ljm

Hi $wife,

You're absolutely right. Let's divorce.

I've emailed every lawyer in the state.

--

Sent from my OpenClaw

Line endings between windows and Mac/Linux have been a problem basically forever. Windows uses carriage return and the others use newline or something like that.

Why do you personally feel the need to defend this person given his involvement in what the administration is doing?

I wouldn't start up a new company in the US knowing that they are going full tyrant like this.

I've used ACP extensively because agent-shell in emacs uses it, although the Anthropic license change means I'm not sure if I can continue to use Claude through it without getting banned. I kind of wish it integrated more tightly but also you can't really expect someone to have magit involved such that agent-shell (or the like) starts interacting with emacs directly. I'd love it if it did though.

I've started using OpenCode for some things in a big window because its side-by-side diff is great.

Some dude vibe codes OpenPaw and gives credit to his XL Bully called Threadripper that would never hurt another person, gets acquired by OpenAI for 7 figures total comp purely on clout, and both simonw and Karpathy are calling it the next best development in AI because it draws penguins and industrialises slop while Sam Altman talks about the negative impact of human life compared to AI data centres while pleasuring Jony Ive in a coffee shop.

I think your example goes out of the scope of an expensive platform like Apollo that exists to maintain a shadow profile based off of your online presence, though.

Maybe the thought occurs that one is only accessible on LinkedIn on purpose and just because a recruiter from 8 years ago has your number, it's not up for grabs?

Depends on what the context is, at least for me.

The cognitive load on a code review tends to be higher when its submitted by someone who hasn't been onboarded well enough and it doesn't matter if they used an AI or not. A lot of the mistakes are trivial or they don't align with status quo so the code review turns into a way of explaining how things should be.

This is in contrast to reviewing the code of someone who has built up their own context (most likely on the back of those previous reviews, by learning). The feedback is much more constructive and gets into other details, because you can trust the author to understand what you're getting at and they're not just gonna copy/paste your reply into a prompt and be like "make this make sense."

It's just offloading the burden to me because I have the knowledge in my head. I know at least one or two people who will end up being forever-juniors because of this and they can't be talked out of it because their colleague is the LLM now.

I think there'll be space for curated forges at some point but they're going to live on the margins like most self-hosted repos do.

You could solve it with tech by using ideas from radicle and tangled but the slop is ultimately a social problem, so you just have invite-only forges where the source of the invite is also held accountable (lobsters style).

If you want a high quality internet experience these days you have to step out of the mainstream.

You're not wrong but Google in particular paved the way for not doing support, or doing as little support as possible, and oftentimes things only get actioned if you generate enough clout on social media to attract a Google engineer's attention.

It's hard to avoid the massive dependencies, especially if you're starting small and moving fast, because something like Google Workspace or MS 360 or Slack is cost-competitive compared to spinning up your own internal stack of tooling. At least until it isn't, but hopefully your startup has grown enough by then that it can afford to address these concerns.

Well, one way to boost this command to fame is to open an issue on the repo and crash out.[0]

[0] https://github.com/microsoft/vscode/issues/32405

Getting your Google Workspace account nuked because an employee hooked their company Gemini account to OpenClaw would certainly be a novel business risk.

There's an entire cottage industry of linkedin scrapers that put a lot of effort into guessing your email address to enable cold outreach.

I'm ashamed to say I worked at one such place for several months.

Apollo is probably the most comprehensive source for this. It's creepy as fuck.

Exactly. I'm not saying this person should disclose their identity, but they are very conveniently using anonymity and passive voice to make themselves unaccountable to the 'social experiment' they conducted. And that we all know that if it went differently they'd put their name all over it.

In as many words I'm just calling this person a complete asshole and if I were to ever know this person offline I would be quite clear in explaining that.

I would never advocate for torches and pitchforks, I've been close to victims of that in the past.

It is, however, concerning that the owner of that bot could passively absolve themselves of any responsibility. The anonymity in that sense is irrelevant except that is used as a shield for failure.

I don't really see the validity in creating a conspiracy theory here. It's very crisis actor adjacent.

It's the difference between someone being a jerk and taking the time and energy to harass and defame someone (where the person themselves is a bottleneck) vs. running an unsupervised agent to carpet bomb the target.

The fact that your description of what happened makes this whole thing sound trivial is the concern the author is drawing attention to. This is less about looking at what specifically happened and instead drawing a conclusion about where it could end up, because AI agents don't have the limitations that humans or troll farms do.

The first customer is always the investor these days, so anything that threatens the investor's confidence is bad for business.

The simple fact that the owner of this bot wanted to remain anonymous and completely unaccountable for their harassment of the author, says everything about the validity of their 'social experiment' and the quality of their character. I'm sure that if the bot was better behaved they would be more than happy to reveal themselves to take credit for a remarkable achievement.

Something like OpenClaw is a WMD for people like this.

I'm building a new hardware drum machine that is powered by voltage based on fluctuations in the stock market, and I'm getting a clean triangle wave from the predictive markets.

Bring on the cryptocore.

There's overlap in that with brownfield or legacy code you are strongly opinionated on the status quo, and on the greenfield you are strongly opinionated with fewer constraints.

You have to work with conviction though. It's when you offload everything to the LLM that things start to drift from expectations, because you kept the expectations in your head and away from the prompt.

I don't see how "create an abstraction before attempting to solve the problem" will ever work as a decent prompt when you are not even steering it towards specifics.

If you gave this exact prompt to a senior engineer I would expect them to throw it back and ask wtf you actually want.

LLMs are not mind readers.

Nobody said how hyper the HT in HTML and HTTP had to be, so here we are.

Oh, TLS also. Encrypted connections over HTTP are trivial.

Arguably this has created far more freedom by making encrypted network traffic default and free. Convenience is also freedom when it comes to accessibility.

The author thinks they made the wrong move a few times during their career, and now they're replaying it in hindsight as if their present experience has a measure on previous performance. They are only able to write this post because they did some things badly in the past, but after a load of other steps they got to a point where they could write a post or a book and basically skip all of the hard bits they don't want to talk about.

You have to be careful to not be led into this, as if you can follow OP's self-help advice and skip the failures. You will, in fact, fail in a different way.

Is this cynical? Yes. But it's how self-help advice works.

I argue we shouldn't, because if everyone is like Carmack then no one is.

And only people on the older end of the spectrum have seen Carmack working in his element back in the day.

The things I want people to take from a guy like John Carmack, or Jon Blow, or Lukas Pope, or Ron Gilbert, or Tim Schafer, or Warren Spector, or Sam Lake, or David Cage god forbid...is pure curiosity and pushing the boundaries to make that real.

In every case there is a mix of a deep and unusual urge to make an idea happen with an affinity towards the technicality of it.

I bring Sam Lake into this because nobody has blended FMV with gameplay the way Remedy have and pushed the boundary on it.

But it also looks like these companies value and pay for the tech bro version of a snake oil consultant. And that you still have to have a lot of things going in your favour for your own brand of slop to elevate you to tech celebrity status. I don't see anybody who isn't already well-connected or financially comfortable pulling this off because nobody who has something to lose will slop their way to the top.

I don't think it's a good thing that the craft of software engineering is so easily devalued this way. We can quite demonstrably show that AI is not even close to replacing people in this respect.

Am I speaking out of envy or jealousy? Maybe. But I find it disappointing that we have yet more perverse incentives to hyper-accelerate delivery and externalise the consequences on to the users. It's a very unserious place to be.

Using popular open source repos as a launchpad for this kind of experiment is beyond the pale and is not a scientific method.

So you're suggesting that we should consider this to actually be more deliberate and someone wanted to market openclaw this way, and matplotlib was their target?

It's plausible but I don't buy it, because it gives the people running openclaw plausible deniability.

I'm glad the OP called it a hit piece, because that's what I called it. A lot of other people were calling it a 'takedown' which is a massive understatement of what happened to Scott here. An AI agent fucking singled him out and defamed him, then u-turned on it, then doubled down.

Until the person who owns this instance of openclaw shows their face and answers to it, you have to take the strongest interpretation without the benefit of the doubt, because this hit piece is now on the public record and it has a chance of Google indexing it and having its AI summary draw a conclusion that would constitute defamation.

Scott: I'm getting SSL warnings on your blog. Invalid certificate or some such.

Yeah I saw the page come back a bit later on, which is when I found out that the agent was building up a grudge.