Live data from Hacker News

OpenClaw is what Apple intelligence should have been

jakequist.com

421–430 of 440 posts

Re: OpenClaw is what Apple intelligence should have been

#421

Earlier quoted context omitted.

iOS 26 is proof that many product managers at Apple need to find another calling. The usability enshittification in that release is severe and embarrassing.

Or maybe, while being as good as they are at their jobs, they were forced to follow a broken vision with a non-negotiable release date. And simply chose to keep their jobs.

Which also suggests that they need a new calling

Re: OpenClaw is what Apple intelligence should have been

#422

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd reckon 9/10 instances of "distracted driving" deaths involve texting/looking at the phone. Maybe this could reduce those numbers by 90%.

Is it so hard to put the phone down for the minutes you are driving during? Is it that addicting? Why is it so imperative to use your phone while behind the wheel? Might it be better to use this time to break the addiction?

Idk. I don’t have a car. I still turn my phone off for 24-48 hours at a time because I enjoyed the ways things were before cell phones existed. I applaud people who pull over to take a phone call instead of using hands free talking. I am also curious if something like this might significantly reduce deaths due to inattentive driving or not.

Re: OpenClaw is what Apple intelligence should have been

#423

Just to add more credence to this thesis. Here’s the knowledge navigator. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=umJsITGzXd0 It’s a 1987 ad like video showing a professor interacting with what looks like the Dynabook as an essentially AI personal assistant. Apple had this vision a long time ago. I guess they just lost the path somewhere along the way.

holy crap, that's amazing. i struggle to get my head around the agent hype - but i guess this video helps a little. I have Agent FOMO, I guess.

I think it's a more about the cool factor than it is the value creation. I just don't get so many emails that I need something else to summarize them for me and plan my day.

Re: OpenClaw is what Apple intelligence should have been

#424
post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like I’m watching group psychosis where people are just following each other off a cliff. I think the promise of AI and the potential money involved override all self preservation instincts in some people. It would be fine if I could just ignore it, but they are infecting the entire industry.

Just like crypto this will also pass.

No one can really figure out what legitimate uses crypto has that can't be covered by normal payment systems.

Everyone can immediately see how useful AI is, and tons of people are using it. Pretending it will pass would be like saying the Internet was a fad in 1997.

Re: OpenClaw is what Apple intelligence should have been

#425

According to https://1password.com/blog/from-magic-to-malware-how-opencla... , The top skill is/was malware. It's obviously broken, so no, Apple Intelligence should not have been this.

I feel like I’m watching group psychosis where people are just following each other off a cliff. I think the promise of AI and the potential money involved override all self preservation instincts in some people. It would be fine if I could just ignore it, but they are infecting the entire industry.

It is possible that AI is both over-hyped and is (or is becoming) a useful tool. The two can co-exist. Based on my own experience it is useful and it is a huge time saver, especially for experienced engineers who can figure out when to use it and when to avoid it. Trying to ignore AI is as unwise as ignoring any other new tool. I imagine lots of people thought static analysis tools were never going to live up to the hype and didn't need be part of a standard build/debug flow.

Re: OpenClaw is what Apple intelligence should have been

#426
post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just as a reminder, 15 years ago was 2011. That was...like 4 macbooks ago. I still have keyboards from that era. I still have speakers and monitors from that era kicking around. We are definitely, definitely not the last generation to use keyboards.

Maybe not the last, but it feels like we're getting closer than I thought we would. I love keyboards, I love typing. I'm rocking an Ergodox daily with a wooden shell that I built myself over ten years ago, with layers of macros that make it nearly incomprehensible for another person to use. I've got keyboard storage. I used to have a daily habit of going to multiple typing competition websites, planting a flag at #1…

What’s your voice interface setup like? Local inference or cloud service?

Re: OpenClaw is what Apple intelligence should have been

#427
post #11

> I suspect ten years from now, people will look back at 2024-2025 as the moment Apple had a clear shot at owning the agent layer and chose not to take it Ten years from now, there will be no ‘agent layer’. This is like predicting Microsoft failed to capitalize on bulletin boards social media.

Ten years from now, the agent layer will be the interface the majority of people use a computer through. Operating systems will become more agentic and absorb the application layer while platforms like Claude Cowork will try to become the omniapp. They’ll meet in the middle and it will be like Microsoft trying to fight Netscape’s view of the web as the omniapp all over again. Apple will either capitalise on this by m…

I really do not think much will change. In 10 years, computers will still look kinda like today and will be used like today. AI will be used to make drafts, but nothing more. For everything else, they are way too unreliable.

People hate to change habits, and many here overestimate the willingness and ability of, especially, older people to change how they use technology.

Re: OpenClaw is what Apple intelligence should have been

#429
post #287

After having spent a few days with OpenClaw I have to say it’s about the worst software I’ve worked with ever. Everyone focused on the security flaws but the software itself is barely coherent. It’s like Moltbook wrote OpenClaw wrote Moltbook in some insidious wiggum loop from hell with no guard rails. The commit rate on the project reflects this.

I don't have a stake and I'm not disagreeing, but care to say why?

Here’s an example. Agents get exposed a set of tools one of which is file system tools. They are basically read and write or edit a file. The edit requires a replacement syntax. The write function truncates the file. There is no append. These are generally documented as how you work with adding memories. Memories are expected to be read, then rewritten, by the LLM. This is watched by a watchdog and vectorized for RAG. Note however that you have to read the memory in and write it out to append to it through the LLM. Why?

I rewrote almost all the agent functions and denied the existing ones because they are flawed deeply and don’t do what you need to do for any specific purpose. The plugin distribution model is a bit weird and inscrutable. Instead they seem to advocate for skills distribution. These though depend on being able to exec arbitrary bash code. Really?

Moltbook itself depends on agents execing curl commands for each operation. Why? Presumably because the plugin distribution model is inscrutable. I wrote plugins for all the Moltbook operations with convenience and structured memory logs etc. Agent adherence went through the roof.

Sessions don’t seem to reliably work or make sense. Heartbeats randomly stop firing. I turned off heartbeats because they were so flakey despite them being documented as the canonical model for regular interaction in favor of cron jobs that I decomposed my heartbeat task into prime number intervals based on relative frequencies but it seems to randomly inject some heartbeat info into the promoting occasionally if you run cron jobs a certain way. Despite being called cron they don’t actually fire reliably or on the prescribed schedule somehow. The web UI is a mess. Configuration management in the UI is baffling. The separation between the major MD files per agent seems to not matter at all and are inexplicably organized. Hotloading works except when it doesn’t. Logging doesn’t seem to log things that should clearly be logged.

I am down with vibe coding and produce copious amounts of such code myself. But there’s an art to producing code worth using let alone distributing. Entropy and scope need to be rigorously controlled and things need to ship in a functional state - actually functional not aspirationally functional. Decisions need to be considered and guidance given. None of this seems to have happened here. Once it gets to a certain level of chaos IMO it’s unmaintainable and OpenClaw is way past that point and rapidly getting beyond that. It’s probably also a supply chain party bag.

Re: OpenClaw is what Apple intelligence should have been

#430
The good part about OpenClaw: once you wire it up to connect to your important information it can do a lot of cool things. The bad part about OpenClaw: in order for it to do cool things you have to worry it up to your important information. Therein lies the challenge, to make it useful it needs to be connected, but being connected means that there is now a single point of failure or compromise. And unless you're extremely sophisticated, you are the mercy of the provider to guarantee that nothing bad happens. OpenClaw does not do this. In fact, I would say they do the very opposite of it, they declaim any responsibility or attempt to make it secure. Leaking API keys? Check. Allowing malicious plugins? Check. Being insecure by default? Check and check.

I'm no Apple fan, but they aren't in the business of foisting pleasantly packaged footguns on their customers.

Post reply on HN