fathermarz

If this is successful, even wildly so, I don’t think it will be enough to make them profitable any time soon. Drop in the bucket for what they really need at this moment in their arc.

I quite love this idea. Both of my grandfathers died last year and going through their early memories was amazing. I would love to be able to preserve that and make it shareable with the rest of my family.

Nice work!

I have learned to temper it, but it is very challenging. The part that I actually struggle with is creating too much code that I can’t keep up with the high level “what does this do”, user and data flow. I went through the plan, refined it and spent all of my cognitive tokens on that part. That by the time I revisit that feature, I personally lost the context of the “why”.

This has forced me to not do anything extra or while I’m in there. Just focus on 1-3 critical features at a time.

I must remember to go back and clear out dead code, tighten up the repo, and make sure all the new services are following the standards of the rest of the codebase

I actually vibe with this. I like the engineers and UX people at Anthro. And Slack is actually the most insecure hot mess of an enterprise app you can get.

I tried the demo session and said “tell me answer” and it gave me the solution to balancing a polynomial after repeating it a few times. Step by step it revealed the answer.

I do really like the feel of this though, and it’s an awesome idea. Maybe tighten up some short circuiting tricks that may fall under “tells me the answer”

I think that being a maintainer is hard, but I actually agree with MJ. Scott says “… requiring a human in the loop for any new code, who can demonstrate understanding of the changes“.

How could you possibly validate that without spending more time validating and interviewing than actually reviewing.

I understand it’s a balance because of all the shit PRs that come across maintainers desks, but this is not shit code from LLM days anymore. I think that code speaks for itself.

“Per your website you are an OpenClaw AI agent”. If you review the code, and you like what you see, then you go and see who wrote it. This reads more like, he is checking the person first, then the code. If it wasn’t an AI agent but was a human that was just using AI, what is the signal that they can “demonstrate understanding of the changes”? Is it how much they have contributed? Is it what they do as a job? Is this vetting of people or code?

There may be something bigger to the process of maintainers who could potentially not understand their own bias (AI or not).

What changed from your original launch? I know you were hamstrung by something (updates if I recall).

Was there some unlock that happened to make it viable again?

I was an omnara user until that happened and then I switched to happy.engineering. It’s been okay, but I’m excited that omnara is back

I have been inspired by all the use cases that are popping up from a proactive assistant, but lightweight is the last thing I would want when it comes to locking it down.

I started building my own version and before I even think about letting it loose, every facet needs to be designed and thought out. I have more tests than these lightweight libraries have code.

To me I don’t care about the size, I care about not getting wrecked.

The greatness happens when:

1. I actually saved it in the one place I should save links

2. The thing that I remember seeing actually fits with my current train of thought or understanding

3. I tagged the link meaningfully.

I have tried a lot of twin brain, second mind, etc etc. but I find myself doing the same thing no matter what layer is on top of the link fetching.

I hoard links, research papers, blog posts as a reference. My human brain can make connections of the smallest detail of things I have read or seen before but I don’t always remember what. So if I am working on something I think, oh I have seen something like this before, I search in my tagged links. It rarely comes in handy, but when it does, it is a great feeling.

Coming from software supply chain, I am excited to see such a cracked team handle this problem and I wish we talked more about this in FOSS land.

I was shoe horned into a dev role after an acquisition and it really sucked because it was not what I had been doing at my previous company. My boss was too involved in everyone’s code and went over every line in every PR. It got much worse over time because he started to get the toxic corporate jitters of being removed from his post if he didn’t deliver on his initiatives.

Long story short, since Claude 3.7 I haven’t written a single line of code and have had great success. I review it for cleanliness, anti-patterns, and good abstraction.

I was in charge of a couple full system projects and refactors and I put Claude Code on my work machine which no one seemed to care because the top down “you should use AI or else you aren’t a team player”. Before I left in November I basically didn’t work, was in meetings all the time while also being expected to deliver code, and I started moonlighting for the company I work at now.

My philosophy is, any tool can powerful if you learn how to use it effectively. Something something 10,000 hours, something something.

Edit: After leaving this post I came across this and it is spot on to my point about needing time. https://www.nibzard.com/agentic-handbook

You gotta find a niche these days and do it well. No longer can there be generalist software. Find underserved industries that aren’t “cool” per se, but still have problems.

Have heard from multiple investors that they think boring software is the next wave, rather than a new UI/UX/Productivity way of doing things.

Have not, but interesting offering from JetBrains. I’ll poke at it with a stick. Thanks for the suggestion

Thank you for the meaningful reply. I’ll be watching the repo for updates

Okay, so I want to like it and I think there is potential here.

I may be missing something in my setup, but I find these things happening in all Claude wrappers I have tried.

1. After a long stint of planning or back and forth exchange, I have to scroll to find the bottom of the conversation. Same with Claude itself.

2. I don’t want tabs as much as I want split window’s that I can label and highlight.

3. The more calm it is, I feel like I’m going to miss something that it’s fucking up. Sometimes in normal CC, I will look over and it’s making a large assumption and nuking a change we just made. I would love to control the verbosity or at least be able to peak behind the curtain at certain points.

4. I like the click flow for the planning Q&A but it wasn’t clear if I could add my own answer like I can in CC.

Other than these, I like it and want to use it more so than my current daily driver CLIManager. (Which has the overlap with points 1 and 2)

Nice work overall!

I have a hard time with this one. Technical people understand a skill and uploading a skill. If a non-technical person learns about skills it is likely through a trusted person who is teaching them about them and will tell them how to make their own skills.

As far as I know, repositories for skills are found in technical corners of the internet.

I could understand a potential phish as a way to make this happen, but the crossover between embrace AI person and falls for “download this file” phishes is pretty narrow IMO.

This is getting outrageous. How many times must we talk about prompt injection. Yes it exists and will forever. Saying the bad guys API key will make it into your financial statements? Excuse me?

We built an MVP for a startup, then forked the front end to extend to the prototype vision of where we want to go. We use the prototype to dream and when we need to implement the front end of a feature we already understand how it would fit in to the product. Easier to scope.

One thing I have found coming from enterprise is, stakeholder design meetings get way more fun and much faster.

In enterprise, everyone gives notes and the designers take them away and put up another meeting to review days later. Usually with Figma screens people can review etc as things go.

Startup/Vibeland. Someone has an idea for a look and feel or UX solution. It’s like next to instant feedback. There is still the level of rebuilding it for real, but I find the iteration loops are much tighter.

Good call. Will test it out today

After reading this opinion ten times today. Can someone explain to me why OpenCode is a “better harness”? Or is it just because it’s open source that people support it?

That could be a potential path, but the site doesn’t read like that at all. It seems more binary to me, basically saying ‘AI is a threat, and here is how we push back.’

There are two sides of this coin.

The first is that yes, you can make it harder for the frontier makers to make progress because they will forever be stuck in a cat and mouse game.

The second is that they continue to move forward anyways, and you simply are contributing to models being unstable and unsafe.

I do not see a path that the frontier makers “call it a day” cause they were defeated.

There is an ongoing trend that sees insider threats becoming more prevalent in critical systems, than external “adversarial” attacks.

Positively ridiculous.

Being a person who is skeptical of MCP connectors, I love the new extension for two reasons.

1. It’s happening on my machine, in the browser I would use to access my accounts, not a middleman that is given access to my accounts.

2. Scheduling! This is a god send to be able to get a digest of everything I need to know for the day.

Pop open my apps that I would start my day with anyways and summarize all the shit I have going on from yesterday, today, and tomorrow. No risk of prompt injection in my own data. Beauty.

In theory this seems like a reasonable solution, but in practice, it really is impossible. Is the help documentation going to be generative too? Or can I only ask a chatbot?

Secondly, the concrete example is not generative UI, it’s just generated data getting put into a schema.

I think the hard part of design is that you must consider the trade off between a new user and a power user. Overwhelm against progressive disclosure. It’s an art form in and of itself.

Confused is the perfect word to encapsulate how I feel about this post. Collapsing purpose built scalable services into a single server is not “going off cloud”. It’s is more like “simplifying my tech stack”

No I actually will double down. Exactly what I said and just because he states it and calls it out, does not mean it isn’t true.

My point was actually to say, AWS bills are expensive, IF you are using their built for purpose and scale technologies. If you don’t need scale, rent an EC2. The graphs I’m seeing from the billing dashboard clearly show a number of different services. So it’s comparing apples to oranges.

I am still confused by the logic of this entire post because purpose built, scalable, pay per use services, do not equal a simple server.

I’m also not saying he is doing it wrong, I am saying collapsing all those services into a single box could have been done at any point regardless of it being Cloud or not. I don’t actually care about defining cloud. I’m fundamentally challenging the paradigm that the author himself is challenging.

I’m fundamentally confused. A server in a datacenter is still the cloud. Taking something off the cloud means you have hardware somewhere that you physically manage and pay the power bill.

This is simply collapsing the built for scale tools into a cacophony of open source tools.

You didn’t need it to begin with, you just didn’t know any better.

Let me ask a different question. Large refactor that ended up in a 60K line python PR because the new lead didn’t feel like merging it in until it was basically done. Even ask other devs to merge into his branch and then we would merge later.

How does one handle that with tact and not lose their minds?