Live data from Hacker News

OpenClaw is what Apple intelligence should have been

jakequist.com

431–440 of 440 posts

Re: OpenClaw is what Apple intelligence should have been

#431

Earlier quoted context omitted.

who's "afraid" of green bubbles? it's like saying a toyota corolla driver is afraid of the ford pinto

It's a real thing, you're either too old and/or not dating young people. Some do care a lot.

I'm confused, I thought we were talking about people who are installing and running openclaw. You're right, if this is now a thread about teenage dating habits, I'm out.

Re: OpenClaw is what Apple intelligence should have been

#432

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, the other party should file them. Charities can file the lists of donors etc.

What other party? They often don't even know you or if you can use something for tax or not. Pretty much everything can be used for tax deduction, it all just depends on circumstances. I know, many countries have a really broken privacy-situation, but I don't think it would be realistic that every shop is preventive filing every receipt and forces every customer to give them their tax-number so they can link them..

Wait, shops aren't filing their receipts in the US?

Re: OpenClaw is what Apple intelligence should have been

#433
post #361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They could be if models were trained properly, with more carefully delineated prompts.

I'd be super interested in more information on this! Do you mean abandoning unsupervised learning completely? Prompt Injection seems to me to be a fundamental problem in the sense that data and instructions are in the same stream and there's no clear/simple way to differentiate between the two at runtime.

I haven't thought about it deeply. But I guess it's about allowing the model to easily distinguish the prompt from the conversation. Models seem to get confused with escaping, which is fair enough, escaping is very confusing. It's true that for the transformer architecture the prompt and conversation are in the same stream. However you could do something like activate a special input neuron only for prompt input. Or have the prompt a fixed size (e.g. a fixed prefix size). And then do a bunch of adversarial training to punish the model when it confuses the prompt and conversation :)

Re: OpenClaw is what Apple intelligence should have been

#434

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Close to 10 deaths per day (>3000 per year) and 10% of all traffic fatalities in the US, and you want to claim it's not dangerous? https://www.nhtsa.gov/risky-driving/distracted-driving

I am absolutely saying that your claim that conversing is nearly as dangerous as looking at your phone, is total nonsense. And your link doesn't do anything to support your claim.

Have you tried looking for any information that challenges what you believe? It's relatively trivial to find many other sources supporting my claim and the claim you're responding to. The first paragraph in the wikipedia article... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_phones_and_driving_safe...

Re: OpenClaw is what Apple intelligence should have been

#435
The comparison is interesting but I think the real gap is architectural. Apple Intelligence is constrained by a privacy-first on-device model, which limits what it can do. OpenClaw takes the opposite approach — it's a self-hosted orchestration layer that connects to whatever providers you choose. The tradeoff is clear: Apple gives you simplicity and privacy guarantees, OpenClaw gives you flexibility and power at the cost of setup complexity. The question isn't which is better, it's which tradeoff matters more for your use case. For power users who want control, it's not even close.

Re: OpenClaw is what Apple intelligence should have been

#436
I am thinking if this may finally be the missing piece for wide spread NAS. Instead of storing everything on the cloud, a AI Server ( NAS + AI ) will have all your data and runs the model locally. Files dont even need to be tagged or sorted, AI could find it all.

And Apple is best positioned to sell this "Server".

Re: OpenClaw is what Apple intelligence should have been

#437

> This is exactly what Apple Intelligence should have been... They could have shipped an agentic AI that actually automated your computer instead of summarizing your notifications. Imagine if Siri could genuinely file your taxes, respond to emails, or manage your calendar by actually using your apps, not through some brittle API layer that breaks every update. And this is probably coming, a few years from now. Becaus…

I think the interesting tension here is between capability and trust. An agent that can truly “use your computer” is incredibly powerful, but it's also the first time the system has to act as you , not just for you. That shifts the problem from product design to permission, auditability, and undoability. Summarizing notifications is boring, but it’s also reversible. Filing taxes or sending emails isn’t. It feels less…

> An agent that can truly “use your computer” is incredibly powerful, but it's also the first time the system has to act as you, not just for you. That shifts the problem from product design to permission, auditability, and undoability.

Or rather, just reveals that the industry never bothered to properly implement delegation of authority in operating systems and applications, opting instead to first guilt-trip people for sharing their passwords, and later inventing solutions that make it near-impossible to just casually let someone do something for you.

Contrast with how things in real life function, whether at family level or at the workplace.

Re: OpenClaw is what Apple intelligence should have been

#438

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the interesting tension here is between capability and trust. An agent that can truly “use your computer” is incredibly powerful, but it's also the first time the system has to act as you , not just for you. That shifts the problem from product design to permission, auditability, and undoability. Summarizing notifications is boring, but it’s also reversible. Filing taxes or sending emails isn’t. It feels less…

> An agent that can truly “use your computer” is incredibly powerful, but it's also the first time the system has to act as you, not just for you. That shifts the problem from product design to permission, auditability, and undoability. Or rather, just reveals that the industry never bothered to properly implement delegation of authority in operating systems and applications, opting instead to first guilt-trip people…

Half-agree. As an industry, we do suffer from not-invented-here syndrome, so have a lot of mediocre attempts to implement it that don't learn enough lessons from historical human-human examples.

Delegation can also be scary with other humans. "Power of attorney" and all that. Or even just micro-management.

Re: OpenClaw is what Apple intelligence should have been

#439

> This is exactly what Apple Intelligence should have been... They could have shipped an agentic AI that actually automated your computer instead of summarizing your notifications. Imagine if Siri could genuinely file your taxes, respond to emails, or manage your calendar by actually using your apps, not through some brittle API layer that breaks every update. And this is probably coming, a few years from now. Becaus…

I don’t believe this was ever confirmed by Apple, but there was widespread speculation at the time[1] that the delay was due to the very prompt injection attacks OpenClaw users are now discovering. It would be genuinely catastrophic to ship an insecure system with this kind of data access, even with an ‘unsafe mode’. These kinds of risks can only be _consented to_ by technical people who correctly understand them, le…

[deleted]

Re: OpenClaw is what Apple intelligence should have been

#440

> This is exactly what Apple Intelligence should have been... They could have shipped an agentic AI that actually automated your computer instead of summarizing your notifications. Imagine if Siri could genuinely file your taxes, respond to emails, or manage your calendar by actually using your apps, not through some brittle API layer that breaks every update. And this is probably coming, a few years from now. Becaus…

I don’t believe this was ever confirmed by Apple, but there was widespread speculation at the time[1] that the delay was due to the very prompt injection attacks OpenClaw users are now discovering. It would be genuinely catastrophic to ship an insecure system with this kind of data access, even with an ‘unsafe mode’. These kinds of risks can only be _consented to_ by technical people who correctly understand them, le…

The prompt injection thing is especially nasty for agents because they process untrusted input (web pages, emails, documents) and can take real actions. With a chatbot, prompt injection makes it say something dumb. With an agent that acts as you, a malicious payload hidden in an email could make it forward your contacts, reply on your behalf, whatever. You can't fix this in the model alone — you need an enforcement layer outside the model that limits what it can actually do regardless of what it thinks it should do. I'd bet Apple is working on exactly this and it's why they're taking their time.
Post reply on HN