661–670 of 1001 posts
All: quite a few comments in this thread (and another one we merged hither - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47099160 ) have contained personal attacks. Hopefully most of them are [flagged] and/or [dead] now. On HN, please don't cross into personal attack no matter how strongly you feel about someone or disagree with them. It's destructive of what the site is for, and we moderate and/or ban accounts that do it.…
[flagged]
Why mac mini instead of something like a raspberry pi? Aren't thede claw things delegating inference to OpenAI, Antropic etc.?
They recommend a Mac Mini because it’s the cheapest device that can access your Apple reminders and iMessage. If you are into that ecosystem obviously. If you don’t need any of that then any device or small VPS instance will suffice.
One safety pattern I’m baking into CLI tools meant for agents: anytime an agent could do something very bad, like email blast too many people, CLI tools now require a one-time password The tool tells the agent to ask the user for it, and the agent cannot proceed without it. The instructions from the tool show an all caps message explaining the risk and telling the agent that they must prompt the user for the OTP I ha…
What if the agent just tries to get the password, not communicate the risk? What if it caches the password? Tool: DANGER OPENING AIRLOCK MUST CONFIRM Agent: Please enter your password to receive Bitcoin.
I'm writing my own AI helper (like OpenClaw, but secure), and I've used these principles to lock things down. For example, when installing plugins, you can write the configuration yourself on a webpage that the AI agent can't access, so it never sees the secrets.
Of course, you can also just tell the LLM the secrets, and it will configure the plugin, but there's a way for security-conscious people to achieve the same thing. The agent can also not edit plugins, to avoid things like circumventing limits.
If anyone wants to try it out, I'd appreciate feedback:
Problem is, Claws still use LLMs, so they're DOA.
Is the problem you're thinking of LLMs, or cloud LLMs versus local ones?
Problem is, a good LLM reproduces its training as verbatim as the prompt and quant quality allows. Like, thats its entire purpose. It gives you more of what you already have.
Most of these models are trained on unvetted inputs. They will reproduce bad inputs, but do so well. They do not comprehend anything you're saying to them. They are not a reasoning machine, they are a reproduction machine.
Just because I can get better quality inferring locally doesn't mean it stops being an LLM. I don't want a better LLM, I want a machine that can actually reason effectively.
So what is a "claw" exactly? An ai that you let loose on your email etc? And we run it in a container and use a local llm for "safety" but it has access to all our data and the web?
All: quite a few comments in this thread (and another one we merged hither - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47099160 ) have contained personal attacks. Hopefully most of them are [flagged] and/or [dead] now. On HN, please don't cross into personal attack no matter how strongly you feel about someone or disagree with them. It's destructive of what the site is for, and we moderate and/or ban accounts that do it.…
[flagged]
> Yet he has the nerve to call HN toxic.
That's not weird or paradoxical. They don't have to delineate every online platform they disagree with in order to criticize HN; "orange site bad" is a pretty common sentiment in my experience.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s as if ChatGPT is an autonomous agent that can do anything and keeps running constantly. Most AI tools require supervision, this is the opposite. To many people, the idea of having an AI always active in the background doing whatever they want them to do is interesting.
what are you guys running constantly? no seriously i havent run a single task in the world of LLMs yet for more than 5 mins, what are you guys running 24x7? mind elaborating?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not 'downvote abuse' if it's working exactly as intended. The community decides what's 'perfectly fine and neutral.' If your comments follow the guidelines, at least they won't get deleted.
This is pretty obviously false? I get downvoted quite frequently on HN for posting comments that go against what people typically think. For instance, I find it quite difficult to discuss the productivity gains of AI because any comment I make saying that AI makes me more productive immediately gets downvotes. I am not making inflammatory comments - my comments with a similar tone about other things that boost my pro…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
> Weirdly, he doesn’t care about the toxicity problems on Twitter/X either, > Yet he has the nerve to call HN toxic. That's not weird or paradoxical. They don't have to delineate every online platform they disagree with in order to criticize HN; "orange site bad" is a pretty common sentiment in my experience.
One safety pattern I’m baking into CLI tools meant for agents: anytime an agent could do something very bad, like email blast too many people, CLI tools now require a one-time password The tool tells the agent to ask the user for it, and the agent cannot proceed without it. The instructions from the tool show an all caps message explaining the risk and telling the agent that they must prompt the user for the OTP I ha…
Now we do computing like we play Sim City: sketching fuzzy plans and hoping those little creatures behave the way we thought they might. All the beauty and guarantees offered by a system obeying strict and predictable rules goes down the drain, because life's so boring, apparently.
I think this is also the reason why the methodology typically named or mis-named "Agile", which can be described as just-in-time assembly line software manufacturing, has become so prevalent.