This was incredibly vague and a waste of time.
What type of code? What types of tools? What sort of configuration? What messaging app? What projects?
It answers none of these questions.
What type of code? What types of tools? What sort of configuration? What messaging app? What projects?
It answers none of these questions.
I'm now using pi (the thing openclaw is built on) and within a few days i build a tmux plugin and semaphore plugin^1, and it has automated the way _I_ used to use Claude.
The things I disagree with OP is: The usefulness of persistent memory beyond a single line in AGENTS.md "If the user says 'next time' update your AGENTS.md", the use of long-running loops, or the idea that everything can be resolved via chat - might be true for simple projects, but any original work needs me to design the 'right' approach ~5% of the time.
That's not a lot, but AI lets you create load-bearing tech-debt within hours, at which point you're stuck with a lot of shit and you dont know how far it got smeared.
I have an idea, agent turns it into a draft, depending on idea vagueness/complexity combination of: Looking for alternative, plan the change, look for alternative, split up into smaller drafts to drive separately, execute change (spec, code, tests), review change.
Usually its just: Draft, plan, exec, commit. The steps are flexible enough. Usually each step is a different agent, sometimes not. On complex builds or big changes, a planning agent itself might spawn subagents to avoid bloating its own context.
The progress is stored in: ./dev/{draft/<n>.md , wip/<n>/, fin/<n>/ }.
My `lead` pi has a separate AGENTS.md with how to organize the above sequence, and some notes on how to prompt, keep things small, etc. Note that its skill `tmux-coding-agrents` calls other pi instances (optionally set to codex). I've moved off the claude cli entirely.
I used to spend time telling claude not to forget updating the specs or building its tests because context bloat made them forget AGENTS.md, or to read certain files before it should execute a plan. The lead agent does this just fine now, and every time i see it make a mistake i say: "Next time do X" and it automatically updates its own or the worker agents AGENTS.md.
Because my lead agent context is all about managing this process it doesn't forget steps while its off chasing some bug.
Also, I build (but did not publish) a pi plugin that attempts to use other accounts on usage limits.
Most surprising moment I had, was my lead spawning a subagent, spawning a subagent, which spawned a tmux-bash build with very little prompting, and it was the right thing to do to prevent each agent from context bloat.
- the smaller context and default-off for thinking make it extremely fast (thinking is a dead-end bitter lesson imo)
- the source is available; and organized specifically to make it easy for agents to write and test extensions. Just launch pi in the pi-mono directory, and it will turn your idea into an extension in no time.
And the fact this post has 300+ comments, just like countless LLM-generated articles we get here pretty much daily... I guess proves the point in a way?
This is an AI generated post likely created by going to chatgpt.com and typing in "write a blogpost hyping up [thing] as the next technological revolution", like most tech blog content seems to be now. None of those things ever existed, the AI made them up to fulfill the request.
To add to this, OpenClaw is incapable of doing anything meaningful. The context management is horrible, the bot constantly forgets basic instructions, and often misconfigures itself to the point of crashing.
edit: love the downvotes. I guess HN really is Reddit now. You can make any accusation without evidence and people are supposed to just believe it. If you call it out you get downvoted.
Besides, if there are enough red flags that make it indistinguishable from actual AI slop, then chances are it's not worth reading anyway and nothing of value was lost by a false positive.
>Over the past year, I’ve been actively using Claude Code for development. Many people believed AI could already assist with programming—seemingly replacing programmers—but I never felt it brought any revolutionary change to the way I work.
Funny, because just last month, HN was drowning in blog posts saying Claude Code is what enables them to step away from the desk, is definitely going to replace programmers, and lets people code "all through chatting on [their] phone" (being able to code from your phone while sitting on the bus seems to be the magic threshold that makes all the datacenters worth it).
(Not necessarily this specific post).
But we are also easier to impress: only we understand how difficult it is to one-shot code a working app.
AI psychosis sets in when AI captures enough of your perception to alter your reality. Programmers might be "smarter", but we give AI a bigger set of tools to capture our perception with.
And then there's the fact that we want to be fooled.
It's like we all fell under the spell of a terminal endlessly printing output as some kind of measurement of progress.
I just give the link to those posts to my AI to read it, if it's not worth a human writing it, it's not worth a human reading it.