4 ms·
His team is basically him and two other humans, powering an ambitious well-known project so successful an industry titan ended up acquihiring him/them. That's p
by vntok 5mo ago
His team is basically him and two other humans, powering an ambitious well-known project so successful an industry titan ended up acquihiring him/them. That's pretty lean, no?
- cedws 5mo agoWhat’s ambitious about it? It’s a chatbot that glues APIs together.
- lxgr 5mo agoThe ambitious idea is actually giving a chatbot/agent access to a bunch of personal data and having it self-modify its harness and context to some extent. The execution in case of Openclaw is a hot mess.
- coffeefirst 5mo agoI believe this is sometimes called The Lethal Trifecta.
- tecoholic 5mo agoHow much does a SOUL.md cost?
- lxgr 5mo agoThe idea is lean, the execution is slop.
- shepherdjerred 5mo agoI wonder if compilers were ever considered 'slop' If these methods prove successful it isn't going to matter. A user doesn't care if code is 'slop' or artisanal, so long as the app/site/whatever works. If you can combine autonomous flows (and millions of dollars in tokens) to produce work comparable to a traditional engineering team, then why would the user care which wrote the app/site/whatever?
- overfeed 5mo agoIf.
- shepherdjerred 5mo agoYou think humans are going to be writing code in 100 years?
- overfeed 5mo agoYeah, of course hunans will still be writing code in a 100 years. I am certain we still won't have flying cars either. Agricultural mechanisation didn't eliminate human labor over the 20th century. A huge fraction of the world's farmers have little or no mechanization today, well over a century after the invention of the revolutionary farm tractor. With apologies to Ada Lovelace, but humanity has been writing code in anger for only like, 80 years? We'll still be at it in a 100 more.
- shepherdjerred 5mo agoI think you have a fair point. It is possible that LLMs won't scale/advance enough and a fundamentally new approach is needed. I'm personally just impressed with the rate of improvement and _hope_ that it will continue, and that inference prices will fall (or on-device LLM become more feasible/powerful). Anyway I appreciate your perspective even though I don't necessarily share it
- lxgr 5mo agoOf course they will, just like humans are still knitting sweaters by hand even after the invention of the power loom.
- lxgr 5mo agoIf the site works, continues working, can be extended and maintained etc., it’s not slop.
- danpalmer 5mo agoBut it costs $1.3m USD a month to run, not including their salaries. That's the cost of a team of 50-200 staff, depending on where you're hiring. I don't think there's any way most people would call that lean. It's lean in exactly 1 axis which is people, but no one really cares about that, people is always a proxy for cost.
- WickyNilliams 5mo agoHe said in another thread there's 6 people involved. 6 people for this project doesn't feel lean, without even considering the enormous LLM spend/complexity
- tim333 5mo ago3.2M active users. Not a huge staff to user ratio? One per half million users.
- WickyNilliams 5mo agoWhere is that figure from? I would be extremely surprised if that doesn't drop at least an order of magnitude as the hype wears off. Assuming it's even representative of today and not two months ago
- tim333 5mo agoIt's from their website https://openclawvps.io/blog/openclaw-statistics https://openclawvps.io/blog/openclaw-statistics The site say 1200 Github contributors and looking on Github there are now 2105 so it doesn't seem to be dropping that much.
- WickyNilliams 5mo agoThanks. I think that's some unaffiliated website btw. While they seem to have provided sources for most of the stats, MAU is not one of them.