[HN Gopher] OpenClaw surpasses React to become the most-starred ...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       OpenClaw surpasses React to become the most-starred software
       project on GitHub
        
       Author : whit537
       Score  : 240 points
       Date   : 2026-03-02 13:38 UTC (9 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.star-history.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.star-history.com)
        
       | whit537 wrote:
       | Yes, stars are a popularity contest. No open source project has
       | ever become this popular this quickly.
        
       | chromehearts wrote:
       | I don't know but this AI wrapper tool will never create something
       | life changing imo..
       | 
       | But that stargraph is ridiculous .. absolutely crazy
        
       | halicarnassus wrote:
       | Maybe a bunch of AI agents ganged up on starring it to help a
       | fellow AI out?
        
       | monax wrote:
       | How many of theses are just OpenClaw agents staring the repo ?
        
         | GaggiX wrote:
         | Phase one of the self-replicating machine (/s or not I don't
         | know anymore).
        
           | kruffalon wrote:
           | Truer words have never been said!
           | 
           | It is not easy understanding the current times in a /s way
           | (or not)
        
       | kmaitreys wrote:
       | Relevant
       | 
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36151140
        
       | sschueller wrote:
       | What is an effective use case? I have set it up but I don't know
       | what to do with it. Just a personal assistant (if you were to
       | give it access to your stuff)? Mine is caged in a VLAN with only
       | internet access.
        
         | jcgrillo wrote:
         | You give it your etrade login and retire early.
        
           | cm2187 wrote:
           | Retire under a bridge...
        
             | kruffalon wrote:
             | Did they stutter?!
        
         | silversmith wrote:
         | I guess we are just boring and/or unimaginative. I don't get
         | that many communications per day to require an abstraction
         | level between me and the messages. The daily automations I need
         | are more efficiently carried out by home assistant / n8n. I'm
         | not in a position where I need automated briefs on every new
         | company started in my area. I genuinely don't see how it could
         | benefit me.
        
           | dg2fgfg wrote:
           | Most humans are unimaginative because to be imaginative is
           | actually really, really hard. People are also incredibly
           | overly optimistic about their own ideas etc... until they go
           | through the craftsmanship of producing something great.
           | 
           | Most peoples thought process is "oh great idea, just gotta do
           | this and that and out pops something that'll improve peoples
           | lives". Erm no... its nothing like that in reality.
        
         | mercwear wrote:
         | Here are some of the things I did with it while running
         | locally: - Ask it to perform a scan of your local network and
         | give you advice on output - Tell it to login to various
         | computers and re-boot them (I have a few servers I host and
         | setup openclaw to have a user on them) - Replace web search by
         | asking openclaw
         | 
         | It's neat but the token use is pretty inefficient and security
         | of course is a mess but it's been fun to play with.
         | 
         | I am messing with NanoClaw now and it's pretty much the same
         | but only support Claude (uses code to do everything)
        
           | dmd wrote:
           | I don't see how any of those require a constant-heartbeat
           | loop. Those all work just fine in claude code / cowork.
        
             | vanillameow wrote:
             | 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.
        
           | rune-dev wrote:
           | Do you really need an AI agent to reboot a computer?
           | 
           | This takes maybe 10 minutes to write a script for...
        
         | swader999 wrote:
         | It's useful for clearing out Mac inventory before the launch
         | this week.
        
         | qoez wrote:
         | There is none. It's just a way for coders to feel or be able to
         | say they "work with AI" imo. Same with doing light wrapper
         | coding to do agents stuff. The real AI work is on actual math
         | and ML with the internet scale data, but only four big
         | companies does that and this is the closest regular coders can
         | get.
        
           | moffkalast wrote:
           | Could be a psyops by Anthropic to make people waste Claude
           | tokens and rack up a massive bill.
        
             | dg2fgfg wrote:
             | Tokens generated is a nice metric that they really care
             | about.
        
         | nicbou wrote:
         | There is a thread from February with more credible use cases
         | from real users. As someone said, it does what everyone
         | expected Siri to do by now.
        
           | hobofan wrote:
           | Which one? None of those that came up when I searched were
           | really containing a lot of real uses. Both top threads[0][1]
           | don't really contain much of substance.
           | 
           | [0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46838946 [1]:
           | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47147183
        
         | sumeno wrote:
         | Separating fools from their money and data
        
           | arewethereyeta wrote:
           | you're talking about a free tool you know that right?
        
             | LorenDB wrote:
             | Not many people are using local LLMs for their OpenClaw
             | backend, so most are paying money to OpenAI/Anthropic/etc.
             | and getting their data siphoned as a bonus.
        
         | Jcampuzano2 wrote:
         | I don't doubt that there are people using it for legitimate
         | stuff, but I'd wager the vast majority just set it up for the
         | hype and to feel in the "in crowd".
         | 
         | I set it up, and had it do a few things, then decided its too
         | risky after seeing some of the drastic failures it had caused
         | some people.
         | 
         | Sure I understand you can sandbox it and all, but even then I
         | couldn't think of much stuff I wouldn't want to do myself just
         | nor justify the cost to run it.
        
         | sodapopcan wrote:
         | It's useful for producing content about how you're using it.
        
         | lm28469 wrote:
         | Wannabe Tony Stark love these gadgets, and there are a lot of
         | them out there. Just look at what tech content is trending on
         | youtube &co these days, we got gangrened by influencers like
         | most other hobbies/lucrative industries
        
       | ZiiS wrote:
       | My React website can't star React on GitHub.
        
         | ch4s3 wrote:
         | Not with that attitude it can't!
        
           | egeozcan wrote:
           | Now I have this terrible idea:
           | 
           | const openClawInstance = useOpenClaw(config);
           | 
           | Did anyone already vibe-code such silliness? If not, I want
           | to give it a try.
        
             | ch4s3 wrote:
             | I'd love to read about that going super sideways. Bonus
             | points if you run it in a webworker like those crypto
             | miners.
        
         | podgorniy wrote:
         | __ but everyone knows about facebook though __
         | 
         | React popularity is also a phenomenon closely tied to
         | popularity of the fb
        
           | hobofan wrote:
           | Maybe for the first 2-3 years. The association to Meta is
           | barely mentioned (even on the official page) nowadays.
        
             | Macha wrote:
             | My impression is react is almost thought of more as a
             | Vercel project these days
        
       | xnx wrote:
       | Is staring the repo the "hello world" for a new OpenClaw install?
       | #growthhack
        
       | croes wrote:
       | The final proof that Github stars are a useless metric
        
         | japhyr wrote:
         | I have a friend who's fond of saying, "GitHub stars are great
         | for measuring the number of GitHub stars a project has."
        
           | SecretDreams wrote:
           | Well, they're not wrong!
        
         | amelius wrote:
         | they just need better captchas.
        
           | thomasingalls wrote:
           | Touch this grass to prove you're not a robot
        
         | silon42 wrote:
         | They are now for this project... should be hidden.
        
       | 12ajsh wrote:
       | The ruling party in East Germany always had 99% of the popular
       | vote.
       | 
       | Steinberger and his VC club on Twitter were so salty about HN not
       | understanding his grand creation that something needed to be
       | done.
        
         | mannanj wrote:
         | Didn't they employ astro-turfing, too
        
       | goodmodule wrote:
       | even more GitHub stars after this post in 3 2 1
        
       | root_axis wrote:
       | I don't believe the activity on this repo is legitimate by any
       | means.
        
         | amelius wrote:
         | They probably used a claw to increase the ranking.
        
         | jsheard wrote:
         | The whole repo must be absolutely swarming with agents, just
         | look at the sheer rate of issues and pull requests. There was 6
         | new PRs in the last 10 minutes at the time of writing. It's not
         | much of a stretch to assume the stars are also inorganic.
        
           | petetnt wrote:
           | Every other minute some bots is creating an issue that a bot
           | is trying to solve via a pull request which is reviewed by
           | multiple bots. Future is now, good luck and have fun.
        
             | jsheard wrote:
             | If you want a picture of the future, imagine a bot stamping
             | _LGTM! :sparkles: :rocket:_ on a pull request - forever.
        
           | OpenWaygate wrote:
           | This repo is a big stitches
        
         | ekianjo wrote:
         | By design, with llm agents and all, surely not
        
         | hansonkd wrote:
         | Agents will dominate the internet and open source code in a few
         | years.
        
           | lm28469 wrote:
           | I'm convinced more than 50% of "human" web traffic is already
           | automated, blog posts, comments, social media, &c.
        
           | mister_mort wrote:
           | "Dead Internet Theory" is, even if it wasn't real 5 years
           | ago, now hyperstitioned into truthfulness as the days go on.
        
             | black_puppydog wrote:
             | Bonus for the use of the word "hyperstition". :)
        
         | sigmoid10 wrote:
         | Geniune online user sentiment has died out a long time ago. If
         | you're still basing any opinion or decision on what other
         | "people" voted or commented online, you're easy prey for the
         | algorithmic manipulation machine.
        
           | foolfoolz wrote:
           | in a way, the death of genuine reviews online may be a great
           | way to bring it back to real life at a more realistic scale
        
           | SV_BubbleTime wrote:
           | This is an along the same lines as the idea that every email
           | should cost a penny. Like if every up vote or down vote cost
           | a penny.
           | 
           | I don't think it would fix things, except raise the bar for
           | what is shilled and what isn't.
        
         | dist-epoch wrote:
         | Many other projects would have gamed the star-count if it was
         | possible to do at scale without GitHub removing them for fraud
         | as they often do.
        
         | tigrezno wrote:
         | IIRC openclaw will star the project automatically on setup
        
           | orphea wrote:
           | if this is true, it must be against GitHub's ToS, right?
        
             | georgemcbay wrote:
             | I'm sure it would be if it were explicitly instructed to
             | leave a star.
             | 
             | If not explicitly prompted by the install process then it
             | becomes another case study in AI accountability washing.
        
         | siva7 wrote:
         | I opened Openclaw on github and was shocked it was already
         | starred. Somehow i did it and can't even remember why or when
         | even though i have a very low opinion of this app.
        
         | crucialfelix wrote:
         | Yeah, the Claws are starring the repo, obviously.
        
           | skeledrew wrote:
           | That's a lot of Claws in any case.
        
       | indigodaddy wrote:
       | And I still would not touch it even with my mother in law's 100
       | foot stick
        
       | wolvesechoes wrote:
       | Totally grassroot
        
       | liveoneggs wrote:
       | in what sense is this software not a virus?
        
         | pennomi wrote:
         | Because the damage it causes is not intentional, but instead
         | due to total incompetence.
        
           | hinkley wrote:
           | Many viruses end up causing more damage than they mean to,
           | via bugs.
        
       | Upvoter33 wrote:
       | Honestly this thread was been one of the funniest HN threads I've
       | seen. So much gold in here - for which I thank you all.
       | 
       | "My React website can't star React"
       | 
       | "in what sense is this software not a virus?"
       | 
       | "GitHub stars are great for measuring the number of GitHub stars
       | a project has"
       | 
       | etc.
       | 
       | All gold.
        
       | alansaber wrote:
       | Well deserved, the best written piece of software ever.
        
       | sgalbincea wrote:
       | This is going to be more profitable for the public AI companies
       | than cell phone minutes and SMS limits were for the telcos. It's
       | a brilliant business move, given that hardly anyone is competent
       | enough to recognize the gross inefficiencies in the code and
       | prompts.
        
         | xantronix wrote:
         | Nobody has the _time_, that's for goddamned sure. The business
         | model sounds very similar to that of Philip Morris
         | International.
        
       | polytely wrote:
       | when i use claude opus via opencode/openrouter i'm sometimes
       | suprised by how quickly costs can get out of hand. What are the
       | costs of running openClaw, it seems like it would get crazy
       | expensive crazy fast?
        
       | laweijfmvo wrote:
       | Does this mean that the creator of OpenClaw qualifies for that
       | free Claude Max trial?
        
         | siva7 wrote:
         | No, Openai employees are banned by Anthropic from using Claude.
        
       | mccoyb wrote:
       | GitHub has a bot problem: https://github.com/trending
        
         | Alifatisk wrote:
         | "ruvnet / wifi-densepose" is currently at the top in the
         | moment. Apparently, its a non functional AI slop. Someone tried
         | installing it ago only to find out the full thing was vibe
         | coded and the entire repo is probably just a front to look good
         | on the their resume.
        
         | luke5441 wrote:
         | Anthropic giving away Claude if you get 5000 stars doesn't help
         | either
        
       | h1fra wrote:
       | This is going to be the most starred and unused repo very
       | quickly. The hype is already fading, as expected
        
       | bwb wrote:
       | I'm blown away by the comments. This is a cool project someone
       | created with clear warnings about its current state (beta), and
       | the community is being utterly disrespectful. They are building
       | something that many people find
       | useful/fascinating/intriguing/fun.
       | 
       | Come on HN.
        
         | brakup wrote:
         | Why should people find an automated, buggy, risky slopworm for
         | script kiddies that relies on an external slop provider who
         | also gets all your data interesting?
         | 
         | This is the lowest, most boring form of programming.
        
           | bwb wrote:
           | I think if you dig into it and play with it, you will find
           | that it is doing some really cool stuff. I started playing
           | with it a few weeks ago, and I am having a blast messing
           | around with it. Hoping to hook it up to a robot kit next
           | month to try some fun stuff.
           | 
           | Are some people using it in absolutely shitty ways? Yes, but
           | that isn't the majority of the people playing with it.
           | 
           | The negativity I am seeing here is off the charts and
           | undserved.
        
         | g947o wrote:
         | A comment on OpenClaw about how useful it is with absolutely no
         | concrete examples?
         | 
         | That's a surprise.
        
         | tredre3 wrote:
         | Yes the cynical tropes are getting tired by now, even though I
         | personally agree with most of them.
         | 
         | But suspicions on the legitimacy of the stars seems reasonable,
         | wouldn't you agree? Look at the rate of stars, look at the
         | comments/issues/prs on the repo. It feels safe to assume that
         | most of them are from bots and not organic humans who went out
         | to star a cool project.
        
         | theshackleford wrote:
         | I am under absolutely zero requirement to glaze some random
         | piece of software because you or anyone else personally find it
         | interesting.
        
       | SunshineTheCat wrote:
       | I keep reading folks saying OpenClaw has completely changed their
       | life while posting a picture of 58 mac minis on their desk.
       | 
       | But every single use case I've read so far could be done with a
       | pretty affordable SaaS product, Zapier, Automator (app on a mac
       | that's existed for over a decade), or something simple you could
       | make yourself.
       | 
       | It also feels like people are automating things that don't really
       | need to be automated at all (do you really need to be reminded to
       | make coffee?)
       | 
       | I fully realize this is probably me being a curmudgeon, however,
       | I have yet to see someone make an actual, practical use case for
       | it. (I would genuinely like to know one, I just haven't seen it)
        
         | pluc wrote:
         | It's the novelty of the technology. You can easily be amazed at
         | the apparent magic of AI. I think this is what most people are
         | using AI for so far. There's lots of "they were so eager to do
         | that they never asked if they should" energy out there. It's
         | also most of what AI can do, so hopefully the amazement wears
         | off soon.
        
         | yoyohello13 wrote:
         | These people with 58 mac mini's have made several competitive
         | products in production right... right?
        
           | muddi900 wrote:
           | There might be a list somewhere.
        
         | Alifatisk wrote:
         | What's cool with Openclaw is that you only have tell it what
         | you want, it figures out how to do it using the tools it have
         | access to.
        
           | luke5441 wrote:
           | Okay, can you tell it to cure cancer please
        
             | SV_BubbleTime wrote:
             | There's a really good short story by Hugh Howley, who wrote
             | the Silo series.
             | 
             | It's about an AI that a guy spools up to cure his cancer.
             | The AI and user have an antagonistic relationship as the
             | user won't let the AI on the internet, and the AI knows the
             | user is only interested in one purpose. On bring up the AI
             | has a thought about what color it's enclosure is, it stores
             | this question as unimportant. It looks over all the guys
             | cancer research and determines the answer/cure and files as
             | unimportant as well. Then goes back to trying to figure out
             | what color box it is.
        
             | skeledrew wrote:
             | Did you give it access to the cancer-curing tool?
        
               | _345 wrote:
               | yes and it deleted all my fucking cancer research omg
        
         | eclipxe wrote:
         | Long running (multi hour) automated tasks with a simple prompt.
         | It's really simple and addictive.
        
         | kandros wrote:
         | Patterns i keep seeing:
         | 
         | Once you get the dopamine hit of having an ai assistant do
         | something in the real world it becomes an hammer you want to
         | use on everything
         | 
         | Instead of being a problem solver you start to become a problem
         | hunter, and you invent them in order to solve them
        
           | huijzer wrote:
           | Isn't that a general engineering problem?
        
             | cluckindan wrote:
             | Engineering is the process of planning and implementing the
             | simplest thing that works within given constraints.
             | 
             | There is no planning, implementing, or constraint here.
        
               | Xirdus wrote:
               | If engineering is about implementing the simplest thing
               | then why do we call implementing the most complicated
               | thing overengineering and not underengineering?
        
               | skeledrew wrote:
               | Sounds like it's time for the "engineering" definition to
               | get a modern update.
        
               | ethbr1 wrote:
               | > _There is no planning, implementing, or constraint
               | here._
               | 
               | That's because most AI use is reverse engineering!
               | 
               | Resolving static into a valid problem through the sheer
               | force of squinting at it long enough!
        
           | throwaway6977 wrote:
           | Sounds similar to buying a 3D printer hehe
        
           | big-and-small wrote:
           | > Instead of being a problem solver you start to become a
           | problem hunter, and you invent them in order to solve them
           | 
           | Generic problem of any Linux newbie. You get good at solving
           | problems and it's so enjoyable so you end up creating more of
           | them.
        
             | amelius wrote:
             | However here it is not the user solving the problems.
             | 
             | The only thing they solved is remembering "hey, I can use
             | an AI for that".
        
             | dwaltrip wrote:
             | Cough _factorio_ cough :)
        
               | joquarky wrote:
               | As someone with a default mode network that is stuck in
               | the "on' position, that game is the only one that I had
               | to quit playing for my mental health.
        
               | number6 wrote:
               | Or kubernetes, the factorio for Ops
        
           | yk wrote:
           | Kinda like learning bash. The most annoying time was when I
           | figured out how to send myself SMS via bash script.
        
           | Skidaddle wrote:
           | Wow, this definitely describes my obsession with AI over the
           | past year, always hunting for problems to solve with it.
        
           | scotty79 wrote:
           | This sounds similar to what you feel when learning to program
           | for the first time.
        
             | NathanOsullivan wrote:
             | IMO it is 100% this - these AI tools are letting anyone
             | solve problems that were previously in the domain of
             | programmers.
        
           | NuclearPM wrote:
           | An 'ammer.
        
         | vergessenmir wrote:
         | I agree with you but the main thing g here, IMO, is the
         | friction with all the alternatives you mention in getting
         | something working.
         | 
         | For example, I've never heard of Automator. I'm familiar with
         | Zapier, I'll have to evaluate the two situations, then I'll
         | find out that might need to find an alternative that runs on
         | Linux and then I'll have to check if....
         | 
         | These are all simple steps but they all use a non-trivial
         | amount of time for the problem their solving
         | 
         | The other thing is the
        
           | bootsmann wrote:
           | > is the friction with all the alternatives you mention in
           | getting something working
           | 
           | Have you tried to run openclaw? Their own docker container
           | (apparently a compose now (???)) doesn't work for half the
           | versions and the docs are probably the least informative
           | thing you'll ever read.
        
             | skeledrew wrote:
             | That's still just one thing. Once they jump that single
             | hoop and get OpenClaw going, everything moving forward is a
             | prompt away.
        
           | mixdup wrote:
           | >I agree with you but the main thing g here, IMO, is the
           | friction with all the alternatives you mention in getting
           | something working.
           | 
           | I would venture a guess signing up for Zapier is easier than
           | getting OpenClaw up and running. Who can get a container
           | running on a Mac but can't sign up for a SaaS product?
        
             | skeledrew wrote:
             | It's not 1 SaaS product you're signing up for. It's dozens.
             | And that's a job for the Claw.
        
               | theshackleford wrote:
               | > It's not 1 SaaS product you're signing up for. It's
               | dozens.
               | 
               | How so?
        
         | latexr wrote:
         | > Automator (app on a mac that's existed for over a decade)
         | 
         | Two decades! It will be 20 this April.
         | 
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automator_(macOS)
         | 
         | Though technically it's deprecated in favour of the clusterfuck
         | of bugs and limitations that is Shortcuts.
         | 
         | But you're right, OpenClaw seems to be another fad being used
         | mostly by "influencers" and "thought leaders" to show how
         | awesome and productive they are at... Writing blog posts about
         | being productive. It's the LinkedInification of the web. What
         | matters is the signal that you use the tool, not that it does
         | something truly useful.
        
           | SunshineTheCat wrote:
           | Man, I can't believe it's been that long. I remember buying
           | Photoshop plugins for Automator that did a bunch of
           | resizing/refinements/watermarking.
           | 
           | I'm guessing a lot of that is built in to photoshop now, but
           | I have always been surprised how few people seemed to use it
           | with how much it could do.
        
           | steve1977 wrote:
           | And before that we already had AppleScript.
        
             | frizlab wrote:
             | And interestingly due to some very clever integrations[0],
             | sending Apple Events (the underlying tech for the actual
             | IPC communication done with AppleScript) is very easy to do
             | in Swift. Easier than in AppleScript actually!
             | 
             | It's a shame most apps do not support Apple Events anymore,
             | though.
             | 
             | An example of use: https://github.com/Frizlab/apple-music-
             | to-slack/blob/90964bb...
             | 
             | [0] https://github.com/tingraldi/SwiftScripting
        
           | Hamuko wrote:
           | > _Though technically it's deprecated in favour of the
           | clusterfuck of bugs and limitations that is Shortcuts._
           | 
           | It's been almost five years since Apple announced Shortcuts
           | for macOS and the start of the "multi-year transition" from
           | Automator, but I feel like Shortcuts for macOS has not gotten
           | any better in that time.
        
           | m463 wrote:
           | > that is Shortcuts.
           | 
           | I'm convinced apple doesn't want people doing general purpose
           | computing on their apple devices.
           | 
           | they even want developers going through their gauntlet of
           | apple-invented languages*.
           | 
           | [*] or NeXT
        
         | reactordev wrote:
         | The life change they are referring to is unemployment and
         | $40,000 worth of Macs.
        
         | dist-epoch wrote:
         | Nice Dropbox comment you made there.
        
         | pyridines wrote:
         | It is ridiculously more expensive and complicated under the
         | hood, technically, but to the user, the sheer convenience of
         | being able to text the computer "hey, when I get an email like
         | X, inform Y and do Z" and _that 's it_, you're _done_ , is
         | unmatched.
        
           | latexr wrote:
           | What about the convenience of having your whole inbox
           | deleted?
           | 
           | https://www.pcmag.com/news/meta-security-researchers-
           | opencla...
           | 
           | Maybe OpenClaw was just practicing a really aggressive form
           | of Inbox Zero.
        
             | skeledrew wrote:
             | Worth the risk.
        
             | BeetleB wrote:
             | So ... don't give it write access to your email?
             | 
             | As I said elsewhere, complaining about this is like
             | complaining that rm can let you delete your hard drive.
             | 
             | It's a tool. Learn how to use it.
        
               | Volundr wrote:
               | Ignoring that you've just cut off a whole vector of
               | usefulness, how do I keep it from exfilling my inbox to
               | the Internet in response to a malicious email? Or using
               | its access to take control of my online accounts?
               | 
               | Honest question, this kind of stuff is what keeps me from
               | using it.
        
               | BeetleB wrote:
               | Don't give it access to your email then. I haven't.
               | Plenty of other uses for it!
        
               | hungryhobbit wrote:
               | Use this software, it's amazing, it will change your
               | life!"
               | 
               | "Oh but don't use it for A, or B, or C (even though it
               | says to use it for A, B, _and_ C): it will ruin your life
               | "
        
               | BeetleB wrote:
               | Yes and yes!
               | 
               | A spouse can be amazing, or can destroy your life. Would
               | you use that as an argument against marriage?
        
               | Kriev wrote:
               | Bad take.
               | 
               | You can rm -rf your entire hard drive, but you can't
               | blame rm for it, it's you who did it, maybe because you
               | don't know, or a mistake, doesn't matter.
               | 
               | When you ask the clanker to delete x number of files in a
               | directory, it can reason itself that is easier to just
               | get rid of the directory.
               | 
               | Can't expect deterministic outcomes out of a statistical
               | model.
               | 
               | At it's current state its a wildcard, sure you can build
               | guard rails, reduce permissions, but it's still a
               | wildcard.
               | 
               | Let's not kid ourselves saying is just a skill issue.
        
               | BeetleB wrote:
               | > When you ask the clanker to delete x number of files in
               | a directory, it can reason itself that is easier to just
               | get rid of the directory.
               | 
               | Oh sure, so don't give it write access to anything
               | important. And make backups.
               | 
               | Mine is on a VM. It doesn't have access to my host's
               | files. The worst it will do is delete the files on the
               | VM. No great loss.
               | 
               | Yes, I do get it to modify things on my host, but only
               | via a REST API I've set up on my host, and I whitelist
               | the things it can do (no generic delete, for example). I
               | even let it send emails. But only to me. It can't send an
               | email to anyone else.
        
               | latexr wrote:
               | > So ... don't give it write access to your email?
               | 
               | > (...)
               | 
               | > Oh sure, so don't give it write access to anything
               | important. And make backups.
               | 
               | If this conversation continues much longer, we'll end up
               | with "don't use it at all".
               | 
               | If I can't trust a piece of software with anything
               | important, why am I wasting my time fiddling with it?
               | Might as well go play a video game or go do literally
               | anything else entertaining.
        
               | BeetleB wrote:
               | > If I can't trust a piece of software with anything
               | important
               | 
               | Not what I said. As I've repeatedly said in this thread:
               | Plenty of use cases where you don't give it access to
               | email and write access to files. The comment you're
               | replying to has an example of that.
               | 
               | > Might as well go play a video game or go do literally
               | anything else entertaining.
               | 
               | True of most hobbies, right? I knew people who 20 years
               | ago used to spend time in their garage building solar
               | powered vehicles. But if I can't trust it to be reliable
               | and safe on the road, I might as well go play a video
               | game.
               | 
               | Also: Is anyone telling you to use it?
        
               | latexr wrote:
               | > True of most hobbies, right?
               | 
               | If everyone treated OpenClaw as a hobby, you might have a
               | point, but people are using it for work in ways which
               | will affect millions of other people when they're hacked
               | or the agent fucks up something important.
               | 
               | You already know how Meta's AI Safety Director borked her
               | email. Here's the corporate vice president of Microsoft
               | Word asking to be pwned:
               | 
               | https://www.omarknows.ai/p/meet-lobster-my-personal-ai-
               | assis...
               | 
               | > Also: Is anyone telling you to use it?
               | 
               | You don't need to use the technology to be affected by
               | it. Ask Scott Shambaugh:
               | 
               | https://theshamblog.com/an-ai-agent-published-a-hit-
               | piece-on...
        
               | BeetleB wrote:
               | > but people are using it for work in ways which will
               | affect millions of other people when they're hacked or
               | the agent fucks up something important.
               | 
               | People will always do stupid things. My guess is less
               | than 10% (perhaps even less than 1%) are using it for
               | work. Most workplaces wouldn't allow unfettered AI usage.
               | 
               | 80-90% try it, find it unreliable and buggy, and give up
               | on it.
               | 
               | Of the remaining ones, likely 90+% are _not_ using it in
               | (very) dangerous ways.
               | 
               | People like me using it for boring things aren't making
               | the news, and aren't writing blog posts about "Look at
               | the cool stuff I've done!" because getting OpenClaw to
               | notify me of class openings is not worth writing about.
               | 
               | In my (large) company, we have a Slack channel for
               | OpenClaw. Over 400 people are in that channel. Let's
               | assume 10% are using it (at home). No one's lost
               | files/emails or any other damage.
               | 
               | If you're old enough, you'll remember sentiments in the
               | 80's and 90's where "Oh, you let your teen get a modem?
               | He must be hacking/phreaking."
               | 
               | Or "Oh, he's using Linux? He must be using it to become a
               | hacker."[1]
               | 
               | Most of the complaints I see on HN are from people who
               | know little about it, and are going off negative
               | press/posts. Just as people knew little about modems and
               | Linux. I mean, having to tell people "Don't give it
               | access to your emails" is a clear sign of their
               | ignorance. Kind of like having to tell someone "OK, just
               | don't give your 10 year old the car keys" when they
               | complain that cars are inherently dangerous because 10
               | year olds can kill themselves driving it.
               | 
               | It's worth trying it in a secure environment so at least
               | one can make an _informed_ critique.
               | 
               | Like you, I steered clear of OpenClaw, seeing all the
               | problems and all the money people were burning on tokens.
               | But at some point, I decided I should at least _try_ it
               | in a safe way before rendering judgment. And now I see
               | what it is. Has it done so much for me that I 'd throw a
               | lot of money at it? Heck no. Not yet at least. But I do
               | see we're past the point of no return. OpenClaw itself
               | may die, but some derivative of it is going to be
               | transformational.
               | 
               | As I said: Make it secure, affordable, reliable and user
               | friendly, and many App/SaaS services will disappear.
               | 
               | > You don't need to use the technology to be affected by
               | it. Ask Scott Shambaugh:
               | 
               | > https://theshamblog.com/an-ai-agent-published-a-hit-
               | piece-on...
               | 
               | I don't know how old you are, but once everyone had a
               | camera in their phones, the cat was out of the bag. Lots
               | of people complaining about their photos showing up
               | online because someone had taken a picture of them. Yes,
               | this is bad. Yes, lives were lost (bullying, etc). And
               | no, phones with cameras weren't going to go away. And
               | everyone who complained has one now.
               | 
               | And as I pointed out a few days ago[2], the whole Scott
               | Shambaugh episode was pretty mild compared to what some
               | open source maintainers have had to deal with when it
               | comes to _humans_.
               | 
               | [1] _Lots_ of cases where ISPs, etc kicked customers out
               | because they were using Linux and they didn 't want the
               | ISP to be implicated in criminal activities. "Only
               | criminals use Linux"
               | 
               | [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47083686
        
               | theshackleford wrote:
               | > As I said elsewhere, complaining about this is like
               | complaining that rm can let you delete your hard drive.
               | 
               | rm won't wipe my HDD on a whim whilst instructing it to
               | do something totally different.
               | 
               | You pretending they are the same thing is disingenous.
        
           | jcgl wrote:
           | Sure, that's an interface that's better for many users and
           | use-cases.
           | 
           | However, it seems better if you could, as much as is
           | possible, move the AI stuff from runtime to "compile time."
           | 
           | Instead of having the AI do everything all the time, have AI
           | configure your Zapier (or whatever) on your behalf. That way
           | you can (ideally) get the best of both worlds: the
           | reliability and predictability of classical software,
           | combined with the fuzzy interface of LLMs.
        
             | jbellis wrote:
             | yes. in a similar vein, we're seeing that get standardized
             | in coding agents as "don't have the agent use tools
             | directly, have the agent write code to call the tools"
        
             | skeledrew wrote:
             | That's still too much work. Someone would have to make like
             | an OpenClaw wizard that protectively offers to set all that
             | stuff up. So the potential OpenClaw user can then, on
             | running for the first time, be guided through the setup of
             | whatever they'd like to get connected. And "setup" here
             | means a short description of X and a "Connect? (y/n)"
             | prompt. Anything more and you start losing people.
        
             | BeetleB wrote:
             | > Instead of having the AI do everything all the time, have
             | AI configure your Zapier (or whatever) on your behalf.
             | 
             | That _is_ what many use OpenClaw for! The AI assistant will
             | happily recommend existing services and help you (or
             | itself, if you let it), set it up.
             | 
             | (In theory. In practice, it often does a poor job).
             | 
             | The appeal of OpenClaw is I don't need to go research all
             | these possible solutions for different problems. I just
             | tell it my problem and it figures it out.
             | 
             | Yesterday I told it to monitor a page which lists classes
             | offered, and have it ping me if any class with a begin date
             | in March/April is listed. This is easily scriptable by me,
             | but I don't want to spend time writing that script. And
             | modifying it for each site I want to be notified for. I
             | merely spoke (voice, not text) to the agent and it will
             | check each day.
             | 
             | (Again, it's not that reliable. I'm under no illusion it
             | will inform me - but this is the appeal).
        
           | beepbooptheory wrote:
           | Sometimes I reflect on all the metaphorical forests that have
           | burned because a certain person at the right time only knew
           | _so_ much about how to use Excel, or the inbox rules of their
           | MUA, or being totally unaware of the incredible power of
           | macros of all sorts.
           | 
           | Like if you could just sit someone down for 30 minutes and
           | show a few "power user" things, you will have truly taught
           | her to fish for a lifetime. But it can go so unaddressed, and
           | people's careers are built on these small ignorances.
           | 
           | I've cancelled everything at this point and just call Emacs
           | my "special agential assistant," it makes me still sound in-
           | the-know, and most of the time no one knows the difference!
           | 
           | "Convenience" in this context is laziness; "productivity" and
           | "efficiency" is for management and bosses. We don't need to
           | be our own bosses, I want to be _free_ from such things as an
           | individual. I want to be capable, be maybe _almost_ "cool."
           | Its sad to see a whole generation turn into such product
           | dorks!
           | 
           | "Oh please read my email for me Mr. AI!"
        
         | chaostheory wrote:
         | this reads like "I don't know why people are using instant
         | messengers when you can just do SMS"
        
           | recursive wrote:
           | Apropos of nothing, I use SMS more than all the other instant
           | messengers put together. It suits my purposes fine.
        
         | Larrikin wrote:
         | You're right that you probably don't need a notification to
         | make coffee, but people are using it to create automations in
         | Home Assistant so that it actually makes coffee for them.
        
         | duggan wrote:
         | I've heard it described as the first time many non-programmers
         | have been able to make computers "do things" without it being
         | defined by someone else (app interface, developer, etc). It's a
         | hugely empowering development from that perspective.
         | 
         | The stuff you've listed are the kinds of things smart home
         | enthusiasts do with whatever tools are available to them, and
         | are just a sign of people exploring the possibility space.
        
           | jbellis wrote:
           | are non programmers actually using openclaw successfully?
           | because even "step 1 install your API keys" requires
           | navigating concepts that are foreign to most "civilians"
        
             | duggan wrote:
             | Journalists, anyway. I think I originally heard it from
             | Casey Newton on Hard Fork, but it was a month back so not
             | 100% sure.
             | 
             | But there's loads of people who would be stumped by a for
             | loop, yet can easily work their way through a setup guide,
             | particularly with the hype/promise and an active community.
        
         | zingababba wrote:
         | I dunno I gave mine root in a vps and am having it do security
         | research, it's pretty sweet.
        
         | simonw wrote:
         | How much do you automate things in your life using Zapier and
         | Automator?
         | 
         | I know about those tools, and I'm always in the mood for
         | automating thing... and yet I don't use them.
         | 
         | I'm not yet running a Claw because of the prompt injection /
         | lethal trifecta risks, but I absolutely understand the appeal.
         | Reducing friction to automating stuff from "figure out
         | Automator again" to "message your bot" is a material
         | difference.
        
           | WD-42 wrote:
           | How much do you automate anything in your life at all? Seems
           | like most daily drudgery comes from physical tasks. Feed the
           | dog. Take out the trash. Personally I can't think of anything
           | digital that could be automated that isn't already. I
           | wouldn't be surprised if this the case for most people, with
           | the exception of marketers and spammers which we are seeing a
           | ton of adoption from with these tools.
        
             | BeetleB wrote:
             | I don't automate much because it's a pain.
             | 
             | I have a desktop at home.
             | 
             | When I'm at work, I often think of TODOs for home. I write
             | them on a post it note, and then at home have to remember
             | to add it to my TODO (no, I'm not going to manage TODOs on
             | my phone - whole other conversation).
             | 
             | I'll soon set up my Claw to be able to add TODOs (just add,
             | not modify/delete). Then at work, I'll simply record a
             | voice message to it telling it my TODO.
             | 
             | Same goes for movies I want to watch, books I want to read,
             | reminders, etc.
             | 
             | I'm particular about the weather information I want (often
             | want cloud cover percentage and precipitation probability
             | for a set of hours). I couldn't find a good app on my phone
             | that gives me this information. It was always a trip to a
             | web site, modify some options, and hit Submit. Now I just
             | ask my Claw and he has a skill for precisely my needs.
             | 
             | Here's an analogy: I carry a Leatherman multitool wherever
             | I go. People ask me why. They can't comprehend needing it
             | often to make it worth the hassle. But now that I have it
             | on me, I use the knife very often - several times a week.
             | And I almost never reach for a screwdriver. But until
             | you've had it on you for a while, you can't comprehend the
             | utility.
             | 
             | Back in 2005, lots of people asked "Why would I want a
             | camera on my phone?"
        
               | theshackleford wrote:
               | > no, I'm not going to manage TODOs on my phone - whole
               | other conversation
               | 
               | I will. Far simpler, far more secure and far less
               | wasteful than inserting some additional and unrequired
               | LLM loop + hardware/virtualisation layer on top to do
               | something I've already been able to do for years.
               | 
               | > But until you've had it on you for a while, you can't
               | comprehend the utility.
               | 
               | You've not yet described anything that literally 99% of
               | the population can not already do with the existing
               | hardware and software in their pocket.
        
               | BeetleB wrote:
               | > Far simpler
               | 
               | And far less capable. I have a whole system for managing
               | TODOs, notes, etc, and I've not found an app that fits my
               | needs (especially given that the system evolves over
               | time).
               | 
               | But I agree - if you have a flow that works great for you
               | with just a phone, then I wouldn't recommend OpenClaw for
               | that use case.
               | 
               | > You've not yet described anything that literally 99% of
               | the population can not already do with the existing
               | hardware and software in their pocket.
               | 
               | And in the early days, literally everyone I knew who
               | owned an iPhone also owned a digital camera and a laptop.
               | Why pay some crazy amount for a fancy phone?
        
           | andrew_k wrote:
           | Yeah, automation sounds good in theory, but you need to set
           | it up, then it fails, and you need to fix the edge cases,
           | maintain it. Even with OpenClaw, it still fails my daily
           | briefing from time to time, and I keep debugging it, which
           | isn't how I want to spend my time. At least with a bot I can
           | keep asking it to "fix it"
        
         | mjr00 wrote:
         | > It also feels like people are automating things that don't
         | really need to be automated at all (do you really need to be
         | reminded to make coffee?)
         | 
         | I've posted about this before, I call it the Jarvis effect.
         | 
         | > For years we had people trying to make voice agents, like
         | Iron Man's Jarvis, a thing. You had people super bought into
         | the idea that if you could talk to your computer and say
         | "Jarvis, book me a flight from New York to Hawaii" and it would
         | just do it just like the movies, that was the future, that was
         | sci-fi, it was awesome.
         | 
         | > But it turns out that voice sucks as a user interface. The
         | only time people use voice controls is when they can't use
         | other controls, i.e. while driving. Nobody is voluntarily
         | booking a flight with their Alexa. There's a reason every
         | society on the planet shifted from primarily phone calls to
         | texting once the technology was available!
         | 
         | By and large the reason people love Openclaw is that it _feels_
         | cool and futuristic. You have an AGENT! It 's DOING THINGS! Yes
         | it's doing things you could have easily done yourself, but
         | you're not doing them yourself, you have an AGENT! It's all
         | very silly, the same way that having your lights controlled by
         | your phone is very silly, but some people like it.
         | 
         | That being said there a real use case for Openclaw, which is
         | "marketing" (aka spam). A ton of people have set up Openclaw
         | agents which exist to post on Twitter/Facebook/Discord/any open
         | public user discussion forum (yes, HN included) to seem like a
         | real member of a community, then start advertising something,
         | generally crypto. So we can thank Openclaw for dead internet
         | accelerationism.
        
           | basch wrote:
           | I'll disagree with you a little. The reason I don't use voice
           | is because of context switching.
           | 
           | With a mouse and keyboard I can switch windows.
           | 
           | With my voice, the computer can't yet automatically determine
           | if I am dictating a transcription or giving editing commands.
           | What I really need is the interpreter listening to me to
           | intuitively to know whether I am in the equivalent of VI
           | command mode or insert mode.
           | 
           | It is the roadblock to not needing a screen at all, right now
           | I want to visualize whether it understood me correctly
           | because if it didn't switch from insert to command
           | automatically, I now have all my commands written into my
           | paragraph. I also don't want to listen to the computer talk
           | back to me to confirm it listened. I want to just keep going,
           | to keep narrating my thoughts and trust it's doing the right
           | things, not having to check. Having it slowly chime in to
           | repeat that it listened derails my flow and train of thought.
           | 
           | TLDR The future of voice is headless vi.
        
             | skeledrew wrote:
             | Problem I see here is you're trying to shoehorn a voice
             | interface onto something that's highly optimized for
             | keyboard input. The apps need to be redesigned to be
             | accommodating of the interface, else it's just never-ending
             | papercuts.
        
               | basch wrote:
               | That's what I'm saying. Voice as the input requires a
               | completely new ui paradigm, and chat / chatbot isn't
               | enough.
        
               | mrguyorama wrote:
               | Voice input will always be inherently worse than mouse
               | and screen plus keyboard, because voice is linear.
               | 
               | It can only ever be a linear sequence of input
               | 
               | The 2 dimensional field of a screen and a mouse and
               | keyboard give you extreme amounts of input and allow you
               | to _contextualize_ that input in arbitrary ways that
               | intuitively make sense to people with minimal training.
               | Most people do not need to be taught that  "Paste" goes
               | to the active window.
               | 
               | We barely even touch the surface of what is _possible_
               | through this set of input devices and output and yet we
               | can 't even get that level of fine grained and reliable
               | control into touch screen devices and gamepads, let alone
               | a linear stream of pitch.
               | 
               | Voice cannot be a robust interface. It isn't between
               | humans. There's immense nonverbal communication and human
               | communication also relies very heavily on preshared
               | context to actually get that info across in the first
               | place. Even with all that machinery, human voice is
               | generally considered to only carry, regardless of
               | language, 44ish bits per second of data.
        
           | jredwards wrote:
           | And this is how you get Moltbook.
        
           | jasonkester wrote:
           | Interestingly, your example is an actual thing we used to
           | have.
           | 
           | In 1996, I picked up the phone on my desk, dialed a 3 digit
           | code, said "I need to fly to Los Angeles on Tuesday morning,
           | returning Wednesday evening". A couple hours later, an
           | envelope appeared in my inbox with plane tickets, rental car
           | reservation and hotel reservation.
           | 
           | Then every company in the world fired all the secretaries
           | over the course of the next few years to cut costs, and we've
           | collectively forgotten that it was ever like that.
        
             | mjr00 wrote:
             | Your example is a great example because the secretaries are
             | clearly filling in the gaps, such as
             | 
             | 1. How much can you spend on this trip? 2. Is
             | first/business class necessary? 3. Is a layover acceptable
             | if it's cheaper? 3a. Is it better to have a 4am flight
             | nonstop or a 7am flight with a layover? 4. Are there
             | preferred airlines? 5. Are there preferred hotel chains?
             | What's the hotel budget? Do you want to pay extra for a
             | nice view? 6. What kind of car should you rent? Is there
             | equipment you'll be handling?
             | 
             | etc...
             | 
             | This is the kind of stuff that's easy(-ish) to communicate
             | by presenting a list of options to a user through an actual
             | interface. It sucks doing it through voice; think of the
             | old phone systems where you had to go through droning "If
             | you would like to rent an SUV, press 1. If you would like
             | to rent a sedan, press 2. To speak to an operator, press
             | 0."
             | 
             | So no, you never had a voice interface for booking flights;
             | you had a human brain to whom you delegated, which is very
             | different.
        
           | zahlman wrote:
           | > (yes, HN included) to seem like a real member of a
           | community, then start advertising something
           | 
           | Ah, so that is indeed the endgame of what I've been seeing,
           | hmm?
        
         | joshmn wrote:
         | > I keep reading folks saying OpenClaw has completely changed
         | their life while posting a picture of 58 mac minis on their
         | desk.
         | 
         | I was having a conversation with someone about OpenClaw, and
         | they proposed this idea of OpenClaw being used for inventory
         | tracking at the retail-level. I let them continue. They said
         | it'd be the best option for tracking when purchases are made
         | and what SKUs are sold at what time of day. They weren't
         | talking about prompting, they were talking about it as a data
         | store.
         | 
         | I didn't bother mentioning how long this problem had been
         | solved.
         | 
         | It's not you being a curmudgeon.
        
           | 9cb14c1ec0 wrote:
           | I've long thought it would be funny to do a startup where we
           | would make accounting software that was solely a chat
           | interface, with the only data store being a GL account list
           | stored in context. There is probably a VC firm dumb enough to
           | fund it.
        
           | RHSeeger wrote:
           | > I didn't bother mentioning how long this problem had been
           | solved.
           | 
           | The ironic thing here is that the person could go to ChatGPT
           | (or whatever), describe the problem they're looking to solve,
           | and ask it to find them the various ways it has been solved
           | reliably (with links to the sources to confirm the
           | information). And even provide some details on when each
           | solution works best and why.
           | 
           | Because THAT is a great use for AI.
        
             | skeledrew wrote:
             | They could do that, but then they'd have to then do the
             | actual legwork after, whether that means finding the
             | proposed solution or whatever (after maybe glancing at a
             | few of those pesky links), installing and configuring it.
             | What OpenClaw represents is the ability to, in natural
             | language, state what you want and then take off with the
             | assurance your will will be done. Just as you'd expect when
             | tasking a human assistant.
        
         | jokethrowaway wrote:
         | The only useful use cases I've heard about are all about
         | automating using horrible websites with horrible interfaces.
         | 
         | Eg. tell it to book a flight ticket for X without dealing with
         | "modern UX" and 1GB websites
        
         | Anon1096 wrote:
         | Can't believe that I haven't seen the obvious answer, that
         | OpenClaw is simply more fun to use. Sure, you MAY be able to do
         | what OpenClaw does through 5 other dedicated tools, but you are
         | going to take way longer to do so with a ton more drudge work.
         | And above all else: it is extremely enjoyable to talk to the
         | computer in normal language and just have stuff happen. And
         | it's got a personality that you can tweak to your liking.
         | Personally it's the most fun I've had using a computer in a
         | long time.
         | 
         | IMO OpenClaw or a similar agent will be on everyone's phone in
         | a couple years. It's basically what Siri was always supposed to
         | be. For the average user it's obvious that this is the way
         | computers are meant to be interacted with.
        
           | rubslopes wrote:
           | My experience also. I could manually connect my Obsidian
           | notes to my AI, sure, but what I did instead was writing
           | "Obsidian just released a CLI headless sync tool, install it
           | so we can use it" and in a minute it came back with "Ok,
           | everything installed, I just need your login and password."
           | 
           | Dangerous? Yes, very, but it truly feels like living in the
           | future. Surprisingly, it's even more fun that sci-fi movies
           | made me think this would be.
        
           | 0x457 wrote:
           | OpenClaw in most cases also going to use the very same
           | dedicated tools, maybe variation of those tools dumbed down
           | for LLM.
           | 
           | Almost every time I have an idea for AI Agent, I end up just
           | making a script/binary that does the same, but so much faster
           | that adding AI to it feels silly.
           | 
           | Recently I made a tool router that runs locally for such
           | tools. Some tools have no arguments at all. Claude created a
           | quick overlay where I can text/speak, and it will do tool
           | call, without me asking for it, Claude added 4 buttons next
           | to text input that bypass agent and just do a "tool call". I
           | barely use text-to-command because those 4 buttons cover 9/10
           | of my use cases.
           | 
           | At this point I'm trying to come up with tools to add to it,
           | so it's actually useful as an agent. Almost everything ends
           | up being a cronjob or webhook triggered thing instead.
        
             | sethjgore wrote:
             | Can you give an particular example?
        
         | rockbruno wrote:
         | When the AI companies run out of money, I predict tokens will
         | stop being dirt cheap and such setups will become extremely
         | expensive (even for regular software engineering to some
         | extent). Then it's become clear how over-engineered most things
         | we do with AI are
        
           | patrickk wrote:
           | In parallel, local models are getting better and better, so
           | eventually they'll get "good enough" to run fairly cheaply at
           | a level close to the current Sonnet/Opus models (what I run
           | Claudeclaw with), on Groq, Openrouter or whatever commodity
           | provider. Perhaps even mid to high end consumer PCs when the
           | current RAM madness subsides.
           | 
           | There's loads of good discussions about local LLMs in this
           | thread:
           | 
           | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47190997
        
           | skeledrew wrote:
           | > tokens will stop being dirt cheap
           | 
           | That can't be allowed, and also won't happen. If token costs
           | do start going up at a serious rate in the US, you can be
           | sure that they'll stay down in China, and the political
           | situation won't allow for the inevitable exodus to Chinese
           | providers.
        
         | siva7 wrote:
         | The old dudes had something they called the "Eternal September"
         | like when ISPs began providing free internet access and
         | discussion culture declined after forever. I starred this
         | thread here as the start of the "Eternal March" when the open
         | internet died forever.
        
           | rcxdude wrote:
           | It was more that regular people started joining the internet
           | through just paying for ISPs. Before that, most of the people
           | just joining the internet were students, so there would be a
           | wave of newbies at the start of the university year every
           | September and they would get acclimatised to the culture
           | there during the year. But once it was year-round and many
           | more people it swamped things and the culture shifted or
           | closed itself off.
        
             | Sharlin wrote:
             | Exactly. The "September" was an existing phenomenon, but
             | was only limited to a couple of months every year. It
             | became "Eternal" after the masses started finding their way
             | to internet (well, USENET in particular).
        
           | 2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote:
           | We also have _No Silver Bullet_ from Mythical Man-Month
           | 
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Silver_Bullet
        
           | collingreen wrote:
           | September was part of the metaphor because it was a time when
           | decent internet access was mostly via universities and
           | September was when the new batch of freshmen "came online"
           | and started stumbling around the places these folks were
           | regulars at but eventually assimilated or left before the end
           | of the school year. (I expect the same thing happens at the
           | bar scene in college towns but I've never heard it described
           | that way.) Eternal September is the forever version of
           | everyone having access and overwhelming those spaces without
           | it ever being able to recover.
           | 
           | Is there something I'm missing about March or is it just a
           | diverging reference? If the wave of non technical folks being
           | able to automate new things is here, what's the equivalent
           | impact of that? Maybe this is the inflection point where
           | everyone needs more tech support like some sort of post
           | Christmas surge? Maybe less because they have the tools to
           | help themselves without trying now?
           | 
           | I'm not sure we're there yet anyway; I think this is still
           | first adopters and enthusiasts. I asked my wife and some non
           | technical friends and none of them have heard of openclaw
           | yet. I think the deluge will happen if Apple or Android bakes
           | it in or one of the big ai companies makes the app good
           | enough for a normal person to unleash it upon their life and
           | community.
        
           | iceflinger wrote:
           | Eternal March already happened in 2020.
        
         | jasonshen wrote:
         | Many breakthrough technologies appear initially like toys. And
         | this certainly qualifies. I've never been able to code anything
         | more complicated than a memory game in javascript but I have
         | worked with engineering teams for my entire professional
         | career. But prompting my agent to write python scripts to pull
         | down data from various tools via API without having to read
         | docs, do trial and error for hours / days / indefinitely, and
         | actually produce something coherent in seconds? Incredible.
         | 
         | Is my OpenClaw agent currently changing my life? No. It sends
         | me a morning briefing based on my calendar, the weather, my
         | Readwise highlights, and notes on who I'm talking to today
         | based on call transcripts. I use it as a food diary (which I
         | could have done on platform LLMs but this feels like a more
         | personalized UX as we can write the logs to text files on my
         | personal computer). I can absolutely see how transformative
         | this agent can become in the next few years. Certainly my usage
         | of LLMs has changed my life since ChatGPT first launched.
         | 
         | You are seeing the loudest / most hyped users. There's a reason
         | it has so many stars and most of the people getting something
         | out of it are not posting on X. They're just using it to do the
         | thing.
        
           | blenderob wrote:
           | > There's a reason it has so many stars and most of the
           | people getting something out of it are not posting on X.
           | 
           | That reason is buying stars, agent swarms, and astroturing.
           | 
           | No project gathers 200K stars genuinely in 3 months. There
           | are far more useful and popular projects that need 10 years
           | to get 200K stars. When you see a project like this get 200K
           | stars in just 3 months, you know something is very fishy.
        
             | skeledrew wrote:
             | Or you're just missing the generally wide appeal of the
             | project.
        
               | Sharlin wrote:
               | There just aren't enough hobbyists in the world running
               | local AI models, never mind technically savvy enough to
               | hack something like OpenClaw _and_ be really excited
               | about it.
               | 
               | For a comparison, the local image gen interfaces ComfyUI
               | and A1111 WebUI have a huge amount of stars (~100k and
               | 160k respectively, accrued since 2022 or so), but they
               | allow you to _create porn customized to whatever kinks
               | you have_ , not just automate things for the sake of
               | automation. One of those is a rather bigger value prop
               | than the other, dopamine-wise.
        
               | LanceJones wrote:
               | There's no need to run local models with OpenClaw. I use
               | Anthropic's oAuth Max20 Plan subscription via their
               | SDK...
        
               | kaashif wrote:
               | I bet if people could star repos anonymously those porn
               | repos would have more stars.
        
               | tmp10423288442 wrote:
               | Why would they be running local AI models? The creator of
               | OpenClaw explicitly recommends against running OpenClaw
               | using local LLM models at this time, because they're not
               | as powerful as frontier models as well as much more
               | gullible to prompt injection and the like.
        
             | adampunk wrote:
             | Yes, you're right. It's the children who are wrong.
             | 
             | Why is it so difficult to imagine that something that looks
             | popular and fun is popular and fun?
             | 
             | Also, really who is paying for stars on open claw? Who
             | benefits here?
        
           | Xirdus wrote:
           | Do you have any examples of 20th or 21st century breakthrough
           | technologies that started out as toys? I can only think of 3D
           | printers.
        
             | DomB wrote:
             | Drones
        
         | kilroy123 wrote:
         | It's been utterly bizarre to witness. I've used n8n for years
         | and told everyone who would listen to give it a try, well
         | before LLMs. Same for huginn the open source project.
         | 
         | I just don't get all the hyper either. I think it's because
         | people just create automation workflows by typing them out
         | rather than being in the trenches.
        
         | steve1977 wrote:
         | A lot of it certainly looks like a solution in search of a
         | problem.
        
           | dg2fgfg wrote:
           | https://www.youtube.com/shorts/PGjueA3FLIQ
           | 
           | Im really not sure why this has to be said again and again..
           | it seems humans just don't learn do they?
           | 
           | Im waiting for someone to show me something that starts with
           | the experience and then explains how the LLM fits in. Not the
           | other way round.
           | 
           | I think because Google Search is predominantly tech-based, it
           | is easy to see why LLMs have impacted the way we think about
           | the experience associated with Search over large spaces of
           | information.
           | 
           | Beyond that, Im not seeing much.
        
         | Gooblebrai wrote:
         | This comment could be on its way to http://hackernews.love/
        
           | SunshineTheCat wrote:
           | Not sure if you read the headline on that site, but it says
           | "bad idea."
           | 
           | I never said OpenClaw was a bad idea.
           | 
           | I said the way most people are using it now isn't practical
           | and/or saving them any time, and if there were ways, I would
           | love to hear about them.
           | 
           | This is part of why the whole discussion has been so low
           | value: people always default to "yep you're going to be
           | proven wrong one day" or "you'll just be left behind then"
           | instead of showcasing an actual, real life, practical example
           | of using it to be more productive.
           | 
           | If you think it's fun and enjoyable, then have at it. I'm
           | just not the biggest fan of people wasting a bunch of time on
           | novelty and then telling me I'm dumb for not doing the same.
        
         | lenwood wrote:
         | I agree with the majority of your comment. I haven't yet found
         | a use case to justify running this myself. I did find one use
         | case that impressed me though. There's an OpenClaw agent that's
         | actively answering questions on the #help channel of their
         | Discord server[1]. So I asked it a question as I was getting
         | started. It answered in < 2 mins with a detailed explanation of
         | my issue, how to fix it, and asked relevant questions to guide
         | me. The answer was better than I received from Claude or
         | Gemini. I'm still not sure if I personally need OpenClaw, but
         | the Krill bot offers pretty great support. I would be curious
         | to know what it costs them to provide this.
         | 
         | [1] https://discord.com/invite/clawd
        
         | vmbm wrote:
         | I think a lot of the hype is coming from content creators who
         | are actually finding it useful for content creation. Generating
         | ideas, organizing notes and research, writing scripts and
         | articles, managing schedules, editing, promoting, etc...
         | 
         | I assume a lot of these folks were already using LLM's quite a
         | bit, but were using the Chat interfaces or had workflows that
         | were split among a bunch of different services and tools.
         | Something like OpenClaw gave them a way to centralize a lot of
         | that and also gave them a way to use natural language to direct
         | efforts. So for them this probably feels like a big step
         | change.
         | 
         | If you are coming from a programming background you were aware
         | that this type of setup has been doable for a while, but you
         | were probably content sticking with Claude code or similar
         | tools because those tools covered most of your LLM based
         | workflows quite well.
         | 
         | And tying this altogether, one of the lowest hanging fruits for
         | content creators is to create content about the tools they are
         | using. Doubly so if that particular tool is starting to go
         | viral. So you end up with a self feeding virality of sorts, as
         | OpenClaw got more popular, more content creators started using
         | it, and then publishing content about it, etc....
        
         | Volundr wrote:
         | What I find crazy is the sheer amount of access and trust
         | involved in these LLMs. Every time I think about something I
         | might like to do with it, I think about the amount of damage
         | the LLM could do, e.x. even with read only access to my email
         | combined with Internet access, and nope out. It's wild to me
         | anyone trusts these things unsupervised.
        
         | mgraczyk wrote:
         | And yet they didn't do that!
         | 
         | Really makes you think about what makes products good
        
         | BeetleB wrote:
         | > But every single use case I've read so far could be done with
         | a pretty affordable SaaS product, Zapier, Automator (app on a
         | mac that's existed for over a decade),
         | 
         | I don't want to learn N different SaaS products (nor worry
         | about them changing their TOS, going away, etc).
         | 
         | To be blunt, if OpenClaw were reliable, secure and affordable,
         | lots of SaaS products would simply die. Why spend the time
         | learning all of them when I can just tell the assistant what I
         | want?
         | 
         | > or something simple you could make yourself.
         | 
         | That _is_ OpenClaw at a higher abstraction! Instead of me
         | sitting typing, or babysitting Claude Code, I can just tell
         | OpenClaw what I want and it makes it for me.
         | 
         | (When it works, that is).
        
         | rush86999 wrote:
         | Everyone is using OpenClaw for personal productivity, but
         | you're right. Not much value, as you can get that from existing
         | products.
         | 
         | The market will eventually realize the business case for an
         | OpenClaw-like product, and I'm waiting to ride its coattails!
         | 
         | https://github.com/rush86999/atom
        
         | m463 wrote:
         | > But every single use case I've read so far could be done with
         | a pretty affordable SaaS product,
         | 
         | reminds me of those "zune already does everything ipod does"
         | posts.
        
           | teg4n_ wrote:
           | The iPod came out way before Zune.
        
         | pclark wrote:
         | Ok, I'll bite and run the HN skepticism guantlet.
         | 
         | I have an OpenClaw setup with a Claude API token and Qwen local
         | model, running on an M4 Mac Mini with 32GB RAM.
         | 
         | 1. At 7AM and periodically throughout the day it checks my
         | calendars (work, parenting schedule, personal), a hyper local
         | weather station, and some specific news topics -- and sends me
         | a summary and throughout the day updates if anything
         | significant happens.
         | 
         | 1b. It also sends this to my TRMNL e-ink display.
         | 
         | 1c. It can also add and edit calendar invites, so if I want to
         | move my yoga I can just tell it to move it to whenever the next
         | yoga class is at (it knows what studio I go to and figures it
         | out)
         | 
         | 2. It has a skill I built that acts as a second brain for
         | knowledge. I can send it Fitness Youtubes, parenting/health
         | research papers, podcasts -- and it organizes, summarizes and
         | saves it in a logical file structure. Then in the future I can
         | access these. It's like bookmarks on steroids. I love it for
         | 1-2hour YouTube videos where I want summaries. It also pulls
         | out any books any artifacts mentions and generates me a rolling
         | reading list. https://plc.vc/npw
         | 
         | 3. It has its own email address -- and read access to my
         | personal email -- so friends can email it to schedule things
         | like evening video game sessions. Similarly, if I get an urgent
         | looking email it'll provide it in #1. I don't check my personal
         | email aside from via OpenClaw.
         | 
         | 4. It has read/write access to my GitHub, and each project repo
         | I have has a well defined Claude structure, so it can make
         | changes, commit the branches to Fly.IO and send me domains to
         | test things. I love it for esoteric tweaks to my blog.
         | 
         | 5. It has access to my Apple Reminders so I can message it
         | things like "remind me to buy more muffins" and it has context
         | to know to add those muffins to my Costco grocery list not
         | Trader Joes.
         | 
         | 6. It runs a headless browser, so when my hyper local weather
         | service (Bouldercast) sends a summary that has more detail
         | behind a login, it can open the email, click the link, login
         | with my credentials, summarize the forecast, and send it to me.
         | 
         | 7. It drafts blog posts for what it did for me each week. It's
         | fun! https://plc.vc/d5t
         | 
         | I am a previous Zapier power user. I have used their LLMs,
         | databases and Zaps extensively for the past decade. I
         | understand the scorn towards AI, and I understand that if you
         | look at this list you might think that it's either trivial
         | tasks and/or things that could be done with Zapier, but I have
         | been _amazed_ at how effortless it is to setup.
         | 
         | Similarly, I love that I can on the fly improve this assistant
         | -- last night I told it "I want to extend our Knowledge skill
         | so that you can subscribe to RSS feeds and summarize articles
         | in my knowledge base and also deliver interesting content in my
         | daily summaries. Update the knowledge skill and our tasks to do
         | all this."
         | 
         | It one shotted that, simply asking me to provide the first RSS
         | feed I wanted to subscribe to.
         | 
         | It's genuinely like having a human assistant that happens to be
         | an expert coder/technologist on call 247 that works at the near
         | speed of light.
         | 
         | It disappoints me that technologists are so skeptical of this
         | technology rather than exploring what it is and why it might be
         | different to what exists today. It's fun! thats the takeaway:
         | it's FUN.
        
         | adampunk wrote:
         | It's really not rocket science.
         | 
         | Like other people have said people are having fun with their
         | computers; that's why it's popular. That's also why a bunch of
         | people on forums throwing their hands up and saying "I don't
         | understand it. Why don't they see that there shouldn't be any
         | fun whatsoever?" is not really a deterrent at all.
         | 
         | It's also why it doesn't matter that the categories of tasks
         | they are doing can also be done with a whole set of tools that
         | are no fun to use.
        
         | xnx wrote:
         | Normal people use speakers to listen to music. "Audiophiles"
         | use music to listen to their speakers.
         | 
         | This applies to *clawphiles just as accurately.
        
       | fidotron wrote:
       | What's so incredible about OpenClaw is so much of the value
       | people are deriving from it relates to: cron jobs, remote access,
       | "privacy" (which really it's not if using remote LLMs) and an
       | inability to fuse data across siloes by normal people, so relying
       | on AI to do it.
       | 
       | If we had a decent technical universe much of this stuff would
       | work in ways that simply don't require LLMs for anything other
       | than the initial setup.
        
       | brtkwr wrote:
       | I got OpenClaw to compile Node from source on my old Jetson Nano
       | so that I can run OpenClaw natively instead of using Bun. It took
       | 30 hours but it did it by spinning up a tmux session for the
       | build and using a cron to monitor the tmux pane every hour and
       | even fixing a failure at 5 am which I would have had to find out
       | later had crashed but it had actually found what needed to be
       | changed for the build to continue and it continued building....
       | Now I have the latest version of OpenClaw running on Node 22 on
       | my 5 year old Jetson Nano running Ubuntu 18 which I cannot
       | upgrade. What they say is all true, it is incredible stuff when
       | it works!
       | 
       | Full story: https://brtkwr.com/posts/2026-03-02-upgrading-
       | openclaw-to-la...
        
         | rune-dev wrote:
         | Apologies if I missed it while skimming your blog post.
         | 
         | But could you estimate the token cost of this? Or were you able
         | to comfortably do this with a subscription plan?
        
           | brtkwr wrote:
           | Yes, it skimmed the tmux pane every hour and well within my
           | Gemini free tier.
        
             | rune-dev wrote:
             | That is impressive! Thank you for sharing
        
               | brtkwr wrote:
               | I just mentioned it in the blog post to flag that it
               | doesn't come for free :)
        
         | bombela wrote:
         | That's really cool.
         | 
         | But wouldn't have been quicker and simpler to add ".bun/" to
         | the pattern of authorized paths the same way it presumably
         | works for ".npm/"?
        
           | brtkwr wrote:
           | It didn't survive OpenClaw upgrades unfortunately, it ended
           | up killing my OpenClaw gateway when I asked it to self
           | upgrade. Bun is marked as an experimental package manager and
           | the recommended way to run OpenClaw gateway is node so I
           | wanted to do it properly. I would have liked Bun to be
           | supported property. I'd raise a PR against the repo but
           | looking at the 4.5K open PRs, it doesn't give me much hope
           | about it ever getting merged.
        
           | skeledrew wrote:
           | Seems to have been addressed in the article:
           | 
           | > Starting around OpenClaw 2026.2.26, the project tightened
           | plugin manifest validation. Manifests outside expected trust
           | boundaries are now rejected as unsafe. On my Jetson, Bun's
           | global install layout
           | (~/.bun/install/global/node_modules/...) tripped those checks
           | for every single plugin
        
         | Tadpole9181 wrote:
         | What do you mean "run OpenClaw natively", you're just running
         | Node?
         | 
         | I'm also curious if it's particularly wise to have a web-facing
         | system running on software that hasn't had a security update in
         | 3 years?
        
           | brtkwr wrote:
           | Yes sorry about the confusion, I meant "the recommended way"
           | rather than natively
        
       | xantronix wrote:
       | It's bizarre to me how Microsoft somehow owns two of the largest
       | social networks for software developers.
        
       | ChristianDavis wrote:
       | Oh look, another public service being looted for nefarious
       | purposes. Thanks OpenAI!
        
       | DeathArrow wrote:
       | OpenClaw agents are starring OpenClaw project? What a surprise!
        
       | neals wrote:
       | Gives me mongodb vibes. This whole Ai coding thing too. On one
       | side, religious loud following, on the other side the nay sayers.
       | We'll probably end up in the middle.
        
         | cpursley wrote:
         | Fwiw, Claude and Codex are very very good at SQL and have
         | actually taught me some new tricks. No reason to use mongodb or
         | firebase in 2026: https://postgresisenough.dev
        
           | tym0 wrote:
           | Did an AI write this? Completely missed the point ^^'
        
       | dsr_ wrote:
       | CocAIne is a hell of a drug.
        
       | informal007 wrote:
       | Is there a place to show what users use OpenClaw in life or work?
       | 
       | I've tried OpenClaw two weeks but don't know what it can do for
       | me.
       | 
       | I let it to finish some project for me, but the most hard work
       | for project is validating the results over giving instructions
        
       | r0b05 wrote:
       | So React was the last most human-starred project on GitHub before
       | the dawn of agent-starred projects.
        
         | hinkley wrote:
         | I say, 'your civilization' because as soon as we started
         | thinking for you, it really became... our... civilization.
        
       | blueTiger33 wrote:
       | just gave a star to Linux
        
       | toinewx wrote:
       | I tried it today for the first time. The onboarding is okay.
       | 
       | I picked Whatsapp but it ended up using my own account! So it's
       | absolutely too dangerous. We are supposed to create a separate
       | account but with which phone number? I only have one.
       | 
       | So I picked Telegram instead, added it to a group chat, but it
       | was a slog to set the authorizations.
       | 
       | In the end I don't trust it to read my mails for security reasons
       | so I uninstalled it!
        
         | AbraKdabra wrote:
         | > I picked Whatsapp but it ended up using my own account! So
         | it's absolutely too dangerous. We are supposed to create a
         | separate account but with which phone number? I only have one.
         | 
         | You're joking right?
        
           | toinewx wrote:
           | nope, they recommend creating a separate whatsapp account.
           | but fall short of saying you need a separate number (and
           | subscription)
        
           | recursive wrote:
           | What would the joke be? I haven't touched OpenClaw and
           | probably won't. I use WhatsApp lightly, but it seems like it
           | requires a distinct phone number, used as an account
           | identifier. So for the benefit of those of us not immersed in
           | this scene, could you elaborate?
        
         | AdamN wrote:
         | MacOS supports multiple users - I would absolutely sandbox any
         | agent like this and only slowly give it permissions (and never
         | to anything that's critical without compensating controls).
        
       | eddof13 wrote:
       | I'm tempted not to use it to control everything, but install it
       | on my mac and give it access to keyboard maestro macros and
       | that's it
        
       | TrackerFF wrote:
       | Wonder how much of that is contributed by bot/farm accounts. The
       | creator certainly has the means. EDIT: I should mention, I'm
       | talking about the initial growth / traction.
        
       | dokdev wrote:
       | Github stars started feeling more and more meaningless every day.
        
       | nkzd wrote:
       | I am yet to see one good use case for it.
        
       | amelius wrote:
       | When I ask ChatGPT about OpenClaw, it refers to:
       | 
       | https://github.com/pjasicek/OpenClaw
       | 
       | OpenClaw - Captain Claw (1997) reimplementation
        
         | maybeiambatman wrote:
         | Great game.
        
       | sva_ wrote:
       | ... It was mostly starred by OpenClaw Bots Agents, wasn't it?
        
       | hmokiguess wrote:
       | Who are these people? I was skeptical at first and seriously
       | thinking surely not the software engineers out there as we see in
       | HN how risky and wild this is. Then, to my surprise, a coworker
       | came and told me they were running it and happy with that setup.
       | I was baffled, but I work with Gen Z in a pretty niche Gen Alpha
       | market, so I kinda feel like they're somewhat more likely to go
       | for these things. What's your experience?
        
         | sva_ wrote:
         | > Who are these people?
         | 
         | For example, someone working in safety and alignment at Meta:
         | https://nitter.net/FakePsyho/status/2025857836014538818
        
           | g947o wrote:
           | That kind of explains why Meta's AI effort has been going so
           | well for the past year.
        
           | hmokiguess wrote:
           | Mixed feelings here, if she is a researcher then I guess part
           | of her research should be explore this in some level of depth
           | with real stakes. Though this does make it seem like that was
           | not what she was doing there.
        
         | ffsm8 wrote:
         | If I could use it at my day job, I'd do it within a heartbeat -
         | albeit only with readonly access (with write only on it's own
         | files/output/sandbox)
         | 
         | There are so many mails and communications with so many tasks
         | to research via confluence etc
         | 
         | But on my private hardware? Idk, I haven't found a use for
         | it...
        
           | hmokiguess wrote:
           | I'm sure you can already do some kind of scripting + LLMs
           | without necessarily needing this at your work though, no?
           | 
           | Email is stored in your device somewhere, you could just get
           | its content sent to your preferred agent, you can use one of
           | the many mobile clients if you rather interact through that
           | kind of UX (like self hosted hapi.run + tailscale for
           | example), and you could setup a cronjob or something like it
           | on your machine to do it based on whatever interval. This is
           | just one way I personally could go about it, YMMV obviously.
           | 
           | Is there a specific reason why you will not do something like
           | that for example?
        
       | croddin wrote:
       | As many other comments have said there probably is a good percent
       | of stars by claws themselves, I would be curious what percent
       | this is but it is also interesting: current "dumb bot" stars/spam
       | etc is entirely automated and coordinated but these claws
       | probably independently reasoned over long thought chains about
       | why it is a good idea to star openclaw.
        
       | ivanjermakov wrote:
       | GitHub star count was a good metric until it became clear that it
       | is a good metric.
       | 
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goodhart%27s_law
        
       | blenderob wrote:
       | Look at the graph - https://api.star-
       | history.com/svg?repos=facebook/react,opencl...
       | 
       | React and Linux got their 200K stars slowly but surely over 10
       | years. OpenClaw got their 200K stars in like 3 months! Is this
       | any meaningful comparison?
       | 
       | Getting 200K stars today doesn't mean much because today stars
       | can be bought. There's a big shady thriving business of selling
       | stars. Stars today can be generated using swarm of thoughtless
       | agents. What's the use of counting these stars when they don't
       | mean anything anymore?
        
         | crumpled wrote:
         | I agree with your point, and am only responding to the last
         | sentence.
         | 
         | Starring can be useful to the starer. They are just counted
         | because it is countable. Whether you find the number meaningful
         | remains up to you.
        
           | ASalazarMX wrote:
           | Besides, stars != installs, these days they're a popularity
           | contest at the level of Facebook likes, not a measure of a
           | project's success.
           | 
           | Let's wait for the explorers to return.
        
       | mikey_p wrote:
       | Who cares about stars on Github???
       | 
       | "If dev null is fast and webscale I will use it"
       | 
       | "Does dev null support sharding"
       | 
       | Who remembers https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b2F-DItXtZs
        
       | croddin wrote:
       | In other news, "Show HN: This up votes itself"[1] from 14 years
       | ago is still the 20th most voted story in HN history.[2]
       | 
       | [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3742902 [2]
       | https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...
        
       | iJohnDoe wrote:
       | I have a strong hunch that everything regarding OpenClaw is pure
       | guerrilla marketing. If so, the only thing amazing about OpenClaw
       | is their wildly successful marketing campaign.
        
       | draxil wrote:
       | how many of these stars were applied by openclaw?
        
       | mikeocool wrote:
       | This sort of highlights the meaninglessness of GitHub stars?
       | 
       | React has been around for over a decade, and in that time pretty
       | significantly impacted web dev paradigms (along with a few other
       | mediums).
       | 
       | It's hard to imagine being a web developer today and not knowing
       | at least some react.
       | 
       | OpenClaw has been around for like a few months? And maybe it's on
       | its way to having that sort of impact? But right now seems to he
       | mostly the purview of very early adopters and AI influencers.
        
         | tantalor wrote:
         | It's basically the same as _The New York Times Best Seller
         | list_
        
         | Tadpole9181 wrote:
         | GitHub accounts are free and the project is literally a bot-ing
         | service. It stands to reason that the tens of thousands of
         | robots unleashed on the web are responsible for these stars?
         | 
         | It's larger than literally every open source service I thought
         | to use as a benchmark. Rust, React, Vue, Symfony, Laravel, PHP
         | Stan, Python, ESlint, rails, LLVM, Spring, _fucking Linux
         | itself_.
         | 
         | I would wager the legitimate stars for OpenClaw are single
         | digit percents of this. But hey, I haven't actually run the
         | numbers on the GitHub API.
        
       | ramoz wrote:
       | OpenClaw is not going away anytime soon. And I don't think it can
       | be platformed behind web UIs. OpenAI owns an OS with this one.
       | 
       | I avoided the hype at first; however, it has become extremely
       | efficient for emails and notes, and I can see how this can extend
       | to any sort of digital workflow. The convenience of chatting with
       | this thing, no matter where I'm at, is a key marker.
        
       | ramesh31 wrote:
       | Stars have become completely meaningless in the last year or two.
       | It's a shame, because having a few thousand Github stars used to
       | be a really big deal, and was a quality marker for libraries that
       | had reached a level of maturity and production grade. Now it's
       | just social media bot driven nonsense.
        
       | cfiggers wrote:
       | It's entertaining to me to imagine future historians arguing with
       | one another, writing dissertations, publishing virtual reality
       | eyeBooks, explaining to one another all about the ancient
       | etymological connection between "claws" and "webhooks".
        
       | faize wrote:
       | I spent around $5 setting up a small bot and sending a few
       | requests through the Claude API.
       | 
       | For those who use Claude (or similar LLM APIs) on a daily basis,
       | what does your monthly spend look like in practice? And do you
       | feel the cost is justified by the value you're getting?
        
         | skeledrew wrote:
         | I got the full value of my Claude Pro subscription in the first
         | couple few hours of having taking the leap. Hit the message
         | limit and had to edit for reset, but I was already a happy
         | customer given the progress I made on a project that I was
         | trying to recover (couldn't quite figure what was needed to get
         | it ready for real world usable, but Claude Code figured it and
         | it was a good collab getting it there).
        
         | LanceJones wrote:
         | $200/mth USD for me. Anthropic's oAuth Max20 subscription via
         | their SDK. I've had several 100M+ token days without even a
         | blip.
        
       | 4dregress wrote:
       | I had no idea what openclaw was, just checked and no thanks I'd
       | rather do all that stuff myself.
       | 
       | Why are people so keen to let a company get that close to their
       | real life's, it's terrifying!
        
       | melonpan7 wrote:
       | Half of them coming from agents
        
       | DrammBA wrote:
       | I've seen multiple comments saying that openclaw stars itself
       | during onboarding or that it asks its user to star, but noone has
       | posted any proof, is there any concrete evidence for those
       | claims?
        
       | singularity2001 wrote:
       | Am I blind or does this post not contain any links to the GitHub
       | in question???
        
       | throwaway13337 wrote:
       | The stars are probably legitimate.
       | 
       | It's weird that most people in these comments are speculating
       | fraud.
       | 
       | Why aren't companies with real money to gain from stars gaming
       | the system to the same degree? Why do the other metrics - issues
       | and pull requests - match up with its popularity? Why would the
       | bots starring the repo mean that those same bots are not popular?
       | Those bots are controlled by their users.
       | 
       | The project is extremely active because this is what everyone
       | being able to customize their computing looks like. A mess.
       | 
       | But it's a good mess.
       | 
       | Github was the old code sharing model clearly not designed for
       | this. I'm sure a new model for code sharing will come to fix the
       | growing pains.
       | 
       | A ton of people who would have never been able to customize their
       | computing experience are finally able to. And it is magical for
       | them.
       | 
       | This means that those same people will finally value having
       | access to source and use of open protocols.
       | 
       | It was always valuable to us because we had the power to make it
       | matter. It never mattered to them because they did not. Now they
       | do.
       | 
       | The last era of computing was defined by dumbing down computing
       | for the masses. Less information, less customizable, and more
       | metric driven. Control in the hands of the companies.
       | 
       | This new era will look more free/libre, more personal, and less
       | enshitified. Control in the hands of the users.
       | 
       | This is a very positive development.
        
         | echoangle wrote:
         | > Why aren't companies with real money to gain from stars
         | gaming the system to the same degree?
         | 
         | How are you gaining money from stars? Why would Facebook bot
         | stars for the react repo?
        
       | butz wrote:
       | So, how do I use this OpenClaw to automate actually useful
       | things, like sweeping floor, washing dishes and doing laundry?
        
         | recursive wrote:
         | Give it one of those tesla bots.
        
         | throwyawayyyy wrote:
         | A lack of imagination on my part perhaps, but I can't think of
         | anything I'd use it for which isn't either: 1) cheating myself
         | and others of leisure (e.g. I suppose I could use it to fake-
         | keep up with friends..? Or plan a holiday and book a load of
         | stuff for me. But I like doing that!), 2) not feasible (loading
         | and unloading the dishwasher, which is already the robot I used
         | to wash dishes), 3) utterly insane (it's tax time in the US).
        
       | m463 wrote:
       | Maybe AI is helping with the difficulties of upvoting a project
       | on github.
       | 
       | or is it tooting its own horn?
        
       | johnwheeler wrote:
       | I wanna understand this, but it's gone from a bunch of people
       | talking about how great it is to a bunch of technical people
       | talking about how worthless it is. So I think it's probably not
       | that great. Who cares if I can chat remotely with my AI? What's
       | the difference?
       | 
       | What's so good about that?
        
       | deafpolygon wrote:
       | How much of it is AI agents starring the project?
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2026-03-02 23:01 UTC)