vanillameow

I would agree if not for the fact that they just let a $200M contract slip through over it. You could argue it's "safety theater" in itself but that seems like a risky gambit especially with this administration. I definitely trust Anthropic more than OpenAI. In fact I'd go as far as to say it's probably pretty imperative that Anthropic stays a frontrunner in this race and doesn't leave the field exclusively to OAI (and maybe Google which is just as bad). That doesn't mean I'm exactly happy with Anthropic's comments like "mass surveillance bad but only for the US". But Anthropic at least regularly asks questions about the direction of AI development. I haven't seen the other frontier model companies do any such thing.

And in reality most of what does need a heartbeat loop can also easily be automated by just asking Claude to set up a cronjob. I think genuinely the most "novel" thing about something like OpenClaw is just that it "feels" more like a "real entity", like a partner rather than a chatbot, and for some reason that resonates with people. Whether that's by itself kind of a huge red flag or kind of a nothingburger, everyone has to decide for themselves.

I think we are all collectively coasting on a wave of lagging behind the current technology. Yes the new models have been exceptionally strong. But I think it's just because developers are exposed to the ecosystem more that we fear its impact more. In reality most white collar work is about one or two generations of AI models away at most from being easily replaced. Basically anything that doesn't involve human contact. Like I'm sorry but a lot of jobs in billing or middle management or form processing are not more difficult to replace than managing a whole ass several million LoC legacy application with 8 layers of architecture. As soon as AI can reliably navigate these quantities of context and memory, it's over for a lot of professions as we know them.

I keep myself sane by one, as others have said, realizing that developers will still very likely have a better understanding of how to use AI to create stable and maintainable software; There's more to software development than just coding.

Second, I am increasingly becoming aware that I'm more than my white-collar output, which I feel like many devs struggle with specifically since programming is also many devs personal hobby. It's a bit depressing when you have an idea for a side project to solve a personal problem and Opus can shit it out in 5 minutes. But I've also realized it frees up a lot of time. I can realize a lot of those small automations that were piling up on my backlog now. Ideas that I dreamed up but never had the time to personally implement. I can write more. I can read more small blogs by real humans with real opinions. I'm learning more about networking and selfhosting, topics I never had much time for because I spent my little free time on coding projects. And I will probably also get back into game development since that's where creativity and expression, as opposed to implementation, really shines, and that's something that I don't see AI taking away from us very soon.

As for the economical impact, well, lol lmao we'll have to cross that bridge when we get there. I just think that personally by the time I myself am affected by this problem, we have a global crisis anyway so it's not really like I can personally prepare for it.

Honestly, might try this in my next project. Just code the tests and have AI implement against it.

Is this in line with Anthropic ToS? They cracked down hard on Clawdbot and the like from what I gathered. I guess if you are still invoking CC it might be fine, but isn't that gonna lead to weird behavior from basically doubling up on harnesses?

Unfortunately it's currently very utopian for (I would assume) most devs to use something like this when API cost is so prohibitively expensive compared to e.g. Claude Code. I would love to use a lighter and better harness, but I wouldn't love to quintuple my monthly costs. For now the pricing advantage is just too big for me compared to the inconvenience of using CC.

I think I will try to push at least my more techy friends to a combination of Matrix and Teamspeak (because honestly the Matrix implementation of anything VC/Screenshare/Video is pure ass. A group call on Element right now starts a Jitsi conference. Can we be for real). On CachyOS with Wayland I additionally apparently need OBS with WebRTC for streaming because audio streaming support for Wayland seems to be some sort of circle of hell.

Matrix is kinda jank but I hope Discord enshittification will speed up client development a bit. I am just really fond of the concept of federated servers and self-owned chat history. Prevents hostage holding of chats in the future. For people who don't want to switch I will run a Discord Bridge for now but I do hope to get my main contacts off this software honestly.

For me anything that visibly looks like Discord is a non-starter because I want a product with an actual vision, not someone trying to slopcode an exact replacement of the Discord UI. Imagine if Discord just looked like Skype did in 2008. Yuck. The Matrix protocol, for all its faults, at least has some form of vision.

I mean I understand that you want your business to not fall behind right now, sure. But I don't understand people in management who are audibly _excited_ about the prospect of these developments even behind closed doors. I guess some of them imagine they are the next Steve Jobs only held back by their dev teams, but most of them are in for a rude awakening lol. And I guess a lot are just grifting. The amount of psychotic B2B SaaS rambling on Twitter is already unbearable as is.

> If writing the code is the easy part, why would I want someone else to write it?

Exactly my takeaway to current AI developments as well. I am also confused by corporate or management who seem to think they are immune to AI developments. If AI ever does get to the point where it can write flawless code, what exactly makes them think they will do any better in composing these tools than the developers who've been working with this technology for years? Their job security is hedged precisely IN THE FACT that we are limited by time and need managed teams of humans to create larger projects. If this limitation falls, I feel like their jobs would be the first on the chopping block, long before me as a developer. Competition from tech-savvy individuals would be massive overnight. Very weird horse to bet on unless you are part of a frontier AI company who do actually control the resources.

"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."

OpenClaw currently has 1.8k issues, 400k lines of code, had an RCE exploit discovered just a few days ago, it takes 5 seconds to get a response when I type "openclaw" in my CLI and most of the top skills are malware. I'm pretty sure training on that repository is the equivalent to eating a cyanide pill for a coding model.

I actually agree with your take that custom apps will take over a subset of established software for some users at some point, but I don't think models poisoning themselves with recklessly vibecoded bloatware is how we get there at all.

I do see the potential in something like OpenClaw, personally, but more as a kind of interface for a collection of small isolated automations that _could_ be loosely connected via some type of memory bank (whether that's a RAG or just text files or a database or whatever). Not all of these will require LLMs and certainly none of them will require vibecoding at all if you have infinite time; But the reality is I don't have infinite time, and if I have 300 small ideas and I can only implement my like 10 of them a week by myself, I'd personally rather automate 30 more than just not have them at all, you know?

But I am talking about shell scripts here, cronjobs, maybe small background services. And I would never dare publish these as public applications or products. Both because I feel no pride about having "made" these - because, you know, I haven't, the AI did - and because they just aren't public facing interfaces.

I think the main issue at the moment is that so many devs are pretending that these vibecoded projects are "products". They are not. They are tailor-made, non-recyclable throwaway software for one person: The creator. I just see no world at the moment where I have any plausible reason to use someone else's vibecoded software.

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.

Been looking at this over the weekend. It genuinely seems like it could have some really cool use cases. However I just don't trust an AI enough to run unprompted with root access to a machine 24/7, even if it's sandboxed. As soon as I willingly integrate data into it, the sandboxing doesn't really matter, especially when I ask it to decide for itself how to process that data (which seems to be what they want you to do with it? Ask it to define its own skills?)

Most of the cool stuff here, i.e. automatic news or calendar summaries or hue light controls or Discord bot integration or what not, you can also just "vibecode" in an afternoon using regular Claude code. If you actually review said code, you then have the peace of mind of knowing exactly what gets triggered when. I don't really feel comfortable enough to give that control away yet.

And I also feel like the people who _do_ feel comfortable giving this control away also strongly overlap with people who really don't have the understanding to make an informed decision on it...

Sometimes when I use a plugin like this I get reminded just how much of a productivity nerf it is to code without an autocomplete AI. Honestly in my opinion if you write a lot of boilerplate code this is almost more useful than something like Claude Code, because it turbocharges your own train of thought rather than making you review someone else's, which may not align with your vision.

This is a really good plugin. I'm a diehard JetBrains user, I tried switching to VSCode and its various forks many times because of AI but muscle memory from years of use is hard to override. And for a lot of languages JetBrains is just much better, especially out of the box. But they dropped the ball so hard on AI it's unbelievable. Claude Code pulled it back a bit because at least now the cutting edge tools aren't just VSCode plugins, but I was still missing a solid autocomplete tool. Glad this is here to fill that niche. Very likely will be switching my GitHub copilot subscription to this.

I also really appreciate publishing open weights and allowing a privacy mode for anonymous trial users, even if it's opt-in. Usually these things seem to be reserved for paying tiers these days...

If you really want to deliver polished products, you still have to manually review the code. When I tried actually "vibecoding" something, I got exhausted so fast by trying to keep up with the metric tons of code output by the AI. I think most developers agree that reviewing other people's code is more exhausting mentally than writing your own. So I doubt those who see coding as too mentally straining will take the time to fully review AI written code.

More likely that step is just skipped and replaced with thoughts and prayers.