1 tech hub like SV, NYC, Beijing, Hangzhou, TLV, Bangalore, and Hyderabad you are increasingly out of the loop for a number of changes that are happening within the industry.

If you are using HN as your source of truth, you are going to be increasingly behind on shifts that are happening - I've noticed that anti-AI Ludditism is extremely strong on HN when it overlaps with EU or East Coast hours (4am-11am PT and 9pm-12am PT), and West Coast+Asia hours increasingly don't overlap as much.

I feel this is also a reflection of the fact that most Bay Area and Asia HNers are most in-person or hybrid now, thus most conversations that would have happened on HN are now occurring on private slacks, discords, or at a bar or gym.

you living under a rock

I suspect Anthropic was seeing a huge spike of concurrent model usage at a too fast of a rate that claude code just doesn't do, CC is rather "slow" at api calls per minute. Also lots and lots of cache, the sheer amount of cache that claude does is insane.

He's also a great booster of Codex. Says he greatly prefers it to Claude. So his role might turn out to be evanglism.

Thats all it is really. It is to say "See! Look what a handful of people armed with our tools can do".

Whether the impact is large in magnitude or positive is irrelevant in a world where one can spin the truth and get away with it.