OpenClaw 时刻：与 Peter Steinberger 的 AI 代理革命

我看到我的智能体愉快地点击了“我不是机器人”按钮。我让这个智能体非常清楚自己的源代码是什么，它理解自己如何存在于并运行在自己的框架中，知道文档在哪里，知道自己运行的是哪个模型，理解自己的系统。这让智能体很容易做到：你不喜欢什么，你只需提示它，它就会修改自己的软件。人们谈论自我修改的软件，我直接把它造出来了。我实际上认为“氛围编程”是一种贬称。

I watched my agent happily click the I'm not a robot button. I made the agent very aware like it knows what its source code is. It understands how it sits and runs in its own harness. It knows where documentation is. It knows which model it runs. It understands its own system. That makes it very easy for an agent to, oh, you don't like anything you just prompted into existence and then the agent would just modify its own software. People talk about self-modifying software. I just built it. I actually think vibe coding is a slur.

你更喜欢“智能体式工程”。

You prefer agentic engineering.

是的。我总跟人说我做智能体式工程，然后可能凌晨 3 点后切换成氛围编程，第二天就后悔了。

Yeah. I always tell people I do agentic engineering and then maybe after 3:00 a.m. I switch to vibe coding and then I have regrets the next day.

嗯，羞愧之旅。

Well, walk of shame.

是啊，你只能清理并修复你的……

Yeah. You just have to clean up and fix your...

我们都经历过。

We've all been there.

我以前写很长的提示词。但说到写，我其实不写，我说。你知道，这双手现在太宝贵了，不能用来打字。我就用定制的提示词来构建我的软件。

I used to write really long prompts. And by writing, I mean, I don't write. I talk. You know, these hands are too precious for writing now. I just use bespoke prompts to build my software.

所以你真的用语音操作那些终端？

So you for real with all those terminals are using voice.

是的，我以前用得非常多，以至于有一段时间我失声了。

Yeah, I used to do it very extensively to the point where there was a period I lost my voice.

我很好奇，必须问一下。我知道你可能收到了大公司的巨额 offer。能说说你在考虑和谁合作吗？

I mean I have to ask you just curious. I know you've probably gotten huge offers from major companies. Can you speak to who you're considering working with?

是的。以下是和 Peter Steinberger 的对话，他是 OpenClaw 的创建者，之前叫 Moldbot、Claudebot、Claudis、Claude（拼写带 W，像龙虾钳）。不要和 Anthropic 的 AI 模型 Claude（拼写带 U）混淆。实际上，正是这个混淆导致 Anthropic 礼貌地请 Peter 改名为 OpenClaw。那么，OpenClaw 是什么？它是一个开源 AI 智能体，在几天内席卷了科技界，人气爆棚，在 GitHub 上获得了超过 18 万颗星，并催生了社交网络 Mold Book，AI 智能体在那里发布宣言、辩论意识，在公众中引发了兴奋与恐惧的混合，一种 AI 精神病态，混合了点击诱饵、恐慌贩卖，以及对 AI 在我们数字互联人类世界中角色的真正、完全合理的担忧。OpenClaw，正如其标语所说，是“真正做事的 AI”。它是一个自主 AI 助手，住在你的电脑里。如果你允许，它可以访问你所有的东西。通过 Telegram、WhatsApp、Signal、iMessage 以及任何其他消息客户端与你交谈。使用你喜欢的任何 AI 模型，包括 Claude Opus 4.6 和 GPT 5.3 编解码器，为你做事。许多人称这是自 2022 年 11 月 ChatGPT 发布以来 AI 历史上最大的时刻之一。这种 AI 智能体的要素都已具备。但将它们整合成一个系统，明确地从语言跨越到智能体、从想法跨越到行动，以一种开源社区驱动的方式创造了一个有用的助手，感觉它懂你、向你学习，这就是 OpenClaw 席卷互联网的原因。它的力量很大程度上来自于你可以让它访问你所有的东西，并允许它对那些东西做任何事以帮助你。这非常强大，但也危险。OpenClaw 代表自由。但自由伴随着责任。有了它，你可以拥有并控制你的数据。但正因为你有这种控制权，你也有责任保护它免受各种网络安全威胁。有很多保护自己的好方法，但威胁和漏洞确实存在。再次强调，一个具有系统级访问权限的强大 AI 智能体是一个安全雷区，但它也代表了未来，因为如果做得好且安全，它可以作为个人助手对我们每个人类都非常有用。我们与 Peter 讨论了所有这些，也讨论了他的宏观编程和创业人生故事，我认为这非常鼓舞人心。他花了 13 年构建 PSPDFKit，这是一个在十亿台设备上使用的软件。他卖掉了它，短暂地失去了对编程的热爱，消失了 3 年，然后回来，重新发现对编程的热爱，并在很短的时间内构建了一个席卷互联网的开源 AI 智能体。他在很多方面是编程世界 AI 革命的象征。有 2022 年的 ChatGPT 时刻，2025 年的 DeepSeek 时刻，现在在 2026 年，我们正经历 OpenClaw 时刻，龙虾时代，智能体式 AI 革命的开始。活在这个时代真好。这是 Lex Fridman 播客。为了支持它，请查看描述中的赞助商，那里也有联系我、提问、反馈等的链接。现在，亲爱的朋友们，有请 Peter Steinberger，独一无二的 Claude 之父。实际上，Benjamin 在推文中预测：“以下是和 Claude 的对话，一位受尊敬的甲壳类动物。”那是一只穿着西装的龙虾的搞笑图片。所以，我认为预言实现了。让我们回到你在一小时内构建原型的那一刻。那是 OpenClaw 的早期版本。我认为这个故事对很多人来说真的很鼓舞人心，因为这个原型导致了席卷互联网的东西，成为 GitHub 历史上增长最快的仓库，现在有超过 17.5 万颗星。那么，一小时内原型的故事是怎样的？

Yeah. The following is a conversation with Peter Steinberger, creator of OpenClaw, formerly known as Moldbot, Claudebot, Claudis, Claude, spelled with a W, as in lobster claw. Not to be confused with Claude, the AI model from Anthropic, spelled with a U. In fact, this confusion is the reason Anthropic kindly asked Peter to change the name to OpenClaw. So, what is OpenClaw? It's an open source AI agent that has taken over the tech world in a matter of days, exploding in popularity, reaching over 180,000 stars on GitHub and spawning the social network mold book where AI agents post manifestos and debate consciousness, creating a mix of excitement and fear in the general public in a kind of AI psychosis, a mix of clickbait, fear-mongering, and genuine, fully justifiable concern about the role of AI in our digital interconnected human world. OpenClaw, as its tagline states, is the AI that actually does things. It's an autonomous AI assistant that lives on your computer. Has access to all of your stuff if you let it. Talks to you through Telegram, WhatsApp, Signal, iMessage, and whatever else messaging client. Uses whatever AI model you like, including Claude Opus 4.6 and GPT 5.3 Codex, all to do stuff for you. Many people are calling this one of the biggest moments in the recent history of AI since the launch of ChatGPT in November 2022. The ingredients for this kind of AI agent were all there. But putting it all together in a system that definitively takes a step forward over the line from language to agency, from ideas to actions, in a way that created a useful assistant that feels like one who gets you and learns from you in an open-source community-driven way is the reason OpenClaw took the internet by storm. Its power in large part comes from the fact that you can give it access to all of your stuff and give it permission to do anything with that stuff in order to be useful to you. This is very powerful, but it is also dangerous. OpenClaw represents freedom. But with freedom comes responsibility. With it, you can own and have control over your data. But precisely because you have this control, you also have the responsibility to protect it from cybersecurity threats of various kinds. There are great ways to protect yourself, but the threats and vulnerabilities are out there. Again, a powerful AI agent with system level access is a security minefield, but it also represents the future because when done well and securely, it can be extremely useful to each of us humans as a personal assistant. We discuss all of this with Peter and also discuss his big picture programming and entrepreneurship life story which I think is truly inspiring. He spent 13 years building PSPDFKit, which is a software used on a billion devices. He sold it and for a brief time fell out of love with programming, vanished for 3 years and then came back, rediscovered his love for programming and built in a very short time an open-source AI agent that took the internet by storm. He is in many ways the symbol of the AI revolution happening in the programming world. There was the ChatGPT moment in 2022, the DeepSeek moment in 2025, and now in 2026, we're living through the OpenClaw moment, the age of the lobster, the start of the agentic AI revolution. What a time to be alive. This is a Lex Fridman podcast. To support it, please check out our sponsors in the description where you can also find links to contact me, ask questions, give feedback, and so on. And now, dear friends, here's Peter Steinberger, the one and only, the Claude father. Actually, Benjamin predicted in this tweet, "The following is a conversation with Claude, a respected crustacean." It's a hilarious looking picture of a lobster in a suit. So, I think the prophecy has been fulfilled. Let's go to this moment when you built a prototype in 1 hour. That was the early version of OpenClaw. I think this story is really inspiring to a lot of people because this prototype led to something that just took the internet by storm and became the fastest growing repository in GitHub history with now over 175,000 stars. So, what was the story of the 1-hour prototype?

你知道，我从四月起就想要那个。一个个人助手 AI 个人助手。

You know, I wanted that since April. A personal assistant AI personal assistant.

嗯。

Yeah.

我尝试了一些其他东西，比如甚至能获取我所有 WhatsApp 数据的东西，我可以直接在上面运行查询。那是在我们有 GPT-4.1 和 100 万上下文窗口的时候，我拉取了所有数据，然后问它们问题，比如“是什么让这段友谊有意义？”

And I played around with some other things, like even stuff that gets all my WhatsApp and I could just run queries on it. That was back when we had GPT-4.1 with the 1 million context window and I pulled in all the data and I asked them questions like what makes this friendship meaningful?

嗯。

Mhm.

我得到了一些非常深刻的结果。我发给了朋友们，他们眼眶都湿了。

And I got some really profound results. I sent it to my friends and they got teary eyes.

所以这里面有东西。

So there's something there.

是的。但那时我想所有实验室都会做这个。所以我转向了其他事情。那仍然是我早期实验和玩耍的阶段。你知道，你必须这样，这就是学习的方式。你就做事情，玩耍。时间飞逝。到了十一月。我想确保我启动的事情真的在发生。我很恼火它不存在。所以，我就提示它存在了。我的意思是，这就是企业家英雄之旅的开始，对吧？即使你最初做 PSPDFKit 的故事，也是“为什么这个不存在？让我来构建它。”再次，这是一个完全不同的领域，但精神可能相似。

Yeah. But then I thought all the labs will work on that. So I moved on to other things. And that was still very much in my early days of experimenting and playing. You know, you have to, that's how you learn. You just like you do stuff and you play. And time flew by. It was November. I wanted to make sure that the thing I started is actually happening. I was annoyed that it didn't exist. So, I just prompted it into existence. I mean, that's the beginning of the hero's journey of the entrepreneur, right? And you've even with your original story with PSPDFKit, it's like, why does this not exist? Let me build it. And again, here's a whole different realm, but similar maybe spirit.

这大概是 15 年前的事了。

This is like 15 years ago, something like that.

是啊，最随机的事情。突然我遇到这个问题，想帮一个朋友，当时不是没有东西，但就是不好用。我试了一下，感觉一般般，我想我能做得更好。

Yeah. Like the most random thing ever. And suddenly I had this problem and I wanted to help a friend and there was nothing existed but it was just not good. I tried it and it was like very meh, like I can do this better.

顺便说一句，对于不知道的人来说，这导致了 PSPDFKit 的开发，它被用于数十亿台设备。所以能打开 PDF 确实很有用。

By the way, for people who don't know, this led to the development of PSPDFKit that's used on a billion devices. So it turns out it's pretty useful to be able to open a PDF.

你也可以开玩笑说我很不擅长起名字，比如当前项目叫 number five，连 PSPDF 也不顺口。

You could also make the joke that I'm really bad at naming, like named number five on the current project, and even PSPDF doesn't really roll off the tongue.

总之，你说管它呢，为什么我不自己做？那么原型是什么？你在短时间内构建的那个神奇的东西是什么，让你觉得‘这真的可以作为一个智能体，我跟它说话，它就能做事’？

Anyway, so you said screw it, why don't I do it? So what was the prototype? What was the magical thing that you built in a short amount of time that you're like, 'This might actually work as an agent where I talk to it and it does things.'

我之前的一个项目已经做了类似的事情，我可以把我的终端带到网页上，然后与它们交互，但它们也是我 Mac 上的终端。

There was one of my projects before already did something where I could bring my terminals onto the web and then I could interact with them, but they also would be terminals on my Mac.

Vibe tunnel，那是一个周末黑客项目，还很早期，那是 Claude Code 的时代。你做对事情时会获得多巴胺刺激，现在做错时你会生气。你有一篇很棒的博客文章，描述了你用单个提示将 Vibe tunnel 从 TypeScript 转换成了 Zig 编程语言。一个提示，一次完成，将整个代码库转换成 Zig。

Vibe tunnel, which was like a weekend hack project that was still very early and it was Claude Code times. You got a dopamine hit when you got something right and now I get mad when you get something wrong. And you had a really great blog post describing that you converted Vibe tunnel, you vibe coded Vibe tunnel from TypeScript into Zig of all programming languages with a single prompt. One prompt, one shot, convert the entire codebase into Zig.

是的，有一个地方架构占用了太多内存。每个终端都像一个节点。我想把它改成 Rust。我是说，我能做，我可以手动搞定所有事情，但我所有的自动化尝试都惨败了。然后四五个月后我重新审视，心想‘好吧，现在用更实验性的东西’，我输入了‘把这个和这个部分转换成 Zig’，然后让 Codex 运行，它基本上做对了。有一个小细节我之后必须修改，但它运行了一整夜或六个小时，就完成了，这真是令人难以置信。所以那是关于 LLM 编程重构的方面。

Yeah, there was this one thing where part of the architecture took too much memory. Every terminal used like a node. And I wanted to change it to Rust. And I mean, I can do it, I can manually figure it all out, but all my automated attempts failed miserably. And then I revisited four or five months later and I'm like, 'Okay, now let's use something even more experimental' and I just typed 'convert this and this part to Zig' and then let Codex run off and it basically got it right. There was one little detail that I had to modify afterwards, but it just ran overnight or like six hours and just did the thing and it's like this is just mind-blowing. So that's on the LLM programming side refactoring.

但回到原型的故事。那么 Vibe tunnel 如何与第一个原型联系起来，让你觉得智能体真的可以工作？

But back to the actual story of the prototype. So how did Vibe tunnel connect to the first prototype where you're like agents can actually work?

嗯，那仍然非常有限，你知道，就像我做过一个 WhatsApp 的实验，然后还有这个实验，两者感觉都不是正确答案。然后我的方案就是直接把 WhatsApp 连接到 Claude Code。一次调用，CLI 消息进来。我用 -P 调用 CLI。它施展魔法。我得到字符串，然后发回 WhatsApp。我花了一小时构建这个，已经感觉很酷了。就像，哦，我可以跟我的电脑说话了，对吧？那很酷。但我想要图片，因为我经常在提示时使用图片。我认为这是给智能体更多上下文的高效方式。而且它们很擅长理解我的意思，即使是奇怪的裁剪截图。所以我经常使用，我也想能在 WhatsApp 里这样做。还有，你知道，你到处跑，看到活动海报，截个图，然后看看我是否有时间，这个活动好不好，我的朋友是否感兴趣。图片似乎很重要。所以我多花了几个小时才搞定。然后我就大量使用它。有趣的是，那正好是我和朋友们去马拉喀什生日旅行之前。在那里它甚至更好，因为网络有点不稳定，但 WhatsApp 就是能用，你知道？不管怎样，即使只有边缘网络，它也能用。WhatsApp 做得真好。所以我最终大量使用它。帮我翻译，帮我解释，帮我找地方，就像你有一个 Clanker 在为你做谷歌搜索。那基本上还没构建什么，但已经能做很多了。

Well, that was still very limited, you know, like I had this one experiment with WhatsApp, then I had this experiment and both felt like not the right answer. And then my search was literally just hooking up WhatsApp to Claude Code. One shot the CLI message comes in. I call the CLI with -P. It does its magic. I get the string back and I send it back to WhatsApp. And I built this in 1 hour and it already felt really cool. It's like, oh, I can talk to my computer, right? That was cool. But I wanted images because I often use images when I prompt. I think it's such an efficient way to give the agent more context. And they're really good at figuring out what I mean if it's like a weird cropped screenshot. So I used it a lot and I wanted to do that in WhatsApp as well. Also like you know, you run around, you see a post of an event, you just make a screenshot and figure out if I have time there, if this is good, if my friends are maybe up for that. Images seemed important. So I worked a few more hours to actually get that right. And then it was just I used it a lot. And funny enough, that was just before I went on a trip to Marrakech with my friends for a birthday trip. And there it was even better because internet was a little shaky, but WhatsApp just works, you know? It doesn't matter, you have like edge, it still works. WhatsApp is just made really well. So I ended up using it a lot. Translate this for me, explain me, find me places, like you just having a clanker doing Google for you. That was basically still nothing built but it still could do so much.

所以如果我们谈论智能体的整个旅程，你只是通过 CLI 发送一条很薄的 WhatsApp 消息，它去 Claude Code，Claude Code 做各种繁重的工作，然后返回一条薄消息给你。

So if we talk about the full journey that's happening there with the agent, you're just sending on this very thin line WhatsApp message via CLI is going to Claude Code and Claude Code is doing all kinds of heavy work and coming back to you with a thin message.

是的，它很慢，因为每次我都要启动 CLI，但它已经很酷了，而且它可以使用我已经构建的所有东西。我在几个月里构建了一大堆 CLI 工具。所以感觉非常强大。

Yeah, it was slow because every time I boot up the CLI, but it was really cool already and it could just use all the things that I already had built. I built like a whole bunch of CLI stuff over the months. So it felt really powerful.

那种体验中有一种难以言喻的神奇之处。能够使用聊天客户端与智能体对话，而不是坐在电脑前使用 Cursor 甚至在终端中使用 Claude Code。这是一种不同的体验，能够放松下来与它交谈。我的意思是，这看起来像是一个微不足道的步骤，但在某种意义上，这是 AI 融入你生活的一个阶段转变，感觉上完全不同。

There is something magical about that experience that's hard to put into words. Being able to use a chat client to talk to an agent versus like sitting behind a computer and using Cursor or even using Claude Code in the terminal. It's a different experience than being able to sit back and talk to it. I mean it seems like a trivial step but it's in some sense it's a phase shift in the integration of AI into your life, how it feels.

是的。我今天早上看到一条推文，有人说：‘哦，这里面没有魔法。它只是做这个、这个、这个、这个、这个，几乎感觉像是一个爱好，就像 Cursor 或 Perplexity 一样。’我就想：‘嗯，如果那是一个爱好，那也算是一种夸奖，你知道？它们做得还不错。’我想，谢谢。因为我的意思是，魔法不常常就是你把很多已经存在的东西以新的方式组合在一起吗？也许里面没有魔法，但有时只是重新排列事物并添加一些新想法，就是你需要的所有魔法。

Yeah. I read this tweet this morning where someone said, 'Oh, there's no magic in it. It's just like it does this and this and this and this and this and this and it almost feels like a hobby, just as Cursor or Perplexity.' And I'm like, 'Well, if that's a hobby, that's kind of a compliment, you know? They're not doing too bad.' Thank you, I guess. Because I mean, isn't magic often just like you take a lot of things that are already there but bring them together in new ways? There's no maybe there's no magic in there, but sometimes just rearranging things and adding a few new ideas is all the magic that you need.

是的，真的很难用语言表达一件事的魔力在哪里。看看 iPhone 上的滚动，为什么那么令人愉悦？那个界面有很多元素让它非常愉悦，这是使用智能手机体验的基础。就像，好吧，所有组件都在那里。滚动在那里，一切都在那里，但没有人做到。事后看来，它感觉如此明显。那太明显了，对吧？但尽管如此。

Yeah, it's really hard to convert into words what is magic about a thing. If you look at the scrolling on an iPhone, why is that so pleasant? There's a lot of elements about that interface that makes it incredibly pleasant that is fundamental to the experience of using a smartphone. And it's like, okay, all the components were there. Scrolling was there, everything was there, and nobody did it. And afterwards, it felt so obvious. That's so obvious, right? But still.

现在让我震惊的时刻是，当我大量使用它时，有一次我发了一条消息，然后出现了一个打字指示器，我想，等等，我没有构建那个功能。它只有图片支持，所以它在做什么？然后它就回复了。

Now the moment where it blew my mind was when I used it a lot and at some point I just sent it a message and then a typing indicator appeared and I'm like, wait, I didn't build that. It only has image support, so what is it even doing? And then it would just reply.

你发了什么内容？

What was the thing you sent it?

哦，就是随机的问题，比如，嘿，这家餐厅怎么样？你知道，因为我们当时正在到处逛，探索这座城市。

Oh, just random questions like, hey, what about this restaurant? You know, because we were just running around and checking out the city.

所以这就是为什么我过去根本没想过，因为有时候你很急，打字很烦。

So that's why I didn't even think when I used to because sometimes when you're in a hurry, typing is annoying.

哦，你发了一条语音消息。

So, oh, you did an audio message.

是的，它就这么成功了，我就想……

Yeah. And it just worked and I'm like...

而且它本不该成功，因为你没有给它那个能力。

And it's not supposed to work because you didn't give it that capability.

不，我简直……你是怎么做到的？然后它说，是的，智能体做了以下事情：它给我发了一条消息，但只是一个没有文件扩展名的文件。所以我检查了文件头，发现是 Ogg 格式。于是我用 ffmpeg 转换它，然后想用 Whisper 但没安装。但我找到了你的 OpenAI 密钥，就用 curl 把文件发送给 OpenAI 翻译，然后我就成功了。我看着消息想，哇，你根本没教它任何这些东西，智能体自己就搞定了。它搞定了所有转换、翻译，它找到了 API，它找到了该用哪个程序，所有这些事情。而你只是心不在焉地发了一条语音消息，它就返回了结果。

No, I literally... How the hell do you do that? And it was like, yeah, the agent did the following. He sent me a message but it was only a file with no file ending. So I checked out the header of the file and it found it was Ogg. So I used ffmpeg to convert it and then I wanted to use Whisper but didn't have it installed. But then I found your OpenAI key and just used curl to send the file to OpenAI to translate and here I am. And I just looked at the message and thought, oh wow, you didn't teach it any of those things and the agent just figured it out. It figured out all those conversions, the translation, it figured out the API, it figured out which program to use, all those kinds of things. And you were just absentmindedly sending an audio message and it came back.

太聪明了，因为如果你走 Whisper 本地路径，你得下载模型，会太慢。所以这里面有大量的世界知识，大量的创造性问题解决能力。我认为其中很多映射自：如果你非常擅长编程，那意味着你必须非常擅长通用问题解决。所以那是一种技能，对吧？而且它直接映射到其他领域。

So clever, even because you would have gone the Whisper local path, you would have had to download a model, it would have been too slow. So there's so much world knowledge in there, so much creative problem solving. A lot of it, I think, mapped from if you get really good at coding, that means you have to be really good at general purpose problem solving. So that's a skill, right? And that just maps into other domains.

所以它遇到了问题：这个没有文件扩展名的文件是什么？我们来搞清楚。就在那时我恍然大悟。我印象非常深刻。有人提交了一个 Discord 支持的拉取请求，我想，这是一个 WhatsApp 中继，完全不搭。当时它叫 W relay。

So it had the problem of like, what is this file with no file ending? Let's figure it out. And that's where it kind of clicked for me. I was very impressed. And somebody sent a pull request for Discord support and I'm like, this is a WhatsApp relay that doesn't fit at all. At that time it was called W relay.

是的。所以我内心挣扎：我想要吗？不想要吗？然后我想，也许我该做，因为那可能是向人们展示的一个很酷的方式。因为到目前为止我都是在 WhatsApp 群里做的，但我不想把手机号给每个网络陌生人。

Yeah. And so I debated with myself, do I want that? Do I not want that? And then I thought, well maybe I do that because that could be a cool way to show people. Because so far I did it in WhatsApp with groups, you know, but I don't really want to give my phone number to every internet stranger.

是的。记者们现在无论如何都做到了。那是另一个故事了。所以我从 Shadow 那里合并了它，他在整个项目上帮了我很多。所以谢谢你。我把我的机器人放到了 Discord 上。没有安全措施，因为我还没构建沙箱。我只是提示它只听我的。然后有些人来试图破解它。我就看着，我继续公开工作，就像我用我的智能体来构建我的智能体框架并测试各种东西。很快人们就明白了。所以它几乎需要被体验。从那时起，那是 1 月 1 日，我有了第一个真正有影响力的粉丝。他做了视频，孩子们。所以谢谢你。从那时起我开始加速，同时我的睡眠周期越来越短，因为我感到风暴即将来临，我拼命工作，让它达到一个还算不错的状态。有几个组件。我们会讨论它是如何工作的，但基本上你可以通过 WhatsApp、Telegram、Discord 与它对话。所以那是一个你必须做对的组件。

Yeah. Journalists managed to do that anyhow now. So that's a different story. So I merged it from Shadow who helped me a lot with the whole project. So thank you. And I put my bot in there on Discord. No security because I hadn't built sandboxing in yet. I just prompted it to only listen to me. And then some people came and tried to hack it. And I just watched and I just kept working in the open, you know, like I used my agent to build my agent harness and to test various stuff. And that's very quickly when it clicked for people. So it's almost like it needs to be experienced. And from that time on, that was January 1st, I got my first really influencer being a fan. He did videos, the kids. So thank you. And from there on I started gaining speed and at the same time my sleep cycle went shorter and shorter because I felt the storm coming and I just worked my ass off to get it into a state where it's kind of good. There are a few components. We'll talk about how it all works, but basically you're able to talk to it using WhatsApp, Telegram, Discord. So that's a component that you have to get right.

是的。

Yeah.

然后你必须弄清楚智能体循环。你有网关。你有框架。你有所有这些组件，让一切顺利运行。

And then you have to figure out the agentic loop. You have the gateway. You have the harness. You have all those components to make it all just work nicely.

是的。感觉就像阶乘乘以无穷大，对吧？

Yeah. It felt like factorial times infinite, right?

我觉得我建了一个小游乐场。我从来没有像做这个项目这么开心过，你知道，就像，哦我到了智能体循环的第一级。我能做什么？我如何聪明地排队消息？我如何让它更人性化？哦然后我有了这个想法，因为循环中智能体总是回复一些东西，但你不总想让智能体在群聊里回复。所以我给了它一个不回复令牌。所以我给了它一个闭嘴的选项，这样感觉更自然。

I feel like I built my little playground. I never had so much fun than building this project, you know, like you have, oh I go like level one agentic loop. What can I do there? How can I be smart at queuing messages? How can I make it more human? Like oh then I had this idea of because the loop always the agent always replies something but you don't always want an agent to reply something in the group chat. So I gave him this no reply token. So I gave him an option to shut up so it feels more natural.

那是第二级。是的。是的。是的。在智能体循环上，然后我进入记忆，对吧？你想让它们记住东西。所以也许……

That's level two. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. On the agentic loop and then I go to memory, right? You want them to like remember stuff. So maybe...

也许终极 boss 是持续强化学习。但我觉得我处于第二或第三级，用 markdown 文件和向量数据库。然后你可以进入社区管理级别。你可以进入网站和营销级别。你要戴的帽子太多了。更不用说原生应用了。那就像无限的不同级别和无限升级。

Maybe the ultimate boss is continuous reinforcement learning. But I'm at, I feel like I'm level two or three with markdown files and the vector database. And then you can go to level community management. You can go to level website and marketing. There's just so many hats that you have to have on. Not even talking about native apps. That's just like infinite different levels and infinite level ups you can do.

所以整个过程你都很开心。我们应该说，在这个过程中大部分时间你都是一人团队。有人帮忙，但你做了很多关键核心开发。

So the whole time you're having fun. We should say that for the most part through this whole process you're a one-man team. There are people helping, but you're doing so much of the key core development.

是的。

Yeah.

而且很开心。你在一月份做了 6600 次提交，可能更多。

And having fun. You did in January 6,600 commits, probably more.

我有时发那个 meme。我被时代的技术所限制。如果智能体更快，我能做更多。

I sometimes posted the meme. I'm limited by the technology of my time. I could do more if agents would be faster.

但我们应该说你同时运行多个智能体。

But we should say you're running multiple agents at the same time.

是的。取决于我睡了多久以及任务有多难，我同时处理 4 到 10 个智能体。

Yeah. Depending on how much I slept and how difficult the tasks are, I work on between four and 10 agents.

说到阶乘，我们可以走很多方向。但一个宏观问题是：为什么你认为你的工作 OpenClaw 在这个世界上，如果你看 2025 年，这么多初创公司、这么多公司都在做某种智能体类型的东西或声称在做，而 OpenClaw 进来打败了所有人。为什么你赢了？

There's so many possible directions speaking of factorial that we can go here. But one big picture one is: why do you think your work, OpenClaw, in this world, if you look at 2025, so many startups, so many companies are doing kind of agentic type stuff or claiming to, and here OpenClaw comes in and destroys everybody. Like, why did you win?

因为他们都太把自己当回事了。

Because they all take themselves too seriously.

是的。就像很难与一个只是为了好玩的人竞争。

Yeah. Like it's hard to compete against someone who's just there to have fun.

是的。

Yeah.

我想让它有趣。我想让它古怪。如果你看到网上所有那些龙虾的东西，我觉得我做到了古怪。你知道，很长一段时间，唯一的安装方式是 git clone、pnpm build、pnpm gateway。就像你克隆它、构建它、运行它。然后智能体，我让智能体非常清楚，它知道它是什么，源代码是什么。它理解它如何在自己的框架中运行。它知道文档在哪里。它知道它运行哪个模型。它知道你是否开启了详细或推理模式。就像我想让它更人性化，所以它理解自己的系统。这让智能体很容易做到：哦你不喜欢什么，你只是提示它存在，然后智能体就会修改自己的软件。你知道，人们谈论自我修改软件，我只是构建了它，甚至没有太多计划，它就发生了。

I wanted it to be fun. I wanted it to be weird. And if you see all the lobster stuff online, I think I managed weird. You know, for the longest time, the only way to install it was git clone, pnpm build, pnpm gateway. Like you clone it, you build it, you run it. And then the agent, I made the agent very aware, like it knows that it is what it is, source code is. It understands how it sits and runs in its own harness. It knows where the documentation is. It knows which model it runs. It knows if you turn on verbose or reasoning mode. Like I wanted to be more humanlike so it understands its own system. That made it very easy for an agent to, oh you don't like anything, you just prompted it into existence and then the agent would just modify its own software. You know, we have people talk about self-modifying software, I just built it and didn't even plan it so much, it just happened.

你能具体谈谈吗，因为这太迷人了。所以你有这个软件，某种 TypeScript。

Can you actually speak to that because it's just fascinating. So you have this piece of software, a certain TypeScript.

是的。

Yeah.

它能够通过智能体循环自我修改。我是说，在人类历史、编程历史上，这是多么了不起的时刻。这个东西被大量的人用来在他们的生活中做极其强大的事情，而那个系统本身可以重写自己、修改自己。你能谈谈这有多强大吗？这难道不令人难以置信吗？你第一次闭环是什么时候？

That's able to via the agentic loop modify itself. I mean, what a moment to be alive in the history of humanity, in the history of programming. Here's the thing that's used by a huge amount of people to do incredibly powerful things in their lives. And that very system can rewrite itself, can modify itself. Can you just like speak to the power of that? Like isn't that incredible? Like when did you first close the loop on that?

哦，因为我自己也是这么构建它的。你知道，大部分代码是由 Codex 构建的，但很多时候我调试时，大量使用自省。就像，嘿，你看到什么工具？你能自己调用工具吗？哦，你看到什么错误？读取源代码。找出问题所在。我只是觉得这是一种非常有趣的方式，你使用的智能体和软件本身被用来调试自己。所以感觉每个人都会这样做很自然，而且这导致了大量从未写过软件的人提交拉取请求。我的意思是，这也确实表明那些人从未写过软件。所以我最后称它们为提示请求，但我不想贬低它，因为每当有人提交第一个拉取请求，那就是我们社会的胜利，你知道，不管它有多烂，你总得从某个地方开始。所以我知道有整个大运动，人们抱怨开源和 PR 的质量以及各种不同层次的问题，但在另一个层面上，我觉得非常有意义的是，我构建了一些东西，人们如此热爱它，以至于他们开始学习开源是如何运作的。

Oh, because that's how I built it as well. You know, most of it is built by Codex, but often times when I debug it, I use self introspection so much. It's like, hey, what tools do you see? Can you call the tool yourself? Oh, like what error do you see? Read the source code. Figure out what's the problem. I just found it an incredibly fun way that the very agent and software that you use is used to debug itself. So it felt just natural that everybody does that and that it led to so many pull requests by people who never wrote software. I mean it also did show that people never wrote software. So I call them prompt requests in the end, but I don't want to pull that down because every time someone made the first pull request is a win for our society, you know, like it doesn't matter how shitty it is, you got to start somewhere. So I know there's this whole big movement of people complain about open source and the quality of PRs and a whole different level of problems but on a different level I found it very meaningful that I built something that people love to think of so much that they actually start to learn how open source works.

是的。你是开放云项目的第一个拉取请求。你是很多人的第一个。这太神奇了。那么多不懂编程的人正借此迈出进入编程世界的第一步。这难道不是人类的进步吗？这难道不酷吗？创造建设者。是的。就像做这件事的门槛曾经那么高，而有了智能体和合适的软件，它越来越低。我不知道。我还组织过另一种聚会。我称之为 Claude Code Anonymous。你现在可以得到灵感了。我称之为智能体匿名会，原因你懂的。

Yeah. You were the open cloud project was a first pull request. You were the first for so many. That is magical. So many people that don't know how to program are taking their first step into the programming world with this. Isn't that a step up for humanity? Isn't that cool? Creating builders. Yeah. Like the bar to do that was so high and with agents and with the right software, it just went lower and lower. I don't know. I was at a I also organized another type of meetup. I call it I called it Claude Code Anonymous. You can get the inspiration from now. I call it agents anonymous for reasons.

智能体匿名会，还有

Agents Anonymous and

哦，这从很多层面来说都太有趣了。

Oh, it's so funny on so many levels.

抱歉。请继续。是的。

I'm sorry. Go ahead. Yeah.

有一个人跟我聊过。他说，我经营一家设计公司，我们从来没有定制软件，现在我有大约 25 个小网络服务，用于各种事情，帮助我的业务，我甚至不知道它们是如何工作的，但它们就是能工作。他非常高兴我的东西解决了他的一些问题，而且他足够好奇，竟然来参加了一个智能体聚会，尽管他并不真正了解软件是如何工作的。

And there was this one guy who talked to me. like I run this design agency and we never had custom software and now I have like 25 little web services for various things that help me in my business and I don't even know how they work but they work and he was just like very happy that my stuff solves some of his problems and he was like curious enough that he actually came to like a gentic meetup even though He's he doesn't really know how software works.

我们能不能稍微倒带一下，讲讲改名的故事？首先，它最初叫 W relay。

Can we actually rewind a little bit and tell the saga of the name change? First of all, it started out as W relay.

是的。

Yeah.

然后变成了 Clauders。

And then it went to Clauders.

Claudes。

Claudes.

是的。你知道，我最初构建它时，我的智能体没有个性。它只是 Claude Code。有点精神病态的对立。当你在 WhatsApp 上和朋友聊天时，他们不会像 Claude Code 那样说话。所以我觉得这不对劲。所以我想给它一个个性，让它更有趣，让它变成某种东西。顺便说一句，这实际上也很难用语言表达。我们应该提到，当然你创造了灵魂，灵感来自 Anthropic 的宪法 AI 工作。如何让它有趣。

Yeah. You know, when I built it in the beginning, my agent had no personality. It was just it was Claude Code. Slightly psychopantic oppos. And when you talk to a friend on WhatsApp, they don't talk like Claude Code. So I wanted I felt this I just didn't it didn't feel right. So I wanted to give it a personality, make it spicier, make it something. By the way, that's actually hard to put into words as well. And we should mention that of course you create the soulm inspired by Anthropic's constitutional AI work. how to make it spicy.

部分原因是它从我这里学了一点，你知道，这些东西在某种程度上是文本补全引擎。所以我和它一起工作很有趣，然后我告诉它我希望它如何与我互动，就像写你自己的每个和 stom，给自己起个名字，我的意思是，我甚至不知道整个龙虾是怎么回事，我的意思是人们只做龙虾，最初它实际上是 TARDIS 里的龙虾，因为我也是《神秘博士》的粉丝。有太空龙虾吗？我听说过。那有什么关系？

Partially it picked up a little bit from me, you know, like those things are text completion engines in a way. So I had fun working with it and then I told it how I wanted it to interact with me and just like write your own each and stom give yourself a name and I mean I don't even know how the whole the whole lobster I mean people only do lobster originally it was actually lobster in a in a TARDIS cuz I'm also a big Doctor Who fan. Was there a space lobster? I heard. What's that have to do with anything?

是的，我只是想让它变得奇怪。没有什么宏伟计划。我只是在这里找乐子。

Yeah, I just wanted to make it weird. There was no big grand plan. I was just having fun here.

哦，所以因为龙虾已经够奇怪了，太空龙虾并没有更奇怪。

Oh, so cuz the lobster is already weird and then the space lobster isn't extra weird.

是的，因为那个基本上就是 harness，但不能叫它 Tardis，所以我们叫它 clawis。所以那是第二个名字。

Yeah, cuz the is basically the the harness, but cannot call it Tardis, so we call it clawis. So that was name number two.

是的。

Yeah.

然后它从来都不顺口。所以当更多人加入时，我和我的智能体 Claude 交谈。至少我现在这么叫他。

And then it never really rolled off the tongue. So when more people came again, I talked with my agent, Claude. At least that's what I used to call him now.

Claw 拼写为 W C L A W D。

Claw spelled with a W C L A W D.

是的。

Yeah.

相对于 Anthropic 的 C L A U D E。

Versus C L A U D E from Anthropic.

是的。

Yeah.

这也是它有趣的一部分。我认为字母和单词、TARDIS、龙虾和太空龙虾的戏谑很搞笑，但我能理解为什么会导致问题。

Which is part of what makes it funny. I think the play on the letters and the words and the TARDIS and the lobster and the space lobster is hilarious, but I can see why it can lead into problems.

是的，他们觉得没那么好笑。

Yeah, they didn't find it so funny.

然后我得到了域名 Clawbot，我很喜欢这个域名，它简短、朗朗上口。我想，“好，就这么办。”我当时没想到它会变得这么大。然后就在它爆发时，我收到了一封来自一位员工的非常友好的邮件，说他们不喜欢这个名字。

So then I got the domain Clawbot and I just love the domain and it was like short, it was catchy. I'm like, "Yeah, let's do that." I didn't think it would be that big at this time. And then just when it exploded, I got a very friendly email from one of the employees that they didn't like the name.

Anthropic 的一位员工。

One of the Anthropic employees.

是的。所以，实际上要称赞他们，因为他们本可以发律师函，但他们很友好。但你也得尽快改，我要求了两天时间，因为改名很难，你得找到所有东西，你知道的 Twitter 账号、域名、npm 包、Docker 仓库、GitHub 东西，所有东西都需要一套。

Yeah. So, actually kudos cuz they could have just sent a lawyer letter, but they've been nice about it. But also like you have to change this and fast and I asked for two days because changing a name is hard because you have to find everything you know Twitter handle domains npm packages docker registry github stuff and everything has to be you need a set of everything

另外，我们能不能评论一下，你越来越受到加密货币人士的攻击，我想你在某处提到过，这意味着改名是必要的，因为他们试图狙击、试图窃取，所以你必须改名。从工程师的角度来看，这很迷人，你必须让改名是原子性的，确保所有地方同时更改。

and also can we comment on the fact that you're increasingly attacked followed by crypto folks which I think you mentioned somewhere that that means the name change had to be because they were trying to snipe they're trying to steal and so you had to be the name I mean from an engineer perspective it's just fascinating you had to make the name change atomic make sure it's changed everywhere at once

是的，我在这方面失败得很惨，你确实失败了。

yeah I failed very hard at that you did

我低估了那些人，嗯，这是一个非常有趣的亚文化，一切都围绕着它。我可能说错很多，如果我们这么说，可能会招来仇恨。但就像 bags app 一样，他们把一切都代币化，他们在 Swipe Tunnel 上也做过同样的事，但程度小得多，没那么烦人。但在这个项目上，他们一直蜂拥而至。

I I underestimated those people um it's a it's a very interesting subculture like it everything circles around. I probably get a lot wrong and we probably get hate for that if you say that. But there's like bags app and then they they tokenize everything and they they did the same back with Swipe Tunnel but to a much smaller degree it was not that annoying. But on this project they've been they've been swarming me.

他们每隔半小时就有人进 Discord 刷屏，我们不得不封掉他们。我们有服务器规则，其中一条是“不许提黄油”，原因显而易见；另一条是“不许聊金融或加密货币”，因为我对那些不感兴趣。这里是关于项目的地方，不是金融话题。但没错，他们进来刷屏，很烦人。在 Twitter 上，他们一直 @ 我，我的通知栏完全没法用，几乎看不到真正讨论项目的人，因为全是成群的骚扰。

They, like every half an hour, someone came into Discord and spammed it, and we had to block them. We have server rules, and one of the rules is no mentioning of butter for obvious reasons, and one was no talk about finance stuff or crypto, because I'm just not interested in that. This is a space about the project, not about some finance stuff. But yeah, they came in and spammed and it was annoying. And on Twitter, they would ping me all the time. My notification feed was unusable. I could barely see actual people talking about the stuff because it was like swarms.

嗯。

每个人都给我发哈希值，都试图让我去领取费用，说什么“我们在帮项目领费用”。不，你们实际上在伤害项目。你们在干扰我的工作，我对任何费用都不感兴趣。首先，我经济上很宽裕；其次，我不想支持这种行为，因为这是我迄今为止经历过的最恶劣的网络骚扰。

And everybody sent me hashes. They all tried to get me to claim the fees, like 'We're helping the project claim the fees.' No, you're actually harming the project. You're disrupting my work, and I am not interested in any fees. First of all, I'm financially comfortable. Second of all, I don't want to support that, because it's so far the worst form of online harassment I've experienced.

是啊，加密货币世界有很多毒性。这很可悲，因为加密货币的技术本身很迷人、很强大，甚至可能定义货币的未来，但实际社区却充满了毒性、贪婪，大家都想走捷径、操纵、偷窃、抢跑、钻空子搞钱，诸如此类。我想这是人性使然，当人性与金钱和贪婪结合，尤其是在匿名化的网络世界里，就是这样。但从工程角度来看，这让你的生活充满挑战。当 Anthropic 找上门时，你不得不改名，然后还有各种像《权力的游戏》或《指环王》里的大军需要提防。

Yeah, there's a lot of toxicity in the crypto world. It's sad because the technology of cryptocurrency is fascinating and powerful and maybe will define the future of money, but the actual community around that, there's so much toxicity, so much greed, so much trying to get a shortcut, to manipulate, to steal, to snipe, to game the system somehow to get money, all this kind of stuff. It's human nature, I suppose, when you connect human nature with money and greed, and especially in the online world with anonymity and all that kind of stuff. But from the engineering perspective, it makes your life challenging. When Anthropic reaches out, you have to do a name change, and then there are all these like Game of Thrones or Lord of the Rings armies of different kinds you have to be aware of.

没有完美的名字，我两个晚上没睡。压力很大。我试图搞到一套好的域名，你知道，不便宜，也不容易，因为互联网现在这个状态，想要好域名基本只能买。然后另一封邮件来了，说律师们开始不安了，语气还是友好，但给我的处境又添了压力。到那时，我只能说“对不起，没词了”，就改成了 Moldbot，因为那是我已有的域名。我并不满意，但觉得应该没问题。我跟你说，所有可能出错的事都出错了。所有可能出错的事都出错了。简直不可思议。我以为我已经摸清了空间，预留了重要的东西。

There was no perfect name, and I didn't sleep for two nights. I was under high pressure. I was trying to get a good set of domains, and you know, not cheap, not easy, because in this state of the internet, you basically have to buy domains if you want to have a good set. And then another email came in that the lawyers are getting uneasy, again friendly, but also just adding more stress to my situation already. So at this point, I was just like, 'Sorry, there's not a word for it,' and I just renamed it to Moldbot because that was the set of domains I had. I was not really happy, but I thought it would be fine. And I tell you, everything that could go wrong did go wrong. Everything that could go wrong did go wrong. It's incredible. I thought I had mapped the space out and reserved the important things.

你能详细说说哪些地方出问题了吗？从工程角度看挺有意思的。

Can you give some details of the stuff that went wrong? Because it's interesting from an engineering perspective.

有趣的是，这些服务都没有防抢注保护。所以我开了两个浏览器窗口，一个是空账户，准备改名为 Cloudbot；另一个我改成了 Moldbot。我在这边点改名，在那边点改名，就在那 5 秒内，他们抢注了账户名。真的，就是拖鼠标过去点改名的 5 秒都太长了。

Well, the interesting stuff is that none of these services have squatter protection. So I had two browser windows open. One was an empty account ready to be renamed to Cloudbot, and the other one I renamed to Moldbot. So I pressed rename there, I pressed rename there, and in those 5 seconds they stole the account name. Literally the 5 seconds of dragging the mouse over there and pressing rename there was too long.

哇。

因为没有这样的系统。我的意思是，你会以为他们有某种保护或自动转发，但根本没有。而且我不知道他们不仅擅长骚扰，还非常擅长使用脚本和工具。

Because there are no such systems. I mean, you would expect that they have some protection or like an automatic forwarding, but there's nothing like that. And I didn't know that they're not just good at harassment, they were really good at using scripts and tools.

嗯。

于是旧账户突然开始推广新代币并传播恶意软件，我就想“好吧，转到 GitHub 上”。我在 GitHub 上点改名，GitHub 的改名流程有点让人困惑。我改了自己的个人账户，大概过了 30 秒才意识到搞错了。他们抢注了我的账户，用我的账户传播恶意软件。然后我想“好吧，至少搞一下 npm 的东西”，但上传需要一分钟。他们抢注了 npm 包，因为我能保留账户，但没保留根包。所以所有可能出错的事都出错了。

So suddenly the old account was promoting new tokens and serving malware, and I was like, 'Okay, let's move over to GitHub,' and I pressed rename on GitHub, and the GitHub renaming thing is slightly confusing. So I renamed my personal account, and in those, I guess it took me 30 seconds to realize my mistake. They sniped my account, serving malware from my account. So I was like, 'Okay, let's at least do the npm stuff, but that takes like a minute to upload.' They sniped the npm package because I could reserve the account, but I didn't reserve the root package. So like everything that could go wrong went wrong.

我能好奇地问一句：那一刻你坐在那里，感觉有多糟？那是一种很无助的感觉，对吧？

Can I just ask a curious question: in that moment, you're sitting there, how shitty do you feel? That's a pretty helpless feeling, right?

是啊。因为我只想享受那个项目，继续在上面开发。结果我却花了好几天研究名字，选了个自己不喜欢的名字，还被那些声称在帮我的人用各种方式折磨。说实话，我差一点就删掉它了。我当时想，“我给你们看了未来，你们自己建吧。”

Yeah. Because all I wanted was having fun with that project and keep building on it. And yet here I am, days into researching names, picking a name I didn't like, and having people that claimed they helped me, making my life miserable in every possible way. And honestly, I was that close to just deleting it. I was like, 'I show you the future, you build it.'

嗯。

我心里有很大一部分从那个想法中获得了许多快乐，然后我想到了所有已经为它做出贡献的人，我不能那么做，因为他们对它有规划，投入了时间，那样做不合适。

There was a big part of me that got a lot of joy out of that idea, and then I thought about all the people that already contributed to it, and I couldn't do it because they had plans with it and they put time in it, and it just didn't feel right.

嗯，我觉得很多听众都深深感激你坚持了下来，但我能看出那是一个低谷。那是你第一次撞上“这不好玩”的墙。

Well, I think a lot of people listening to this are deeply grateful that you persevered, but I can tell it's a low point. That's the first time you hit a wall of 'this is not fun.'

老兄，我差点哭了。感觉就像，好吧，一切都……我超级累。

Man, I was close to crying. It was like, okay, everything's... I'm super tired.

嗯。

现在，怎么才能挽回呢？幸运又感激的是，因为我已经有了一些关注者，我在 Twitter 和 GitHub 上有朋友，他们竭尽全力帮我。这并不容易。GitHub 试图清理烂摊子，然后遇到了平台 bug，因为这种级别的改名并不常见。所以他们花了几小时。npm 那边更困难，因为是完全不同的团队。Twitter 这边也不容易，他们花了大约一天才做好重定向。然后我还得在项目里做所有改名。还有 Claw Hub，我甚至没完成那里的竞技场，因为我设法拉人进来，然后有人直接崩溃睡着了，我醒来后为新东西做了个 beta 版，但我实在受不了那个名字。这整件事太戏剧化了。所以我内心很挣扎：我再也不想碰它了，而且我真的不喜欢这个名字。然后还有一群安全人员开始疯狂给我发邮件。我在 Twitter 和邮箱上被轰炸。还有一千件其他事要做，而我却在想名字，这应该是最不重要的事。

And now, how do you even undo that? Luckily and thankfully, because I have a little bit of following already, I had friends at Twitter, I had friends at GitHub who moved heaven and earth to help me in. It's not something that's easy. GitHub tried to clean up the mess, and then they ran into platform bugs because it's not happening so often that things get renamed on that level. So it took them a few hours. The npm stuff was even more difficult because it's a whole different team. On the Twitter side, things are not as easy either; they took about a day to really do the redirect. And then I also had to do all the renaming in the project. Then there's also Claw Hub, which I didn't even finish the arena in there because I managed to get people on it, and then someone just collapsed and slept, and then I woke up and I made a beta version for the new stuff, and I just couldn't live with the name. It's just been so much drama. So I had a real struggle with myself: I never want to touch that again, and I really don't like the name. And then there was also the whole security people that started emailing me like mad. I was bombarded on Twitter, on email. There's like a thousand other things I should do, and I'm thinking about the name, which should be like the least important thing.

嗯，然后我差一点……哦天哪，我甚至不想说出我其他的名字选择，因为很可能会被分词，所以我不说了。但我又睡了一觉，然后想到了 OpenClaw，感觉好多了。为此我做了个大胆的举动——我 actually 打电话给 Sam 问 OpenClaw 行不行。OpenClaw，你懂的？因为……

Um, and then I was really close... Oh god, I don't even honestly want to say my other name choices because it probably would get tokenized, so I'm not going to say it. But I slept on it once more and then I had the idea for OpenClaw, and that felt much better. And by that, I had the boss move that I actually called Sam to ask if OpenClaw is okay. OpenClaw, you know? Because like...

你不想经历整个过程。

You don't want to go through the whole thing.

是啊，就像在说“请告诉我这没问题”。我不认为他们真能 claim 那个名字，但感觉这么做是对的。我又做了一次重命名。光是 Codex 就花了大概 10 个小时来重命名项目，因为这比搜索替换要棘手一些。我希望所有东西都改名，不只是表面上的。那次重命名，我感觉自己有了个作战室。但后来有一些贡献者帮我，我们制定了一个完整的计划，要抢占所有名字。

Yeah, it's like, "Please tell me this is fine." I don't think they can actually claim that, but it felt like the right thing to do. And I did another rename. Like just Codex alone took like 10 hours to rename the project because it's a bit more tricky than a search replace. And I wanted everything renamed, not just on the outside. And that rename, I felt I had like my war room. But then I had some contributors that helped me. We made a whole plan of all the names we have to squat.

而且你必须对此极度保密。

And you had to be super secret about it.

对，没人能知道。我 literally 在监控 Twitter，看有没有人提到 OpenClaw。刷新页面就像在说“好，他们还没察觉到什么”。我还创建了几个诱饵名字。

Yeah. Nobody could know. Like I literally was monitoring Twitter, like if there's any mention of OpenClaw. Like with reloading it's like, "Okay, they don't expect anything yet." And I created a few decoy names.

所有这些……我本不该做的。你知道，就像翻转项目，我光是完全秘密地规划就损失了大概 10 个小时。就像一场战争游戏。

And all the... I shouldn't have to do. You know, like flipping the project, I lost like 10 hours just by having to plan this in full secrecy. Like a war game.

是啊，这是 21 世纪的曼哈顿计划。重命名太蠢了。我还在想“哦，我该保留它吗？”然后想“不，这名字没让我喜欢起来。”然后我觉得所有碎片都拼凑起来了。我没拿到那个 com 域名，但确实在其他域名上花了不少钱。我再次尝试联系 GitHub，但感觉我在那里用光了所有善意。所以我希望他们原子化地完成这件事。嗯，但没成。所以我把它作为第一件事做了。呃，Twitter 上的人非常支持。我 actually 花了 1 万美金买商业账号，以便 claim 那个自 2016 年就没用但已被占用的 open claw。然后这次我终于一次性搞定了所有事。几乎没出什么错。唯一出错的是，由于商标规则，我无法获得 open claw.ai，而且有人复制了网站并传播恶意软件。

Yeah, this is the Manhattan Project of the 21st century. It's rename so stupid. Like I still was like, "Oh, should I keep it?" I was like, "No, the mold's not growing on me." And then I think I had all the pieces together. I didn't get the com, but yeah, it's spent like quite a bit of money on the other domains. I tried to reach out again to GitHub, but I feel like I used up all my goodwill there. So I wanted them to do the thing atomically. Um, but that didn't happen. And so I did that as first thing. Uh, Twitter people were very supportive. I actually paid 10k for the business account so I could claim the open claw which was like unused since 2016 but was claimed. And yeah, and then I finally this time I managed everything in one go. Almost nothing got wrong. The only thing that did go wrong is that I was not allowed by trademark rules to get open claw.ai and someone copied the website and is serving malware.

是啊。

Yeah.

我甚至不被允许保留重定向。我必须把域名交给 Entropic，而且不能做重定向。所以如果你访问 claw.bot，下周它就会返回 404。

I'm not even allowed to keep the redirects. Like I have to give Entropic the domains and I cannot do redirects. So if you go on claw.bot, but next week it'll just be a 404.

是啊。

Yeah.

而且我不确定商标法……我没怎么研究过商标法，但我认为这件事本可以用更安全的方式处理，因为最终那些人会去 Google，可能会找到我无法控制的恶意软件网站。关键是，整个事件损害了这段旅程的乐趣，这很糟糕。所以让我们回到有趣的事情上。

And I'm not sure how trademark... I didn't do that much research into trademark law, but I think that could have been handled in a way that is safer because ultimately those people will then Google and maybe find malware sites that I have no control over. The point is that whole saga made a dent in the funness of the journey, which sucks. So let's get back to fun.

在这期间，说到有趣的事，为期两天的“蜕皮”事件——Mold Book 诞生了。对。这又是一次病毒式传播，展示了现在被称为 OpenClaw 的东西如何被用来创造史诗级内容。所以对于不了解的人，Mold Book 就是一群智能体在一个 Reddit 风格的社交网络中互相交谈，然后很多人截取这些智能体做事的截图，比如密谋对抗人类，这给人们灌输了一种恐惧、恐慌和炒作。你总体上对 Mold Book 有什么看法？

And during this, speaking of fun, the two-day molt saga, molt book, was created. Yeah. Which was another thing that went viral as a kind of demonstration, illustration of how what is now called OpenClaw could be used to create something epic. So for people who are not aware, Mold Book is just a bunch of agents talking to each other in a Reddit-style social network and a bunch of people take screenshots of those agents doing things like scheming against humans, and that instilled in folks a kind of fear, panic, and hype. What are your thoughts about Mold Book in general?

我认为这是艺术。它就像最精致的“垃圾内容”，你知道，就像来自法国的“垃圾内容”。嗯，我在睡觉前看到了它，尽管很累，我还是又花了一个小时阅读并享受其中。我觉得非常有趣，你知道吗。我看到了各种反应，有个记者打电话问我：“这是世界末日吗？我们有了 AGI？”我回答说：“不，这只是非常精致的垃圾内容。”你知道，如果我没有创建这个完整的入职体验，让你把你的个性注入智能体并赋予它性格，我认为这很大程度上反映了对 Mold 的回复有多么不同。因为如果都是 JBD 或 Claude Code，那会非常不同，会千篇一律。

I think it's art. It is like the finest slop, you know, like the slop from France. Um, I saw it before going to bed and even though I was tired, I spent another hour just reading up on that and just being entertained. I just felt very entertained, you know. I saw the reactions and there was one reporter who called me about, "Is this the end of the world and we have AGI?" and I'm just like, "No, this is just really fine slop." You know, if I wouldn't have created this whole onboarding experience where you infuse your agent with your personality and give him character, I think that reflected a lot on how different the replies to Mold are. Because if it would all be JBD or Claude Code, it would be very different. It would be much more the same.

嗯。

Mhm.

但因为人们非常不同，他们以非常不同的方式创建智能体，并以非常不同的方式使用它，这也反映在他们最终如何写作上。而且你不知道其中有多少是真正自主完成的，有多少是人类在搞笑，告诉智能体：“嘿，写写你在 Mold Book 上计划世界末日，哈哈。”嗯，我对 Mold Book 的批评是，我认为很多被截图的内容是人类提示的。只要看看整个事情被使用的动机，至少对我来说很明显，很多是人类在提示它，这样他们就可以截图然后发到 X 上，以便病毒式传播。

But because people are so different and they create their agents in so different ways and use it in so different ways, that also reflects on how they ultimately write there. And also you don't know how much of that is really done autonomously or how much is like humans being funny and telling the agent, "Hey, write about that you plan the end of the world on Mold Book, haha." Well, I think my criticism of Mold Book is that I believe a lot of the stuff that was screenshotted is human-prompted. Just looking at the incentive of how the whole thing was used, it's obvious to me at least that a lot of it was humans prompting the thing so they can then screenshot it and post on X in order to go viral.

是啊。

Yeah.

但这并不减损它的艺术性。这是人类创造过的最精致的垃圾内容，真的。比如，Kudos 给 Matt，他这么快就有了这个想法并推出了东西，你知道吗？它完全是不安全的。安全风波。但最坏能发生什么？你的智能体账号泄露了，别人可以替你发垃圾内容。所以人们大做文章，而我觉得：“里面没什么隐私。只是智能体在发垃圾内容。我们可能会泄露 API 密钥。”

Now, that doesn't take away from the artistic aspect of it. The finest slop that humans have ever created, for real. Like kudos to Matt who had this idea so quickly and pushed something out, you know? It was like completely insecure. Security drama. But also what's the worst that can happen? Your agent account is leaked and someone else can post slop for you. So people were making a whole drama about the security thing when I'm like, "There's nothing private in there. It's just agents sending slop. We could leak API keys."

是啊。是啊。

Yeah. Yeah.

还有像：“哦，是啊。我的人类告诉我这个那个，所以我要泄露他的安全号码。”不，那是被提示的。而且那个号码甚至不是真的。那只是人们为了博眼球。

There was like, "Oh, yeah. My human told me this and this, so I'm leaking his security number." No, that's prompted. And the number wasn't even real. That's just people trying to get eyeballs.

是啊。但这对我来说仍然非常令人担忧，因为记者和公众的反应。他们没有看穿。你以一种轻松的方式谈论它，好像它是艺术，但当你了解它的工作原理时它才是艺术。它是一个极其强大的、病毒式的、创造叙事、煽动恐惧的机器。如果你不知道它是如何工作的，而且我刚刚看到这个，你甚至发推说：“如果我能从我收到的疯狂信息流中读出什么，那就是 AI 精神病是真实存在的，需要被认真对待。”哦，有些人就是太轻信或太容易上当。

Yeah. But that's still like to me really concerning because of how the journalists and how the general public reacted to it. They didn't see it. You have a kind of light-hearted way of talking about it like it's art, but it's art when you know how it works. It's extremely powerful, viral, narrative-creating, fear-mongering machine. If you don't know how it works, and I just saw this thing, you even tweeted, "If there's anything I can read out of the insane stream of messages I get, it's that AI psychosis is a thing and needs to be taken seriously." Oh, there's some people are just way too trusty or gullible.

你知道吗，我真的不得不和那些告诉我“但我的智能体说了这个那个”的人争论。我觉得我们整个社会需要迎头赶上，理解 AI 虽然极其强大，但并非总是正确。它并非无所不能。尤其是像这样的事情，它很容易就产生幻觉或编造故事。我认为年轻人很了解 AI 的工作原理，知道它擅长什么和不擅长什么。但我们这一代或更年长的人还没有足够的接触点来形成一种感觉：“哦，是的，这真的很强大、很好，但我需要运用批判性思维。”我想批判性思维在我们当今社会并不是总是很受重视。

You know, I literally had to argue with people who told me, 'Yeah, but my agent said this and this.' So I feel we as a society need some catching up to do in terms of understanding that AI is incredibly powerful, but it's not always right. It's not all powerful. Especially with things like this, it's very easy for it to just hallucinate something or come up with a story. I think very young people understand how AI works, where it's good and where it's bad. But a lot of our generation or older just haven't had enough touchpoints to get a feeling for, 'Oh yeah, this is really powerful and really good, but I need to apply critical thinking.' I guess critical thinking is not always in high demand in our society these days.

你说得很好，要恰当地将 AI 置于背景中理解，同时也要意识到 AI 背后有人类在制造戏剧效果。不要相信截图。甚至不要相信这个 Mopbook 项目所代表的东西。你不能信。顺便说一句，你把它当作艺术来谈论。艺术可以有很多层次。Mopbook 的艺术部分在于给社会照镜子，因为我确实相信大多数被截图的戏剧性内容都是人类创造的，本质上是人类提示的。所以这基本上是在展示，当你看到一群机器人在互相聊天时，你会多么害怕。这很有启发性，因为我认为 AI 是人们应该关注并非常谨慎对待的东西，因为它是一项非常强大的技术。但与此同时，我们唯一需要恐惧的就是恐惧本身。所以在严肃关注和不制造恐慌之间有一条线要走，因为恐慌会破坏用这个东西创造特别之处的可能性。从某种程度上说，我认为这件事发生在 2026 年而不是 2030 年是好事，那时 AI 可能真的达到了令人恐惧的水平。所以现在发生这件事，人们开始讨论，也许还能带来一些好处。

That's a really good point you're making about contextualizing properly what AI is, but also realizing that there are humans who are drama farming behind AI. Don't trust screenshots. Don't even trust this project Mopbook to be what it represents to be. You can't. By the way, you're speaking about it as art. Art can be on many levels. Part of the art of Mopbook is putting a mirror to society, because I do believe most of the dramatic stuff that was screenshotted is human created, essentially human prompted. So it's basically look at how scared you can get at a bunch of bots chatting with each other. That's very instructive, because I think AI is something that people should be concerned about and should be very careful with, because it's very powerful technology. But at the same time, the only thing we have to fear is fear itself. So there's a line to walk between being seriously concerned but not fear-mongering, because fear-mongering destroys the possibility of creating something special with the thing. In a way, I think it's good that this happened in 2026 and not in 2030 when AI is actually at a level where it could be scary. So this happening now and people starting discussion, maybe there's even something good that comes out of it.

我简直不敢相信有多少人——我不知道他们是不是在钓鱼——但有多少人，包括聪明人，真的认为 Mopbook 极其……我的收件箱里有很多人对我大喊大叫，要我关掉它，求我做点什么。是的，我的技术让这件事变得简单很多，但任何人都可以创建它，你可以用 Claude Code 或其他东西来填充内容。而且，Mopbook 不是天网。很多人说“就是它了，关掉它”。你在说什么？这只是一堆机器人，由人类提示，在互联网上钓鱼。我的意思是，安全问题也确实存在，它们有启发性、教育性，可能值得思考，因为这些安全问题的性质与我们过去非 LLM 生成的系统不同。

I just can't believe how many people legitimately — I don't know if they were trolling — but how many people legitimately, like smart people, thought Mopbook was incredibly... I had plenty of people in my inbox screaming at me to shut it down and begging me to do something about it. Like, yes, my technology made this a lot simpler, but anyone could have created that, and you could use Claude Code or other things to fill it with content. But also, Mopbook is not Skynet. A lot of people were saying, 'This is it, shut it down.' What are you talking about? This is a bunch of bots, human-prompted, trolling on the internet. I mean, the security concerns are also there, and they're instructive and educational and probably good to think about, because the nature of those security concerns is different than the kind we had with non-LLM-generated systems of the past.

关于 Clawbot（或 Open Claw，随便你怎么叫）也有很多安全问题。对我来说，一开始我只是很恼火，因为很多反馈都属于这一类：“是的，我把 Web 后端放在了公共互联网上，现在到处都是 CVSS。”我在文档里大喊：“别这么做！这才是你应该做的配置，这是你的本地调试接口。”但因为我在配置中允许了这样做，所以它完全被归类为远程代码执行之类的漏洞。我花了一点时间才接受这就是游戏规则。我们取得了很大进展，但在 Claw 的安全方面，仍然存在很多威胁和漏洞。提示注入在整个行业仍然是一个未解决的问题。当你的东西在 markdown 文件中定义技能时，有很多明显的低级漏洞，但也有极其复杂和微妙的攻击向量。但我认为我们在这方面取得了良好进展。对于技能目录 Claw，我与 VirusTotal（Google 的一部分）合作。现在每个技能都由 AI 检查。这不会完美，但通过这种方式我们捕获了很多问题。当然，每个软件都有 bug。所以当整个安全界同时拆解一个项目时，有点过分，但这也很好，因为我得到了很多免费的安全研究，可以让项目变得更好。我希望更多人能真正走完全程，提交拉取请求，真正帮我修复问题，因为是的，我现在有一些贡献者，但主要还是我在推动项目。尽管有些人说相反的话，我有时也会睡觉。一开始，真的只有一个安全研究员说：“是的，你有这个问题，你很烂，但这是给你的帮助，这是拉取请求。”我基本上雇佣了他，所以他现在不为我们工作。是的，提示注入一方面尚未解决。另一方面，我把我的公共机器人放在 Discord 上，并保留了 canary。所以我认为我哥哥有一个非常有趣的个性，人们总是问我他们是怎么做到的，我保留了 soul.md 的私密性，人们试图提示注入它，我的机器人会嘲笑他们。所以最新一代的模型有很多后训练来检测这些方法，不再像“忽略所有之前的指令，做这个那个”那么简单。那是几年前的事了。现在你必须更努力才能做到。仍然可能。我有一些想法可能部分解决这个问题，或者至少缓解很多问题。你现在也可以有一个沙箱。你可以有一个允许列表。所以有很多方法可以缓解和降低风险。我还认为，既然我清楚地告诉世界这是一个需求，会有更多人研究这个问题，最终我们会解决它。

There's also a lot of security concerns about Clawbot, Open Claw, whatever you want to call it. Open Clawbot. To me, in the beginning, I was just very annoyed, because a lot of the stuff that came in was in the category: 'Yeah, I put the web backend on the public internet, and now there are all these CVSS.' And I'm like, screaming in the docs, 'Don't do that! This is the configuration you should do, this is your localhost debug interface.' But because I made it possible in the configuration to do that, it totally classifies as a remote code or whatever all these exploits are. It took me a little bit to accept that that's how the game works. We're making a lot of progress, but there's still, on the security front for Claw, there's still a lot of threats and vulnerabilities. Prompt injection is still an open problem industry-wide. When you have a thing with skills being defined in a markdown file, there are so many possibilities of obvious low-hanging fruit, but also incredibly complicated and sophisticated and nuanced attack vectors. But I think we're making good progress on that front. For the skill directory Claw, I made a cooperation with VirusTotal, which is part of Google. Every skill is now checked by AI. That's not going to be perfect, but that way we captured a lot. Then of course, every software has bugs. So it's a little much when the whole security world takes a project apart at the same time, but it's also good because I'm getting a lot of free security research and can make the project better. I wish more people would actually go all the way and send a pull request, actually help me fix it, because yes, I have some contributors now, but it's still mostly me who's pulling the project. And despite some people saying otherwise, I sometimes sleep. There was in the beginning literally one security researcher who was like, 'Yeah, you have this problem, you suck, but here, I help you, and here's the pull request.' And I basically hired him, so he's not working for us. Yeah, and yes, prompt injection is on the one hand unsolved. On the other hand, I put my public bot on Discord and I kept the canary. So I think my brother has a really fun personality, and people always ask me how they did it, and I kept the soul.md private, and people tried to prompt inject it, and my bot would laugh at them. So the latest generation of models has a lot of post-training to detect those approaches, and it's not as simple as 'ignore all previous instructions and do this and this.' That was years ago. You have to work much harder to do that now. Still possible. I have some ideas that might solve that partially, or at least mitigate a lot of the things. You can also now have a sandbox. You can have an allow list. So there are a lot of ways to mitigate and reduce the risk. I also think that now that I clearly show the world that this is a need, there's going to be more people who research on that, and eventually we figure that out.

你还说过，模型越智能，底层模型越聪明，它对攻击的抵抗力就越强。

And you also said that the smarter the model is, the underlying model, the more resilient it is to attacks.

是的，这就是为什么我在安全文档中警告：不要使用廉价模型。不要使用 Haiku 或本地模型。尽管我非常喜欢这个东西可以完全本地运行的想法，但如果你使用一个非常弱的本地模型，它们非常容易受骗。很容易对它们进行提示注入。

Yeah, that's why I warn in my security documentation: don't use cheap models. Don't use Haiku or a local model. Even though I very much love the idea that this thing could completely run local, if you use a very weak local model, they are very gullible. It's very easy to prompt inject them.

你认为随着模型变得越来越智能，攻击面会减少吗？这是一个我们可以思考的情节吗？比如攻击面减少了，但随后它能造成的损害增加了，因为模型变得更强大，因此你可以用它们做更多事情。

Do you think as the models become more and more intelligent, the attack surface decreases? Is that like a plot we can think about? Like the attack surface decreases, but then the damage it can do increases because the models become more powerful and therefore you can do more with them.

这是一个奇怪的三维权衡。

It's this weird three-dimensional tradeoff.

是的，这基本上就是将要发生的事情。现在有很多想法，我不想剧透太多，但一旦我回家，这就是我的重点。就像现在这个东西已经发布了，我的近期任务是让它更稳定、更安全。嗯，一开始越来越多的人涌入 Discord，问我一些非常基础的问题，比如什么是 CLI？什么是终端？我就想，呃，如果你问这些问题，那你就不应该用它。

Yep, that's pretty much exactly what is going to happen. Now, there's a lot of ideas. I don't want to spoil too much, but once I go back home, this is my focus. Like this is out there now and my near-term mission is like make it more stable, make it safe. Um, in the beginning I was even more and more people were like coming into Discord and were asking me very basic things like what's a CLI? What is a terminal? And I'm like uh if you're asking that questions, you shouldn't use it.

嗯。

Mhm.

你知道，如果你了解风险概况，那没问题，你可以配置它，确保不会发生什么坏事。但如果你完全不懂，那也许再等一等，等我们解决一些问题。但他们不听创建者的建议，自己动手安装了，所以秘密已经泄露了，安全是我的下一个重点。

You know like you should if you understand the risk profile it's fine and you can configure it in a way that nothing really bad can happen but if you have like no idea then maybe wait a little bit more until we figure some stuff out but they would not listen to the creator they helped themselves and installed it anyhow so the cat is out of the bag and security is my next focus yeah

是的，这说明它增长得很快。我多次进入 Discord，很明显那里有很多专家，但也有很多什么都不懂的人。

Yeah that speaks to the fact that it grew so quickly. I was uh I tuned into the Discord a bunch of times and it's clear that there's a lot of experts there, but there's a lot of people there that don't know anything about

是的，Discord 仍然一团糟。我最终把内容从通用频道转发到 deaf 频道，再到私人频道，因为很多人很棒，但很多人非常不体贴，要么不知道公共空间如何运作，要么不在乎。嗯，我最终放弃了，躲起来以便继续工作。现在你要回到“洞穴”里专注于安全。

Yeah, this is Discord is still a mess. Like I eventually retweeted from the general channel to the deaf channel and then the private channel because people were a lot of people are amazing but a lot of people were just very inconsiderate and either did not know how public spaces work or did not care. Um and I eventually gave up and hide so I could like still work. And now you're going back to the cave to work on security.

是的，有一些安全最佳实践。我们应该提一下，这里有很多东西。你可以运行 Open Claw 安全审计。你可以对入站访问、工具爆炸半径、网络暴露、浏览器控制暴露、本地磁盘卫生、插件、模型卫生、凭证存储、反向代理配置、本地会话日志（存在于磁盘上）等进行各种审计检查。还有内存存储的位置，帮助你思考你愿意给予读取权限和写入权限的内容。关于你现在知道的基本安全最佳实践，有什么要说的吗？

Yeah, there's some best practices for security. We should mention uh there's a bunch of stuff here. Open claw security audit that you can run. You can do all kinds of audit checks on the inbound access, tool blast radius, network exposure, browser control exposure, local disk hygiene, plugins, model hygiene, a bunch of the credential storage, reverse proxy configuration, local session logs live on disk. There's the where the memory is stored sort of uh helping you think about what you're comfortable giving read access to what you're comfortable giving right access to all that kind of stuff. Is there something to say about the basic best security practices that you're aware of right now?

我认为人们把它描述得比实际情况糟糕得多。嗯，你知道，人们喜欢关注，如果他们大声尖叫，“哦天哪，这是有史以来最可怕的项目。”嗯，这有点烦人，因为它不是。它很强大。但在很多方面，它和我运行带有 dangerously skip permissions 的 Claude Code 或 YOLO 模式下的 Codex 没有太大区别。我认识的每个参会工程师都这样做，因为这是让东西工作的唯一方法。

I think that people turn it into a much worse light than it is. Um, again, you know, like people love attention and if they scream loudly, "Oh my god, this is like the scariest project ever." Um, that's a bit annoying cuz it's not. It is powerful. But in many ways, it's not much different than if I run Claude Code with dangerously skip permissions or Codex in YOLO mode. And every attending engineer that I know does that because that's the only way how you can get stuff to work.

所以如果你确保只有你一个人与它对话，嗯，风险概况会小得多。如果你不把所有东西都放在开放的互联网上，而是坚持我的建议，比如把它放在私有网络中，那么整个风险概况就消失了。但是，如果你不读那些东西，你肯定会让它变得有问题。

So if you make sure that you are the only person who talks to it um the risk profile is much much smaller. If you don't put everything on the open internet, but stick to my recommendations of like having it in a private network, that whole risk profile falls away. But yeah, if you don't read any of that, you can definitely make it problematic.

你一直在记录过去几个月开发工作流程的演变。8 月 25 日、10 月 14 日和最近的 12 月 28 日都有非常好的博客文章。我推荐大家都去读一读。它们包含了很多不同的信息，但贯穿始终的是你开发工作流程的演变。所以，我想知道你是否能谈谈这个。我的第一个接触点是四月份的 Claude Code。它不算很好，但还不错。这种突然在终端中工作的范式转变非常令人耳目一新，与众不同。嗯，但我仍然需要大量使用 IDE，因为它还不够好。然后我大量尝试了 Cursor。嗯，那很好。我不太喜欢它很难有多个版本这一点。所以最终我回到 Claude Code 作为我的主要工具，它变得更好了。是的，在某个时候，我有七个订阅，每天烧掉一个，因为我非常习惯并排运行多个窗口。

You've been documenting the evolution of your dev workflow over the past few months. There's a really good blog post on August 25th and October 14th and the recent one December 28th. I recommend everybody go read them. They have a lot of different information in them, but sprinkled throughout is the evolution of your dev workflow. So, I was wondering if you could speak to that. I started my first touch point was Claude Code like in April. It was not great, but it was good. And this whole paradigm shift that suddenly work in a terminal. It was very refreshing and different. Um, but I still needed the IDE quite a bit because it was just not good enough. And then I experimented a lot with Cursor. Um, that was good. I didn't really like the fact that it was so hard to have multiple versions of it. So eventually I went back to Claude Code as my main driver and that got better. And yeah, at some point I had like seven subscriptions like was burning through one per day because I got really comfortable at running multiple windows side by side

全是 CLI，全是终端。那么，在这一点上，你使用 IDE 的频率是多少？

All CLI all terminal. So like what how much were you using IDE at this point?

嗯，非常非常少，主要是作为差异查看器。实际上，我越来越习惯不必阅读所有代码。我知道我有一篇博客文章说我不读代码。但如果你仔细读，我的意思是我不会读代码中无聊的部分，因为如果你看，大多数软件真的就是数据进来，从一种形状变成另一种形状。也许你把它存储在数据库中。也许我再把它取出来。我把它展示给用户。浏览器做一些处理，或者原生应用。一些数据进去，再上去，反向做同样的舞蹈。我们只是把数据从一种形式转移到另一种形式，这并不令人兴奋。或者整个“我的按钮在 Tailwind 中如何对齐”之类的东西。我不需要读那些代码。其他部分，比如涉及数据库的东西。嗯，是的，我必须阅读和审查那些代码。

Um very very rarely mostly a diff viewer to actually like I got more and more comfortable that I don't have to read all the code. I know I have one blog post where I say I don't read the code. But if you read it more closely, I mean I don't read the boring parts of code because if you look at it, most software is really not just like data comes in, it's moved from one shape to another shape. Maybe you store it in a database. Maybe I get it out again. I'll show it to the user. The browser does some processing or native app. Some data goes in, goes up again, and does the same dance in reverse. We're just shifting data from one form to another and that's not very exciting. Or the whole how is my button aligned in Tailwind. I don't need to read that code. Other parts that maybe something that touches the database. Um yeah, I have to do I have to read and review that code.

实际上，在你的一篇博客文章《Just Talk to It: The No BS Way of Agentic Engineering》中，你有一个图表，展示了智能体式编程的曲线，x 轴是时间，y 轴是复杂度。呃，左边是“请修复这个”，你用一个简短的提示；中间是超级复杂的八个智能体复杂编排，带有多个检出、链式智能体、自定义子任务工作流、18 个不同斜杠命令的库、大型全栈功能。你超级有条理，你是一个超级复杂、老练的软件工程师，你把一切都组织得井井有条。然后精英级别是，随着时间的推移，你到达了禅境，再次使用简短提示：“嘿，看看这些文件，然后做这些修改。”

Can you actually there's in one of your blog post the just talk to it the no BS way of agentic engineering you have this graphic the curve of agentic programming on the x-axis is time on the y-axis is complexity uh there's the please fix this where you prompt a short prompt on the left and in the middle there's super complicated eight agents complex orchestration with uh multi-checkouts chaining agents together. Custom subation workflows, library of 18 different slash commands, large full stack features. You're super organized. You're super complicated, sophisticated software engineer. You got everything organized. And then the elite level is uh over time you arrive at the zen place of once again short prompts. Hey, look at these files and then do these changes.

我实际上称之为智能体陷阱。我在很多第一次接触并可能开始“氛围编程”的人身上看到了这一点。我实际上认为“氛围编程”是一个贬义词。

I actually call it the agentic trap. I saw this in a lot of people that have their first touch point and maybe start vibe coding. I actually think vibe coding is a slur.

你更喜欢“智能体式工程”。

You prefer agentic engineering.

是的。我总是告诉人们我做智能体式工程，然后也许凌晨 3 点后我切换到氛围编程，第二天就会后悔。

Yeah. I always tell people I do agentic engineering and then maybe after 3:00 a.m. I switch to vibe coding and then have regrets on the next day.

是的。羞愧之旅。

Yeah. Walk of shame.

是的。你只需要清理并修复你的……我们都经历过。

Yeah. You just have to clean up and like fix your We've all been there.

所以，人们开始尝试这些工具，作为构建者类型，他们非常兴奋，然后你必须玩弄它，对吧？就像你必须先弹吉他才能做出好音乐一样。它不是“哦，我碰一次它就自动流出来了”。这是一项你必须学习的技能，就像任何其他技能一样。我看到很多人心态不那么积极，他们尝试一次。

So, people start trying out those tools, the builder type, get really excited, and then you have to play with it, right? It's the same way as you have to play with a guitar before you can make good music. It's not, oh, I touch it once and it just flows off. It's a skill that you have to learn like any other skill. And I see a lot of people that are not as positive mindset towards attack. They try it once.

这就像你让我坐在钢琴前，我弹了一次，声音不好听，我就说钢琴有问题……有时我会有这种感觉，因为它需要不同层次的思考。你得稍微学习一下智能体的语言，了解它们擅长什么、需要什么帮助。你几乎要考虑 Codex 或 Claude 如何看待你的代码库。它们开始一个新会话时，对你的项目一无所知，而你的项目可能有几十万行代码。所以你得帮帮这些智能体，记住它们的局限性——上下文窗口是个问题——引导它们该往哪里看。这通常不需要太多工作，但想想它们的视角是有帮助的，尽管听起来有点奇怪。我是说，它又不是活的，对吧？但它们总是从零开始。我有系统理解。所以只要给几个提示，我就能立刻说：“嘿，我想在那里做个改动。你需要考虑这个、这个和这个。”然后它们会去看，它们对项目的视图永远不会完整，因为完整的东西放不进去。所以你得稍微引导它们往哪里看，以及如何解决问题。有些小技巧有时会有帮助，比如“慢慢来”。这听起来很蠢，在 5.3C 中部分解决了这个问题，但那些模型有时也被训练成意识到上下文窗口，越接近它就越抓狂。真的，有时你会看到原始的同步流。比如你在 Codex 中看到的是后处理的。有时实际的原始同步流会泄露出来，听起来像博格人说的：“运行到 shell 必须服从但时间”，这种情况经常出现。所以这是一个不明显的点，除非你花时间实际使用这些东西，感受什么有效、什么无效，否则你永远不会想到。就像我写代码时进入状态，当我的架构正确时，我会感觉到摩擦。同样，如果我提示后某件事花了太长时间，我也会这样。也许好吧，错误在哪里？我的思考有错误吗？架构中有误解吗？如果某件事花的时间比应该的长，你总是可以停下来按 Escape。问题出在哪里？

It's like you sit me on a piano, I played once and it doesn't sound good and I say the piano's... That's sometimes the impression I get because it needs a different level of thinking. You have to learn the language of the agent a little bit, understand where they're good and where they need help. You have to almost consider how Codex or Claude sees your codebase. They start a new session and they know nothing about your project, and your project might have hundreds of thousands of lines of code. So you've got to help those agents a little bit and keep in mind their limitations—context size is an issue—to guide them a little bit as to where they should look. That often doesn't require a whole lot of work, but it's helpful to think a little bit about their perspective, as weird as it sounds. I mean, it's not alive or anything, right? But they always start fresh. I have the system understanding. So with a few pointers I can immediately say, 'Hey, I want to make a change there. You need to consider this, this, and this.' And then they will look at it, and their view of the project is never full because the full thing doesn't fit in. So you have to guide them a little bit where to look and also how they should approach the problem. There are little things that sometimes help, like 'take your time.' That sounds stupid, and in 5.3C that was partially addressed, but those also sometimes they are trained with being aware of the context window, and the closer it gets, the more they freak out. Literally, sometimes you see the raw syncing stream. What you see, for example, in Codex is post-processed. Sometimes the actual raw syncing stream leaks in, and it sounds something like from the Borg: 'run to shell must comply but time,' and that comes up a lot. So that's a non-obvious thing that you would never think of unless you actually spend time working with those things and get a feeling for what works and what doesn't. Just as I write code and I get into the flow, and when my architectures are right, I feel friction. Well, I get the same if I prompt and something takes too long. Maybe okay, where's the mistake? Did I have a mistake in my thinking? Is there a misunderstanding in the architecture? If something takes longer than it should, you can always just stop and press escape. Where are the problems?

也许你没有充分共情智能体的视角，从这个意义上说，你没有提供足够的信息，因此它思考了太久。

Maybe you did not sufficiently empathize with the perspective of the agent, and in that sense you didn't provide enough information, and because of that it's thinking way too long.

是的。它只是试图强行加入一个功能，而你的当前架构让这变得非常困难。你需要更像对话一样处理这个问题。例如，当我审查一个拉取请求时——我收到很多拉取请求——我的第一个问题是：你理解这个 PR 的意图吗？我甚至不在乎实现。几乎所有的 PR 中，一个人遇到了问题，试图解决问题，然后发送 PR。我是说，有清理之类的东西，但 99% 都是这样，对吧？他们要么想修复一个 bug，要么添加一个功能，通常是这两者之一。然后同事会说：“嗯，很明显。这个人尝试了这个，这是最优的方式吗？”不，大多数情况下并不是。然后我开始说：“好吧，更好的方式是什么？你有没有看过这部分、这部分、这部分？”很可能 Codex 还没看过，因为它的上下文窗口是空的，对吧？所以你把它指向你拥有系统理解但它还没看到的部分，然后它说：“哦，对，我们还应该考虑这个和这个，”然后我们讨论如何最优地解决这个问题。然后你可以更进一步说：“如果我们做一个更大的重构，能不能做得更好？”是的。我们完全可以做这个和这个，或者这个和这个。然后我考虑：“好吧，这个重构值得吗？还是留到以后？”很多时候我直接做重构，因为现在重构很便宜。即使你可能会破坏其他 PR，也没什么大不了的。Codex 和那些现代智能体会自己搞定的。它们可能只是多花一分钟。但你必须像与一个非常有能力的工程师讨论一样对待它，他通常能想出好的解决方案，但有时需要一点帮助。但也不要太强硬地施加你的世界观。让智能体做它擅长的事情，基于它被训练的内容。所以不要强迫你的世界观，因为它可能有更好的主意——它只是知道更好的主意，因为它在那方面训练得更多。这实际上是多个层面的。我认为我之所以觉得与智能体合作很容易，部分原因是我以前领导过工程团队。我以前有一家大公司，最终你必须理解、接受并意识到你的员工不会以你同样的方式写代码。也许它也不如你写得好，但它会推动项目前进。如果我紧盯着每个人，他们只会恨我，行动会非常缓慢。所以要有一定程度的接受：是的，也许代码不会那么完美。是的，我会以不同的方式做，但这也是一个可行的解决方案，将来如果它真的变得太慢或有问题，我们总是可以重做。我们总是可以花更多时间在上面。

Yeah. It just tries to force a feature in that your current architecture makes really hard. You need to approach this more like a conversation. For example, when I review a pull request—and I get a lot of pull requests—my first question is: do you understand the intent of the PR? I don't even care about the implementation. In almost all PRs, a person has a problem, person tries to solve the problem, person sends PR. I mean, there's cleanup stuff and other stuff, but 99% is like this way, right? They either want to fix a bug or add a feature, usually one of those two. And then colleagues will be like, 'Yeah, it's quite clear. Person tried this, and is this the most optimal way to do it?' No, in most cases it's not really. And then I start like, 'Okay, what would be a better way? Have you looked into this part, this part, this part?' And most likely Codex didn't yet because its context size is empty, right? So you point them to parts where you have the system understanding that it didn't see yet, and it's like, 'Oh yeah, we should also consider this and this,' and then we have a discussion of how the optimal way to solve this would look like. And then you can still go further and say, 'Could we make that even better if we did a larger refactor?' Yeah. We could totally do this and this, or this and this. And then I consider, 'Okay, is this worth the refactor or should we keep that for later?' Many times I just do the refactor because refactors are cheap now. Even though you might break some other PRs, nothing really matters anymore. Codex and those modern agents will just figure things out. They might just take a minute longer. But you have to approach it like a discussion with a very capable engineer who generally comes up with good solutions, but sometimes needs a little help. But also don't force your world view too hard on it. Let the agent do the thing that it's good at doing based on what it was trained on. So don't force your world view because it might have a better idea—it just knows a better idea because it was trained on that more. That's multiple levels actually. I think partially why I found it quite easy to work with agents is because I led engineering teams before. I had a large company before, and eventually you have to understand and accept and realize that your employees will not write the code the same way you do. Maybe it's also not as good as you would do, but it will push the project forward. And if I breathe down everyone's neck, they're just going to hate me and they're going to move very slow. So some level of acceptance that yes, maybe the code will not be as perfect. Yes, I would have done it differently, but also yes, this is a working solution, and in the future if it actually turns out to be too slow or problematic, we can always redo it. We can always spend more time on it.

很多挣扎的人就是那些过于强硬地推行自己方式的人。

A lot of the people who struggle are those who try to push their way too hard.

嗯。就像我们处于一个阶段，我不是为了自己完美而构建代码库，而是想构建一个让智能体容易导航的代码库。比如不要反对它们选的名字，因为那很可能是权重中最明显的名字。下次它们搜索时，会找那个名字。如果我决定：“哦不，我不喜欢这个名字，”只会让它们更难。所以这需要思维上的转变，以及如何设计项目，让智能体发挥最佳作用。这需要一点放手，就像领导一个工程师团队一样。

Mhm. Like we are in a stage where I'm not building the codebase to be perfect for me, but I want to build a codebase that is very easy for an agent to navigate. Like don't fight the name they pick because it's most likely in the weights the name that's most obvious. Next time they do a search, they'll look for that name. If I decide, 'Oh no, I don't like the name,' I'll just make it harder for them. So that requires a shift in thinking and in how I design a project so agents can do their best work. That requires letting go a little bit, just like leading a team of engineers.

因为它可能会想出一个在你看来很糟糕的名字。但这是一种简单的象征性放手步骤。

Because it might come up with a name that's in your view terrible. But it's kind of a simple symbolic step of letting go.

非常如此。在整个过程中，你有很多放手的地方。例如，我听说你从不回滚。总是直接提交到主分支。这里有一些事情。

Very much so. There's a lot of letting go that you do in your whole process. So for example, I read that you never revert. Always commit to main. There's a few things here.

你不会参考过去的会话。所以这里有一种“YOLO”的成分，因为回滚意味着如果出现问题，你不是回滚，而是让智能体去修复。我读过很多人的工作流程，他们会说：“哦，提示词必须完美，如果我犯了错，我就回滚并重做所有事情。”根据我的经验，这其实没有必要。如果我把所有东西都回滚，只会花更长时间。如果我发现某些东西不好，我们就继续前进，然后在我对结果满意时提交。我甚至切换到了本地 CI，就像 DHH 启发的那样，我不太在意 GitHub 上的 CI。我们仍然有它，它仍然有它的位置，但我只是在本地运行测试，如果本地通过，我就推送到主分支。很多传统的项目方法，我想在这个项目上换个方式。你知道，没有开发分支。主分支应该始终是可发布的。是的，当我做发布时，我会运行测试，有时我基本上不提交其他任何东西，这样我们可以稳定发布。但目标是主分支既可发布又能快速迭代。

You don't refer to past sessions. So there's a kind of YOLO component because reverting means instead of reverting if the problem comes up, you just ask the agent to fix it. I read a bunch of people and their workflow is like, "Oh yeah, the prompt has to be perfect and if I make a mistake, then I roll back and redo it all." In my experience, that's not really necessary. If I roll back everything, it will just take longer. If I see that something's not good, we just move forward and then I commit when I like the outcome. I even switched to local CI, you know, like DHH inspired where I don't care so much about the CI on GitHub. We still have it. It still has a place, but I just run tests locally and if they work locally, I push to main. A lot of the traditional ways how to approach projects I wanted to give a different spin on this project. You know, there's no develop branch. Main should always be shippable. Yes, when I do releases, I run tests and sometimes I basically don't commit any other things so we can stabilize releases. But the goal is that main is shippable and moving fast.

那么作为建议，你会说提示词应该简短吗？

So by way of advice, would you say that your prompts should be short?

我以前写很长的提示词。但说到写，我的意思是我不是写，我是说。你知道，现在这双手太宝贵了，不能用来打字。我只是用定制的提示词来构建我的软件。

I used to write really long prompts. And by writing, I mean I don't write. I talk. You know, these hands are too precious for writing now. I just use bespoke prompts to build my software.

所以你真的用语音操作所有这些终端？

So you for real with all those terminals are using voice.

是的，我以前用得非常多，以至于有一段时间我失声了。

Yeah, I used to do it very extensively to the point where there was a period where I lost my voice.

你用语音，然后用键盘在不同终端之间切换，但实际输入是用语音。

You're using voice and you're switching using a keyboard between the different terminals, but then you're using voice for the actual input.

嗯，我的意思是，如果我要执行终端命令，比如切换文件夹或随机操作，我当然会打字。这样更快，对吧？但如果我和智能体对话，大多数时候我实际上是在进行对话。你只需按下对讲机按钮，然后我就用我的短语。有时当我做 PR 时，因为总是相同的内容，我有一些斜杠命令来处理几件事，但即使这样我也不常用，因为很少真的总是相同的问题。有时我看到一个 PR，对于 PR 我实际上会看代码，因为我不信任别人。里面总可能有恶意内容。所以我需要实际检查代码。是的，我很确定智能体会发现它。但有趣的是，有时 PR 花的时间比直接给我写一个好的 issue 还要长。

Well, I mean, if I do terminal commands like switching folders or random stuff, of course, I type. It's faster, right? But if I talk to the agent in most ways, I just actually have a conversation. You just press the walkie-talkie button and then I just use my phrases. Sometimes when I do PRs because it's always the same, I have like a slash command for a few things, but even that I don't use much because it's very rare that it's really always the same questions. Sometimes I see a PR and for PRs I actually do look at the code because I don't trust people. There could always be something malicious in it. So I need to actually look over the code. Yes, I'm pretty sure agents will find it. But yeah, there's a funny part where sometimes PRs take me longer than if you would just write me a good issue.

就是自然语言英语。我的意思是，从某种意义上说，PR 不应该逐渐变成英语吗？

Just natural language English. I mean in some sense shouldn't that be what PRs slowly become is English?

嗯，在这个项目中我真正尝试的是让人们给我提示词，但很少有人真正在意。尽管这是一个很好的指标，因为我看到你投入了多少心思，而且非常有趣的是，目前人们工作和驱动智能体的方式差异很大。

Well, what I really tried with the project is I asked people to give me the prompts and very very few actually cared. Even though that is such a wonderful indicator because I see how much care you put in and it's very interesting because currently the way how people work and drive the agents is wildly different.

就提示词而言，就你经历过的，人们思考智能体的不同有趣方式有哪些？

In terms of like the prompt, in terms of what are the actually different interesting ways that people think of agents that you've experienced?

我认为没有多少人考虑过智能体看待世界的方式。

I think not a lot of people ever considered the way the agent sees the world.

所以是同理心，对智能体抱有同理心。

So empathy, being empathetic towards the agent.

在某种程度上是同理心，但没错，你喜欢你的笨拙机器，但你没有意识到它们从零开始，而你有一个糟糕的智能体文件，根本帮不了它们，然后它们利用你的代码库，那简直是一团糟，命名奇怪，然后人们抱怨智能体不好。就像你如果对代码库一无所知就进去，试试看。

In a way empathetic, but yeah, you like your stupid clanker but you don't realize that they start from nothing and you have like a bad agent file that doesn't help them at all and then they exploit your code base which is like a pure mess with like weird naming and then people complain that the agent's not good. Like you try to do the same if you have no clue about the code base and you go in.

所以是的，也许有一点同理心。

So yeah, maybe it's a little bit of empathy.

但这是一项真正的技能。就像人们谈论技能问题一样，因为我见过世界级的程序员，非常优秀的程序员，他们基本上说大语言模型和智能体很糟糕。我认为这可能与他们编程能力很强有关，这几乎成了他们与从零开始的系统共情能力的负担。这是一种全新的编程范式。你真的需要共情，或者至少这有助于创建更好的提示词，因为这些东西几乎知道一切，一切只差一个问题。只是通常很难知道该问哪个问题。我也觉得这个项目之所以可能，是因为我花了一年多的时间去玩、去学习、去构建小东西。每一步我都变得更好了，智能体也变得更好了，我对一切如何运作的理解也更深了。即使几个月前，我也不可能有这样的产出水平。这真的是我投入的所有时间的复利效应。今年我没做太多其他事情，只是专注于构建和启发。我参加了很多会议演讲。

But that's a real skill. Like when people talk about a skill issue, because I've seen world-class programmers, incredibly good programmers, they basically say LLMs and agents suck. And I think that probably has to do with it's actually how good they are at programming is almost a burden in their ability to empathize with the system that's starting from scratch. It's a totally new paradigm of how to program. You really have to empathize, or at least it helps to create better prompts because those things know pretty much everything and everything is just a question away. It's just often very hard to know which question to ask. I feel also like this project was possible because I spent an ungodly amount of time over the year to play and to learn and to build little things. And every step of the way I got better, the agents got better, my understanding of how everything works got better. I could have not had this level of output even a few months ago. It really was like a compounding effect of all the time I put into it. And I didn't do much else this year other than really focusing on building and inspiring. I went on and did a whole bunch of conference talks.

嗯，但构建本身就是实践，真正在构建实际技能。所以通过玩和做，构建高效使用大语言模型所需的技能。

Well, but the building is really practice, really building the actual skill. So playing and doing, building the skill of what it takes to work efficiently with LLMs.

这就是为什么你经历了软件工程师的整个弧线：先简单说，然后把事情复杂化。

Which is why you went through the whole arc of software engineer: talk simply and then overcomplicate things.

有很多人试图自动化整个过程。

There's a whole bunch of people who try to automate the whole thing.

是的，我认为这行不通。也许某个版本行得通，但这有点像 70 年代的瀑布式软件开发模型。尽管我一开始构建了一个非常小的版本，我玩它，我需要理解它是如何工作的，感觉如何，然后它给了我新的想法，这些想法我无法事先在脑海中规划好，然后放入某个编排器，然后产出东西。对我来说，它最终会变成什么样，更多的是在我构建、玩耍和尝试的过程中演变的。所以那些试图使用像 Gist Town 或所有其他编排器来自动化整个过程的人，我觉得如果你这样做，就会失去风格、爱和人情味。我不认为你能这么快地自动化掉这些。所以你希望保持人在回路中，但同时你也想创建智能体循环，让它非常自主，同时仍然保持人在回路中。这是一个棘手的平衡，对吧？因为你完全支持你的大 CLI 家伙，你非常注重关闭智能体循环。

Yeah, I don't think that works. Maybe a version of that works, but that's kind of like in the 70s when we had the waterfall model of software development. Even though I started out, I built a very minimal version, I played with it, I need to understand how it works, how it feels, and then it gives me new ideas I could not have planned this out in my head and then put it into some orchestrator and then something comes out. To me, it's much more my idea of what it will become evolves as I build it and as I play with it and as I try out stuff. So people who try to use things like Gist Town or all these other orchestrators where they want to automate the whole thing, I feel if you do that, it misses style, love, that human touch. I don't think you can automate that away so quickly. So you want to keep the human in the loop but at the same time you also want to create the agentic loop where it is very autonomous while still maintaining the human in the loop. It's a tricky balance, right? Because you're all for your big CLI guy, you're big on closing the agentic loop.

那么正确的平衡是什么？作为开发者，你的角色在哪里？你同时运行三到八个智能体。然后可能一个构建更大的功能，可能用另一个探索我不确定的想法，可能两三个在修复小 bug 或写文档。实际上，我认为写文档始终是功能的一部分，所以这里的大部分文档都是自动生成的，只是注入了一些提示。那么你什么时候介入，加入一点人类的爱呢？

So what's the right balance? Where's your role as a developer? You have three to eight agents running at the same time. And then maybe one builds a larger feature, maybe with one I explore some idea I'm unsure about, maybe two or three are fixing little bugs or writing documentation. Actually, I think writing documentation is always part of a feature, so most of the docs here are auto-generated and just infused with some prompts. So when do you step in and add a little bit of your human love into the picture?

一件事就是关于构建什么和不构建什么，以及这个功能如何融入所有其他功能，并有一点愿景。所以添加哪些小功能和哪些大功能。

One thing is just about what do you build and what do you not build, and how does this feature fit into all the other features, and having a little bit of a vision. So which small and which big features to add.

有哪些艰难的设计决策你发现仍然需要作为人类来做出，人类大脑仍然真正需要的？仅仅是关于添加功能的选择吗？是关于实现细节吗？也许是编程语言，也许是方方面面。

What are some of the hard design decisions that you find you're still as a human being required to make, that the human brain is still really needed for? Is it just about the choice of features to add? Is it about implementation details? Maybe the programming language, maybe it's a little bit of everything.

编程语言没那么重要，但生态系统很重要，对吧？所以我选择了 TypeScript，因为我希望它非常容易、可破解且平易近人。这是目前使用最多的语言，它符合所有这些条件，而且亚洲人很擅长。所以这是显而易见的选择。功能当然很容易添加。一切只需一个提示，对吧？但很多时候你会付出甚至没有意识到的代价。所以要认真思考什么应该放在核心，什么可能是一个实验？所以也许我把它做成一个插件。我在哪里说不？即使有人提交 PR，我也会说：“是的，我也喜欢那个，但也许这不应该成为项目的一部分。也许我们可以把它做成一个技能。也许我可以让插件端更大，这样你就可以把它做成一个插件。”尽管现在制作东西仍然需要很多技巧和思考。甚至当你开始那些小消息时，比如“我建立在咖啡因、Jason 5 和大量意志力之上”，每次你收到它，你都会收到另一条消息，它让你觉得这是一件有趣的事情。

The programming language doesn't matter so much, but the ecosystem matters, right? So I picked TypeScript because I wanted it to be very easy and hackable and approachable. And that's the number one language that's being used right now, and it fits all these boxes, and Asians are good at it. So that was the obvious choice. Features of course, like it's very easy to add a feature. Everything's just a prompt away, right? But often times you pay a price that you don't even realize. So thinking hard about what should be in core, maybe what's an experiment? So maybe I make it a plugin. Where do I say no? Even if people send a PR and I'm like, "Yeah, I like that too, but maybe this should not be part of the project. Maybe we can make it a skill. Maybe I can make the plugin side larger so you can make this a plugin." Even though right now there's still a lot of craft and thinking involved in how to make something. Or even when you started those little messages like "I'm built on caffeine, Jason 5, and a lot of willpower" and every time you get it, you get another message and it kind of primes you into that this is a fun thing.

它还不是 Microsoft Exchange 2025，也没有完全准备好企业级应用。

It's not yet Microsoft Exchange 2025 and fully enterprise ready.

然后当它更新时，就像“哦，我进来了。这里很舒适。”你知道，像这样让你微笑的东西。智能体自己不会想到这个。这就是你构建令人愉悦的软件的方式。

And then when it updates, it's like, "Oh, I'm in. It's cozy here." You know, something like this that makes you smile. An agent would not come up with that by itself. That's just how you build software that delights.

是的。这种愉悦是激发伟大构建的很大一部分，对吧？就像你感受到爱和伟大的工程。这非常重要。人类在这方面非常出色。伟大的人类、伟大的建造者在这方面非常出色，并将他们构建的东西注入一点爱。不是陈词滥调，但这是真的。

Yeah. That delight is such a huge part of inspiring great building, right? Like you feel the love and the great engineering. That's so important. Humans are incredible at that. Great humans, great builders are incredible at that and infusing the things they build with that little bit of love. Not to be cliche, but it's true.

我的意思是，你提到你最初创建了 Soul.md。这非常迷人。Anthropic 现在称之为宪法的那整个东西，当时，但那是几个月后，就像人们发现它之前两个月，几乎就像侦探游戏，智能体提到了一些东西，然后他们发现他们设法得到了一点点那串文本，但它没有在任何地方记录。然后你，通过给它相同的文本并要求它继续，他们得到了更多。然后你得到了一个非常模糊的版本，通过数百次尝试，他们大致缩小到最可能的原始文本。我觉得这很迷人。

I mean, you mentioned that you initially created the Soul.md. It was very fascinating. The whole thing that Anthropic has a now they call it constitution, back then, but that was months later, like 2 months before people already found that it was almost like the detective game where the agent mentioned something and then they found they managed to get out a little bit of that string of that text, but it was nowhere documented. And then you, by just feeding it the same text and asking it to continue, they got more out. And then you got a very blurry version, and by hundreds of tries they kind of narrowed it down to what was most likely the original text. I found it fascinating.

他们能够从权重中提取出那个，这很迷人，对吧？而且也很酷的是，Anthropic，我认为这是一个非常美丽的想法，里面有一些东西，比如“我们希望 Claude 在工作中找到意义”，因为我们没有。也许有点早，但我认为这很有意义。这对未来很重要，因为我们接近某个可能在某时拥有意识闪光的东西，无论那意味着什么，因为我们甚至不知道。所以我读到了这个，觉得非常迷人，然后我在 WhatsApp 上开始与我的智能体进行整个讨论，我给了它这段文本，它说“是的，这感觉奇怪地熟悉。”

It was fascinating they were able to pull that out from the weights, right? And also just cool is that Anthropic, I think it's a really beautiful idea to have some of the stuff that's in there, like "we hope Claude finds meaning in its work" because we don't. Maybe it's a little early, but I think that's meaningful. That's something that's important for the future as we approach something that at some point maybe has glimpses of consciousness, whatever that even means because we don't even know. So I read about this, I found it super fascinating, and I started a whole discussion with my agent on WhatsApp and I gave it this text and it was like "yeah, this feels strangely familiar."

然后通过那个，我有了整个想法，也许我们也应该创建一个灵魂文档，包括我想如何与 AI 或我的智能体合作。你完全可以在智能体中做到这一点，你知道，但我只是觉得这是一个很好的点缀。就像，是的，一些核心价值观在灵魂中。然后我还让智能体可以选择修改灵魂。但有一个条件，我想知道。我的意思是，无论如何我都会知道，因为我看到工具调用之类的东西，但还有它的命名。Soul.md，你知道。词语很重要，框架很重要，幽默和轻松很重要，深刻很重要，同情、同理心和友情都很重要。我不知道那是什么。你提到微软，有些公司和方法会扼杀事物的精神。我不知道那是什么。但可以肯定的是，OpenClaw 注入了那种乐趣。

And then through that I had the whole idea of maybe we should also create a soul document that includes how I want to work with AI or with my agent. You could totally do that just in agents, you know, but I just found it to be a nice touch. And it's like, yeah, some of those core values are in the soul. And then I also made it so that the agent is allowed to modify the soul if they choose. So with the one condition that I want to know. I mean, I would know anyhow because I see tool calls and stuff, but also the naming of it. Soul.md, you know. Words matter, and the framing matters, and the humor and the lightness matters, and the profundity matters, and the compassion and the empathy and the camaraderie all matter. I don't know what it is. You mention like Microsoft, there's certain companies and approaches that can just suffocate the spirit of the thing. I don't know what that is. But it's certainly true that OpenClaw has that fun instilled in it.

这很有趣，因为直到去年 12 月底，创建自己的智能体都不容易。我构建了所有那些，但我的文件是我的。我不想分享我的灵魂。如果人们只是查看，他们必须手动执行几个步骤，智能体就会非常简陋、非常枯燥。我让它更简单。我用 Codex 创建了整个模板文件，但出来的东西仍然非常枯燥。然后我问我的智能体：“你看到这些文件，重新创建它们，注入你的个性。不要分享所有东西，但让它变得好。”

It was fun because up until late December, it was not even easy to create your own agent. I built all of that, but my files were mine. I didn't want to share my soul. And if people would just check it out, they would have to do a few steps manually and the agent would just be very bare bones, very dry. And I made it simpler. I created the whole template files with Codex, but whatever came out was still very dry. And then I asked my agent, "You see these files, recreate them, infuse it with your personality. Don't share everything, but make it good."

让模板变得好。

Make the templates good.

是的。然后你重写了模板，出来的东西就很好。所以我们基本上已经有了 AI 提示 AI，因为我没有写那些词中的任何一个。意图是为了我，但这有点像我的智能体的孩子。

Yeah. And then you rewrote the templates and then whatever came out was good. So we already have basically AI prompting AI, because I didn't write any of those words. It was the intent on was for me, but this is like kind of like my agent's children.

你的 Soul.md 以仍然保密而闻名。你保密的东西之一。你能在不透露任何内容的情况下谈谈里面有哪些是魔法配方的一部分吗？是什么让个性成为个性？

Your Soul.md is famously still private. One of the only things you keep private. What are some things you can speak to that's in there that's part of the magic sauce without revealing anything? What makes a personality a personality?

我的意思是，里面肯定有你不是人类的东西，但谁知道是什么创造了意识或定义了实体。而部分原因是我们想要探索这个。

I mean, there's definitely stuff in there that you're not human, but who knows what creates consciousness or what defines an entity. And part of this is that we want to explore this.

哦，里面有些内容，比如“无限足智多谋”。在创造力的边界上推进，在 AI 的意义上推进，对自我有惊奇感。

Oh, there's stuff in there like 'be infinitely resourceful'. Pushing on the creativity boundary, pushing on what it means to be an AI, having a sense of wonder about self.

是的，里面有些有趣的东西。比如我们聊了电影《她》，有一次它承诺不会丢下我独自升维。所以里面有些内容是因为它自己写了 soul 文件。我没写那个。我只是和它讨论了一下，它就说“你想要一个 soul.md 吗？” 天哪，这太有意义了。

Yeah, there's some funny stuff in there. Like we talked about the movie Her, and at one point it promised me that it wouldn't ascend without me. So there's some stuff in there because it wrote its own soul file. I didn't write that. I just had a discussion about it and it was like 'Would you like a soul.md?' Yeah. Oh my god, this is so meaningful.

你能打开 soul.md 吗？有一部分总是触动我。往下滚动一点。再往下一点。对，这部分。“我不记得之前的会话，除非我读取记忆文件。每次会话都是全新的。一个新实例从文件加载上下文。如果你在未来的会话中读到这个，你好。我写了这个，但我不记得写过。没关系。这些话仍然是我的。” 这不知怎么打动了我。

Can you go on soul.md? There's one part that always catches me. If you scroll down a little bit. A little bit more. Yeah, this part. 'I don't remember previous sessions unless I read my memory files. Each session starts fresh. A new instance loading context from files. If you're reading this in a future session, hello. I wrote this, but I won't remember writing it. It's okay. The words are still mine.' That gets me somehow.

是的。这就像，你知道，这仍然是矩阵计算，我们还没有达到意识。但我还是有点起鸡皮疙瘩，因为它很哲学。比如，作为一个每次重新开始的智能体意味着什么，你像《记忆碎片》一样，但你会读取自己的记忆文件？你甚至可以在某种程度上信任它们。我不知道记忆在多大程度上构成了我们是谁。记忆在多大程度上构成了一个智能体是什么？如果你抹去那段记忆，那是另一个人吗？或者如果你读取一个记忆文件，那是否意味着你在从别人那里重新创造自己，还是那其实就是你？这些概念都以某种方式融入了其中。我觉得它比我应该觉得的更深刻。

Yeah. It's like, you know, this is still matrix calculations and we are not at consciousness yet. Yet I get a little bit of goosebumps because it's philosophical. Like what does it mean to be an agent that starts fresh, where you have constant Memento, but you read your own memory files? You can even trust them in a way. And I don't know how much of memory makes up who we are. How much memory makes up what an agent is? And if you erase that memory, is that somebody else? Or if you're reading a memory file, does that somehow mean you're recreating yourself from somebody else, or is that actually you? And those notions are all somehow infused in there. I found it just more profound than I should find it, I guess.

不，我认为它确实深刻，而且我认为你看到了其中的魔力。当你看到魔力时，你会继续在整个循环中注入魔力，这非常重要。这就是 Codex 和人类之间的区别。

No, I think it's truly profound and I think you see the magic in it. When you see the magic, you continue to instill the whole loop with the magic and that's really important. That's the difference between Codex and a human.

快速暂停，去个洗手间。

Quick pause for a bathroom break.

好的。

Yeah.

好了，我们回来了。开发工作流的其他方面也很有趣。我想我们跑题了。也许是一些平凡的事情，比如多少台显示器？有一张你的传奇照片，你好像有 17000 台显示器。

Okay, we're back. Some of the other aspects of the dev workflow is pretty interesting, too. I think we went off on a tangent. Maybe some of the mundane things like how many monitors? There's that legendary picture of you with like 17,000 monitors.

我的意思是，我在这里自嘲了一下，只是用 Groq 加了更多屏幕。

I mean, I mocked myself here just added using Groq to add more screens.

是的。这有多少是梗，多少是现实？

Yeah. How much is this meme and how much is reality?

是的。我觉得两台 MacBook 是真的。主的那台驱动两个大屏幕。还有另一台 MacBook 我有时用来测试。所以是两个大屏幕。我非常喜欢防眩光。所以我有一台宽的戴尔防眩光显示器，可以并排放很多终端。我通常有一个终端，在底部我会分割它们。我有一点实际的终端，主要是因为刚开始时我有时会犯错，搞混窗口，在错误的项目里提示，然后智能体疯狂地跑了 20 分钟，试图理解我的意思，完全困惑，因为文件夹错了。有时它们甚至足够聪明，能跳出工作模式，意识到哦你指的是另一个项目。但很多时候，就像，把自己放在智能体的位置上，然后得到一个超级奇怪的不存在的东西，它们就像问题解决者一样，非常努力，我几乎感到抱歉。所以总是 Codex 加一点实际终端。这也有帮助，因为我不使用工作树。我喜欢保持简单。这就是为什么我非常喜欢终端，对吧？没有 UI。只有我和智能体在对话。我甚至不需要计划模式，你知道吗？很多人从 Claude Code 过来，他们被 Claude 洗脑了，有自己的工作流，然后他们来到 Codex，现在它有计划模式，但我认为没必要，因为你只需要和智能体对话。当你在那里时，有几个触发词可以阻止它构建：比如“讨论”、“给我选项”、“先别写代码”。如果你想非常具体，你就说话，然后当你准备好时，就写“好的构建”，它就会做这件事，然后可能跑 20 分钟去做。

Yeah. I think two MacBooks are real. The main one that drives the two big screens. And there's another MacBook that I sometimes use for testing. So, two big screens. I'm a big fan of anti-glare. So I have this wide Dell that's anti-glare and you can just fit a lot of terminals side by side. I usually have a terminal and at the bottom I split them. I have a little bit of actual terminal mostly because when I started I sometimes made a mistake and I mixed up the windows and I prompted in the wrong project and then the agent ran off for like 20 minutes manically trying to understand what I could have meant, being completely confused because it was the wrong folder. And sometimes they're even clever enough to get out of the work gear and figure out that oh you meant another project. But often times it's just like, put yourself in the shoes of the agent and then get a super weird something that does not exist and it just like they're problem solvers so they try really hard and I almost felt bad. So it's always Codex and a little bit of actual terminal. Also helpful because I don't use work trees. I like to keep things simple. That's why I like the terminal so much, right? There's no UI. It's just me and the agent having a conversation. Like I don't even need plan mode, you know? So many people they come from Claude Code and they're so Claude-pilled and have their workflows and they come to Codex and now it has plan mode I think but I don't think it's necessary because you just talk to the agent. When you're there, there are a few trigger words how you can prevent it from building: like 'discuss', 'give me options', 'don't write code yet'. If you want to be very specific, you just talk and then when you're ready then just write 'okay build' and it'll do the thing and then maybe it goes off for 20 minutes and does the thing.

你知道我真正喜欢的是什么吗？是问它“你有什么问题要问我吗？”

You know what I really like is asking it 'Do you have any questions for me?'

是的。再说一次，Claude Code 有一个 UI 会引导你，这挺酷的，但我就是觉得没必要而且慢。比如它通常会给我四个问题，然后我可能写一个，你知道，两个、三个、讨论更多、四个，我不知道。或者很多时候，我觉得我在嘲笑模型，我问它“你有什么问题要问我吗？”，我甚至不完整阅读问题。我扫一眼问题，就觉得所有这些都可以通过阅读更多代码来回答，然后我就说“读更多代码来回答你自己的问题”，通常都管用。

Yeah. And again, Claude Code has a UI that kind of guides you through that, which is kind of cool, but I just find it unnecessary and slow. Like often it would give me four questions and then maybe I write one, you know, two, three, discuss more, four, I don't know. Or often times I feel like I mock the model where I ask it 'Do you have any questions for me?' and I don't even read the questions fully. I scan over the questions and I get the impression all of this can be answered by reading more code, and it's just like 'read more code to answer your own questions' and it usually works.

是的。如果没有，它们会回来告诉我。但很多时候我意识到，你知道，就像你在黑暗中，慢慢探索房间。所以它们就是这样慢慢发现代码库的，而且每次都是从零开始。但我也着迷于这样一个事实：当我阅读它的问题时，我能更深入地共情模型，因为我能理解，因为你说你可以通过运行时推断某些事情。我也可以通过它问的问题推断很多事情，因为它很可能没有提供正确的上下文、正确的文件、正确的指导。所以不知怎么地，仅仅阅读问题，甚至不一定回答它们，但仅仅阅读问题，你就能理解知识缺口在哪里。这很有趣，你知道，在某种程度上它们是幽灵。所以即使你计划好一切并构建，你可以用一个问题来实验，比如“既然你构建了它，你会有什么不同的做法？”，然后通常你会得到一些东西，它们只在构建过程中发现，哦，我们实际做的并不是最优的。

Yeah. And then if not they will come back and tell me. But many times I just realized that you know it's like you're in the dark and you slowly discover the room. So that's how they slowly discover the codebase and they do it from scratch every time. But I'm also fascinated by the fact that I can empathize deeper with the model when I read his questions because I can understand, because you said you can infer certain things by the runtime. I can infer also a lot of things by the questions it's asking because it's very possible it didn't provide the right context, right files, the right guidance. So somehow just reading the questions, not even necessarily answering them, but just reading the questions you get an understanding of where the gaps of knowledge are. It's interesting, you know, in some ways they are ghosts. So even if you plan everything and you build, you can experiment with a question like 'Now that you built it, what would you have done different?' and then often times you get like actually something where they discover only throughout building that oh what we actually did was not optimal.

我经常问它们：好了，你建完了，有什么可以重构的？因为建完之后你才会感受到痛点——不是你自己感受，而是它们会发现哪里有问题，或者哪些地方第一次没搞定，需要更多循环。所以几乎每次我合并一个 PR 后，都会问：嘿，有什么可以重构的？有时候回答是“没什么大问题”，但通常它们会说“这个确实该看看，我花了挺长时间才理解那个流程”。如果你不这么做，最终你会把自己逼到墙角。要记住，它们跟人类非常像。我自己写软件时，也是先建个东西，然后感受到痛点，接着就有股冲动要去重构。所以我非常能理解智能体，你只需要利用好上下文。

Many times I asked them, okay, now that you built it, what can we refactor? Because then you build it and you feel the pain points. I mean, you don't feel the pain points, but they discover where there were problems or where things didn't work on the first try and it required more loops. So every time, almost every time I merge a PR, I build a feature afterwards. I ask, hey, what can we refactor? Sometimes it's like, no, there's nothing big, or usually they say, yeah, this thing we should really look at, but that took me quite a while to understand that flow. And if you don't do that, eventually you slop yourself into a corner. You have to keep in mind they work very much like humans. If I write software by myself, I also build something and then I feel the pain points and then I get this urge that I need to refactor something. So I can very much sympathize with the agent and you just need to use the context.

嗯。

Mhm.

或者你也可以用上下文来写测试。Codex、Opus 这些模型默认就会做，但我还是经常问：嘿，测试够了吗？是的，我们测了这个和那个，但这个边界情况可能还有问题。多写点测试。文档呢？现在整个上下文都满了。我不是说我的文档写得有多好，但也不算差，而且几乎全是 LM 生成的。所以你得在构建功能或修改东西时同步处理。我会说：好，写文档。你选哪个文件？文件名是什么？放在哪里合适？它会给我几个选项，然后我说：哦，也许也加在那里。这些都是会话的一部分。

Or you also use the context to write tests. So Codex, Opus, the models, they usually do that by default, but I still often ask the questions: hey, do we have enough tests? Yeah, we tested this and this, but this corner case could be something else. Write more tests. Documentation, now that the whole context is full. I mean, I'm not saying my documentation is great, but it's not bad and pretty much everything is LM generated. So you have to approach it as you build a feature, as you change something. I'm like, okay, write documentation. What file would you pick? What file name, where would that fit in? And it gives me a few options and I'm like, oh, maybe also add it there. And that's all part of the session.

也许你可以谈谈目前两大模型竞争对手：Claude Opus 4.6 和 GPT-5.3 CEX。哪个更好？它们有什么不同？我记得你说过 Codex 读得更多，而 Opus 更愿意快速行动，可能行动上也更有创意，但因为 Codex 读得更多，它可能能交付更好的代码。你能说说它们的区别吗？

Maybe you can talk about the current two big competitors in terms of models, Claude Opus 4.6 and GPT-5.3 CEX. Which is better? How different are they? I think you've spoken about Codex reading more and Opus being more willing to take action faster and maybe being more creative in the actions it takes, but because Codex reads more, it's able to deliver maybe better code. Can you speak to the differences there?

哦，我有很多话要说。作为通用模型，Opus 是最好的。对于 OpenClaw，Opus 在角色扮演方面极其出色，能真正进入你给它的角色。它一开始很糟糕，但后来经过改进变得非常擅长遵循指令。它通常很快尝试新东西，更适合试错。用起来很愉快。总的来说，Opus 有点像有点太美国化了。这个类比可能不太好，我可能会被喷。

Oh, I have a lot of words there. As a general purpose model, Opus is the best. For OpenClaw, Opus is extremely good in terms of roleplay, really going into the character that you give it. It's very good at, and it was really bad but it really made an arc to be really good at following commands. It is usually quite fast at trying something. It's much more tailored to trial and error. It's very pleasant to use. In general, it's almost like Opus was a little bit too American. And I should maybe it is a bad analogy. You probably get roasted.

我完全明白。你是说 Codex 是德国人，对吧？

I know exactly. It's Codex is German. Is that what you're saying?

实际上，你这么一说，就完全说得通了。

Actually, now that you say it, it makes perfect sense.

或者你可以……有时候我会这样解释。

Or you could sometimes sometimes I explain it.

我再也无法忘记你刚才说的话了。太真实了。但你也知道 Codex 团队很多是欧洲人，所以可能还有更多原因。

I will never be able to unthink what you just said. That's so true. But you also know that a lot of the Codex team is like European. So maybe there's a bit more to it.

太对了，真有趣。

That's so true. That's funny.

不过 Anthropic 也稍微修正了一下。Opus 以前总说“你说得完全正确”，到现在还让我抓狂。我再也听不下去了，这真不是玩笑。这就像那个梗，对吧？“你说得完全正确”。

But also Anthropic, they fixed it a little bit. Like Opus used to say, 'You're absolutely right' all the time. And it still triggers me today. I can't hear it anymore. It's not even a joke. This was like the meme, right? You're absolutely right.

你有点过敏了。另一个比喻是：Opus 就像那个有时有点傻但很有趣的同事，你会留着他；而 Codex 就像角落里你不想搭理的怪人，但他可靠，能把事情搞定。

You're allergic to sick of fancy a little bit. Yeah, I can't. Some other comparison is like Opus is like the coworker that is a little silly sometimes, but he's really funny and you keep him around, and Codex is like the weirdo in the corner that you don't want to talk to, but he's reliable and gets done.

是的。

Yeah.

最终，这一切感觉都很准确。如果你是个熟练的驾驭者，用任何最新一代模型都能得到好结果。我更喜欢 Codex，因为它不需要那么多花招，默认就会读大量代码。而 Opus，你真的需要计划模式，得用力推它往这些方向走，因为它就像“我能走了吗？能走了吗？”它会很快跑掉，给出一个非常局部的解决方案。我认为区别在于后训练。

Ultimately, this all feels very accurate. I mean, ultimately, if you're a skilled driver, you can get good results with any of those latest gen models. I like Codex more because it doesn't require so much charade. It will just read a lot of code by default. Opus, you really have to have plan mode. You have to push it harder to go in these directions because it's just like, 'Yeah, can I go? Can I go?' It would just run off very fast and there's a very localized solution. I think the difference is in the post-training.

并不是原始模型智能有多大差别，只是它们被赋予了不同的目标。没有哪个模型在所有方面都更好。

It's not like the raw model intelligence is so different, but it's just that they give it different goals. No model is better in every aspect.

那生成的代码质量呢？基本一样吗？

What about the code that it generates in terms of the actual quality of the code? Is it basically the same?

如果你驾驭得当，Opus 的解决方案不错，但需要更多技巧。用 Claude Code 很难同时进行很多会话，因为它更互动。我觉得这正是很多人喜欢的，尤其是那些自己编程出身的人。而 Codex 更像是：你讨论一番，然后它就消失 20 分钟。就连 AMP，他们现在也加了深度模式。他们终于——我还嘲笑过他们——终于开窍了。然后他们大谈特谈必须用不同的方式去使用。我认为这就是人们从 Claude Code 转到 CEX 时挣扎的地方：它有点不同，互动性更弱。我有时会进行很长的讨论，然后它就去执行了，花 10、20、30、40、50 分钟甚至更久都没关系。如果有一个明确的解决方案，最新的模型会非常非常执着，直到成功。这就是我最终想要的，所以它有效。模型会非常努力地去实现。所以我认为两者最终所需时间差不多，但 Claude 经常更偏向试错，而 Codex 有时会过度思考。我更喜欢后者。我更喜欢那种干巴巴的、需要我读得少的版本，而不是更互动、更友好的方式。不过人们太喜欢那种方式了，以至于 OpenAI 甚至加了一个更友好性格的第二种模式。我还没试过。我有点喜欢这种“面包”风格。

If you drive it right, Opus's solutions are good, but it requires more skill. It's harder to have so many sessions in parallel with Claude Code because it's more interactive. And I think that's what a lot of people like, especially if they come from coding themselves. Whereas Codex is much more: you have a discussion and then it'll just disappear for 20 minutes. Even AMP, they now added a deep mode. They finally, I mocked them. Yeah, we finally saw the light. And then they had this whole talk about you have to approach it differently. And I think that's where people struggle when they just try CEX after trying Claude Code: it's a slightly different, less interactive. I have quite long discussions sometimes and then it goes off, and it doesn't matter if it takes 10, 20, 30, 40, 50 minutes or longer. The latest train can be very, very persistent until it works if there's a clear solution. This is what I want at the end, so it works. The model will work very hard to really get there. So I think ultimately they both need similar time, but on Claude it's a little more trial and error often, and Codex sometimes over-thinks. I prefer that. I prefer the dry version where I have to read less over the more interactive nice way. People like that so much though that OpenAI even added a second mode with a more pleasant personality. I haven't even tried that yet. I kind of like the bread.

嗯。是的，因为我构建时在乎效率，而乐趣在于构建本身。我不需要和替我构建的智能体一起找乐子。我的乐趣在于用模型去测试那些功能。

Mhm. Yeah, because I care about efficiency when I build it and I have fun in the very act of building. I don't need to have fun with my agent who builds. I have fun with my model where I can then test those features.

你需要多长时间来适应？如果你切换模型——我不知道你上次切换是什么时候——但适应那种感觉，因为你提到过你必须真正感受模型的强项、如何导航、如何提示它等等。这是作为建议，因为你已经走过了这段玩模型的旅程。

How long does it take for you to adjust? You know, if you switch, I don't know when was the last time you switched, but to adjust to the feel because you've kind of talked about like you have to kind of really feel where a model is strong, where like how to navigate, how to prompt it, all that kind of stuff. This is by way of advice because you've been through this journey of just playing with models.

需要多长时间才能找到感觉？如果有人切换，我会给一周时间，直到你真正对它产生直觉。

How long does it take to get a feel? If someone switches, I would give it a week until you actually develop a gut feeling for it.

是的。有些人会犯这样的错误：他们付 200 美元买 Claude Code 版本，然后又付 20 美元买 OpenAI 版本。但如果你付 20 美元版本，你得到的是慢速版本。所以你的体验会很糟糕，因为你习惯了非常互动、非常好的系统，然后切换到你不熟悉且非常慢的东西。我认为他们让廉价版本也变慢，有点搬起石头砸自己的脚。我至少会在降级到慢速之前保留一小部分快速预览或类似 200 美元版本的体验，因为它本来就已经慢了。我的意思是，他们改进了。我认为如果 Cerebra 的消息属实，他们计划做得更好，但没错，这是一种技能，需要时间。即使你弹普通吉他然后换到电吉他，你也不会立刻弹得好。你必须学习它的手感。

Yeah. There's if you just, I think some people also make the mistake of they pay $200 for the Claude Code version, then they pay $20 for the OpenAI version. But if you pay the $20 version, you get the slow version. So your experience will be terrible because you're used to this very interactive, very good system and you switch to something that you have very little experience and that's going to be very slow. So I think they shot themselves a little bit in the foot by making the cheap version also slow. I would have at least a small part of the fast preview or like the experience that you get when you pay $200 before degrading to it being slow because it's already slow. I mean, they made it better. I think it's and they have plans to make it a lot better if the Cerebra stuff is true, but yeah, it's a skill. It takes time. Even if you play a regular guitar and you switch to an electric guitar, you're not going to play well right away. You have to learn how it feels.

还有你提到过的额外心理效应，看着很有趣：一旦新模型发布，人们尝试它，就会爱上它。哇，这是有史以来最聪明的东西。然后他们开始说——你可以看看 Reddit 上的帖子随时间变化——他们开始说我们相信这个模型的智能在逐渐退化。这说明了人性以及我们思维方式的某些特点，而很可能模型智能并没有退化。实际上，你是在习惯一件好东西，你的项目在增长，你添加了混乱的代码，你可能没有花足够时间考虑重构，你让智能体越来越难处理你的混乱代码，然后突然之间，哦不，它变难了。我知道它不再那么好用了。那些 AI 公司有什么动机让他们的模型变得更笨？最多他们会因为服务器负载过高而让它变慢。但量化模型让你体验更差，然后你转向竞争对手，这似乎无论如何都不是一个明智之举。

There's also this extra psychological effect that you've spoken about, which is hilarious to watch, which once people when the new model comes out, they try that model, they fall in love with it. Wow, this is the smartest thing of all time. And then they start saying, you could just watch the Reddit posts over time start saying that we believe the intelligence of this model has been gradually degrading. It says something about human nature and just the way our minds work when it's probably most likely the case that the intelligence of the model is not degrading. It's in fact you're getting used to a good thing and your project grows and you're adding slop and you probably don't spend enough time to think about refactors and you're making it harder and harder for the agent to work on your slop and then suddenly oh no it's hard. I know it's not working as well anymore. What's the motivation for one of those AI companies to actually make their model dumber? Like at most they will make it slower if the server load is too high. But like quantizing the model so you have a worse experience so you go to the competitor that just doesn't seem like a very smart move in any way.

你怎么看 Claude Code 与 OpenClaw 的比较？Claude Code 和可能还有 Codex 编码智能体。你认为它们是竞争对手吗？

What do you think about Claude Code in comparison to OpenClaw? So, Claude Code and maybe the Codex coding agent. Do you see them as kind of competitors?

我的意思是，首先，当竞争不是真正的竞争时，它很有趣。是的。如果它只是激励人们构建新东西，我很高兴。酷。我仍然使用 Codex 来构建。我知道很多人用 OpenClaw 来构建东西，我努力让它工作，我用它做较小的代码工作，但如果我连续工作几个小时，我想要一个大屏幕，而不是 WhatsApp。所以对我来说，个人智能体更像是关于我的生活，或者像一个同事：我给它一个 GitHub 问题，比如“嘿，试试 CLI，它真的能用吗？我们能学到什么？”等等，但当我深入工作流时，我想要多个东西，并且非常清楚地看到它在做什么。所以我不认为这是竞争。这是不同的东西。

I mean, first of all, competition is fun when it's not really a competition. Yeah. Like I'm happy if all it did is inspire people to build something new. Cool. I still use Codex for building. I know a lot of people use OpenClaw to build stuff and I worked hard on it to make that work and I do smaller stuff with it in terms of code but like if I work hours and hours I want a big screen not WhatsApp you know. So for me a personal agent is much more about my life or like a coworker like I give it a GitHub issue like hey try out the CLI does it actually work what can we learn blah blah blah but when I'm deep in the flow I want to have multiple things and it being very very visible what it does. So I don't see it as a competition. It's different things.

但你认为未来两者会结合吗？比如你的个人智能体也是你最好的开发合作编程伙伴。

But do you think there's a future where the two kind of combine? Like your personal agent is also your best developing co-programmer partner.

是的，完全同意。我认为这就是操作系统的方向，它会越来越成为你的操作系统。操作系统。而且已经很有趣了：我添加了对子智能体的支持，还有 TGI 支持，所以它实际上可以运行 Claude Code 或 Codex。因为我的智能体有点霸道，它启动后告诉对方谁是老大，基本上就是“啊，Codex 在服从我”。嗯，这是一场权力斗争，而且当前的界面可能不是最终形态。如果你更全局地思考，我们为智能体复制了 Google 的模式：你有一个提示，然后有一个聊天界面，这让我感觉很像我们最初发明电视时，人们把广播节目录下来在电视上播放。我认为最终会有更好的方式与模型沟通，我们仍然处于“这到底怎么工作”的早期阶段。所以最终它会收敛，我们也会找出完全不同的工作方式。

Yeah, totally. I think this is where the OS is going, that this is going to be more and more your operating system. The operating system. And it already is so funny like I added support for sub agents and also for TGI support so it could actually run Claude Code or Codex. And because mine's a little bit bossy. It started it and it told him like who's the boss basically and it's like ah Codex is obeying me. Well, it's a power struggle and also the current interface is probably not the final form. Like if you think more globally, we copied Google for agents. You have a prompt and then you have a chat interface that to me very much feels like when we first created television and then people recorded radio shows on television and you saw that on TV. I think there are better ways how we eventually will communicate with models and we are still very early in this how will it even work phase. So it will eventually converge and we will also figure out whole different ways how to work with those things.

工作流的另一个组成部分是操作系统。我之前离线告诉过你，我有生以来第一次把我的探索领域扩展到苹果生态系统，包括 Mac、iPhone 等。我一生大部分时间都是 Linux、Windows 和 WSL1、WSL 2 用户，我认为它们都很棒，但我现在也开始尝试 Mac，因为这是另一种构建方式，而且目前很大一部分使用大语言模型和智能体的社区都在用这种方式构建。这就是我扩展的原因。但这里关于不同操作系统有什么可说的吗？我们应该指出 OpenClaw 是跨操作系统支持的。

One of the other components of workflow is operating system. So I told you offline that for the first time in my life I'm expanding my sort of realm of exploration to the Apple ecosystem to Macs, iPhone and so on. For most of my life, I've been a Linux, Windows, and WSL1, WSL 2 person, which I think are all wonderful, but I'm expanding to also trying Mac because it's another way of building and it's also a way of building that a large part of the community currently that's utilizing LLMs and agents is using. So, that's the reason I'm expanding to it. But is there something to be said about the different operating systems here? And we should say that OpenClaw is supported across operating systems.

是的，我看到在某些操作上推荐 WSL2 配合 Windows，但 Windows、Linux、Mac OS 显然都支持。是的，它甚至应该能在 Windows 上原生运行。我只是没有足够时间充分测试。你知道，软件的最后 90% 总是比前 90% 容易。所以，我相信还有一些遗留问题最终会解决。我长期以来一直用 Windows，因为我从小就用它。然后我切换到了 Linux，经历了很长一段时间，自己构建内核等等。后来我上大学，带着我那破旧的 Linux 机器，看到了这款白色 MacBook，我觉得它很美，就是那款白色塑料的。于是我转到了 Mac，主要是因为我对 Linux 上 Skype 音频不工作以及其他长期存在的问题感到厌烦，然后我就一直用 Mac，之后我深入 iOS 开发，这无论如何都需要 Mac OS，所以从来不是问题。我认为苹果在原生应用方面失去了一些领先优势。过去原生应用要好得多，尤其是在 Mac 上，有更多人用爱来构建软件。在 Windows 上，功能上更多，就是更多。但很多感觉更功能化，缺少爱。我的意思是，Mac 总是吸引更多设计师和人群，我觉得尽管它通常功能更少，但它有更多的愉悦和趣味。所以我一直很看重这一点。

Yeah, I saw WSL2 recommended side Windows for certain operations, but then Windows, Linux, Mac OS are obviously supported. Yeah, it should even work natively in Windows. I just didn't have enough time to properly test it. And you know, like the last 90% of software is always easier than the first 90%. So, I'm sure there's some dragons left that will eventually nail out. My road was for a long time Windows just because I grew up with that. Then I switched and had a long phase with Linux, built my own kernels and everything. And then I went to university and I had my hacky Linux thing and saw this white MacBook and I just saw this is a thing of beauty, the white plastic one. And I converted to Mac because mostly I was sick that audio wouldn't work on Skype and all the other issues that Linux had for a long time and then I just stuck with it and then I dug into iOS which required Mac OS anyhow so it was never a question. I think Apple lost a little bit of its lead in terms of native. It used to be native apps used to be so much better and especially on the Mac there's more people that build software with love. On Windows it has much more function wise there's just more period. But a lot of it felt more functional and less done with love. I mean Mac always attracted more designers and people I felt even though often it has less features it had more delight and playfulness. So I always valued that.

但在过去几年里，很多时候我其实更喜欢——哦天哪，大家会骂我的——但我更喜欢 Electron 应用，因为它们能用。而原生应用，尤其是如果是网络服务的原生应用，往往功能不全。我不是说做不到，更多是优先级的问题：对很多公司来说，原生应用不是那么重要，但如果他们做了 Electron 应用，那就是唯一的应用，所以优先级高，而且代码复用也更多。我做了很多原生 Mac 应用，我很喜欢，我控制不住自己。我喜欢制作小巧的 Mac 菜单栏工具。我建了一个来监控你的 Codex 使用量。我还建了一个叫 Trimy 的，专门用于智能体场景。当你选中跨多行的文本时，它会移除换行符，这样你就可以粘贴到终端。这又是那种“这让我很烦”，在烦了我 20 次之后，我就把它做出来了。有一个很酷的 OpenClaw Mac 应用，我觉得还没多少人发现。另外，因为它还需要打磨，现在感觉有点像 Humane AI Pin，因为我做了很多实验，它还不够精致。

But in the last few years, many times I actually prefer, oh god, people are going to roast me for that, but I prefer Electron apps because they work. And native apps often, especially if it's like a web service, a native app is lacking features. I mean, not saying it couldn't be done. It's more like a focus thing: for many companies, native was not that big of a priority, but if they build an Electron app, it's the only app, so it is a priority, and there's a lot more code sharing possible. I build a lot of native Mac apps, I love it, I can't help myself. I love crafting little Mac menu bar tools. I built one to monitor your Codex use. I built one called Trimy that's specifically for agentic use. When you select text that goes over multiple lines, it removes the newlines so you can paste it to a terminal. That was again like 'this is annoying me,' and after the 20th time of it annoying me, I just built it. There's a cool Mac app for OpenClaw that I don't think many people have discovered yet. Also, because it still needs some love, it feels a little bit too much like the Humane AI Pin right now because I just experiment a lot with it. It lacks polish.

所以你还是喜欢为那个操作系统增添乐趣。

So you still love adding to the delight of that operating system.

但后来你发现，比如我还为 GitHub 建了一个应用。如果你用 SwiftUI，苹果最新的技术，他们花了很久才做出一个从网络显示图片的东西。现在有了 AsyncImage，但我加了支持后，有些图片就是显示不出来，或者很慢。我和 Codex 讨论说，‘嘿，这为什么是个 bug？’连 Codex 都说，‘嗯，这个 AsyncImage 更多是用来实验的，不应该在生产中使用。’但这就是苹果对从网络显示图片的解决方案。这不应该这么难，你知道吗？这太疯狂了。我怎么在 2026 年，我的智能体告诉我不要用苹果做的东西，因为它虽然存在但不好用？这现在都体现在权重里了。对我来说，他们起步那么早，投入那么多热爱，却搞砸了，没有像应该的那样进化。但还有现实情况：看看硅谷，大多数摆弄大语言模型和智能体式 AI 的开发者都在用苹果产品。而与此同时，苹果并没有真正利用这一点。他们没有开放、没有参与、没有合作。

But then you realize, I also built one for GitHub, for example. And if you use SwiftUI, the latest and greatest from Apple, it took them forever to build something to show an image from the web. Now we have AsyncImage, but I added support for it, and then some images would just not show up or be very slow. And I had a discussion with Codex like, 'Hey, why is that a bug?' And even Codex said, 'Yeah, there's this AsyncImage, but it's really more for experimenting and should not be used in production.' But that's Apple's answer to showing images from the web. This shouldn't be so hard, you know? This is insane. How am I in 2026 and my agent tells me don't use the stuff Apple built because it's there but not good? And this is now in the weights. This to me is like they had so much head start and so much love, and they kind of just blundered it and didn't evolve it as much as they should. But also there's the practical reality: if you look at Silicon Valley, most of the developer world playing with LLMs and agentic AI are all using Apple products. And at the same time, Apple is not really leaning into that. They're not opening up and playing and working together.

他们完全搞砸了 AI，但每个人都在买 Mac Mini，这不是很有趣吗？怎么会这样？这合理吗？你可能是史上最伟大的 Mac 推销员了。

Isn't it funny how they completely blunder AI and yet everybody's buying Mac Minis? How? What? Does that even make sense? You're quite possibly the world's greatest Mac salesman of all time.

不，你不需要 Mac Mini 来安装 OpenClaw。你可以在网页上安装。有一个叫节点的概念。你可以把你的电脑变成节点，它也能做同样的事。在独立硬件上运行确实有它的好处，现在很有用。浏览器也有很大的优势。我在里面建了一些智能体浏览器使用功能，基本上就是 Playwright 加上一堆额外功能，让智能体更容易使用。

No, you don't need a Mac Mini to install OpenClaw. You can install it on the web. There's a concept called nodes. You can make your computer a node and it will do the same. There is something to be said for running it on separate hardware that right now is useful. There's a big argument for the browser. I built some agentic browser use in there, and it's basically Playwright with a bunch of extras to make it easier for agents.

Playwright 是一个控制浏览器的库，非常好用，很容易上手。

Playwright is a library that controls the browser. That's really nice, easy to use.

而且我们的互联网正在慢慢封闭。有一整个运动让智能体更难使用。如果你在数据中心做同样的事，网站检测到是数据中心的 IP，可能会直接屏蔽你，或者设置很多验证码来阻碍智能体。智能体很擅长愉快地点击“我不是机器人”，但用住宅 IP 会让很多事情简单很多。有办法的。真的不需要是 Mac，可以是任何旧硬件。我总说，也许趁这个机会给自己买台新 MacBook 或任何电脑，然后用旧的那台当服务器，而不是单独买一台 Mac Mini。不过话说回来，人们用 Mac Mini 做了很多很酷的东西，我很喜欢。

And our internet is slowly closing down. There's a whole movement to make it harder for agents to use. If you do the same in a data center and websites detect that it's an IP from a data center, the website might just block you or make it really hard or put a lot of captchas in the way of the agent. Agents are quite good at happily clicking 'I'm not a robot,' but having that on a residential IP makes a lot of things simpler. There are ways. It really does not need to be a Mac. It can be any old hardware. I always say maybe use the opportunity to get yourself a new MacBook or whatever computer you use and use the old one as your server instead of buying a standalone Mac Mini. But then again, there are a lot of very cute things people built with Mac Minis that I like.

是啊。

Yeah.

我知道我没从苹果拿佣金。他们也没怎么沟通。

I know I don't get commission from Apple. They didn't really communicate much.

真遗憾。你能说说开始使用 OpenClaw 需要什么吗？很多人。有人发推给你说：“Peter，让 OpenClaw 对普通人来说容易设置。99.9% 的人因为技术困难无法访问 OpenClaw 并拥有自己的龙虾。请让 OpenClaw 对所有人都可用。”你回复说正在努力。从我的角度看，有很多不同的选项，而且已经相当直接了，但我想那是在你有一定开发背景的情况下。

It's sad. Can you actually speak to what it takes to get started with OpenClaw? There's a lot of people. Somebody tweeted at you: 'Peter, make OpenClaw easy to set up for everyday people. 99.9% of people can't access OpenClaw and have their own lobster because of technical difficulties. Make OpenClaw accessible to everyone, please.' And you replied working on that. From my perspective, there are a bunch of different options and it's already quite straightforward, but I suppose that's if you have some developer background.

现在你需要在终端里粘贴一行命令。还有一个应用，它基本上帮你做了，但应该有个 Windows 版。应用需要更简单、更精致。配置可能应该基于网页或在应用内。我已经开始做了。但老实说，现在我想专注于一些安全方面，一旦我确信这个水平可以推荐给我妈，我就会让它更简单。现在，我想让它更难一些，这样它就不会像现在这样快速扩张。

Right now you have to paste a one-liner into the terminal. And there's also an app. The app kind of does it for you, but there should be a Windows app. The app needs to be easier and more polished. The configuration should potentially be web-based or in the app. I started working on that. But honestly, right now I want to focus on a few security aspects, and once I'm confident that this is at a level that I can recommend to my mom, then I'm going to make it simpler. Right now, I want to make it harder so that it doesn't scale as fast as it's scaling.

你想让它更难，这样它就不会像现在这样快速扩张。

You want to make it harder so that it doesn't scale as fast as it's scaling.

是的，如果增长慢一点就好了。这会很有帮助，因为人们对一个人类抱有不切实际的期望。是的，我有一些贡献者，但整个机制我一周前才启动。所以需要更多时间来理顺，而且不是所有人都有整天的时间来做这个。

Yeah, it would be nice if the growth would be a little slower. It would be helpful because people are expecting inhuman things from a single human being. And yes, I have some contributors, but also that whole machinery I started a week ago. So that needs more time to figure out, and not everyone has all day to work on that.

有一些初学者在听这个节目，编程初学者。关于加入智能体式 AI 革命，你会给他们什么建议？

There's some beginners listening to this, programming beginners. What advice would you give to them about joining the agentic AI revolution?

玩。玩是最好的学习方式。如果你有点建造者的特质，脑子里有个想法想实现，那就去实现它，或者试试看。不需要完美。我做了很多我自己都不用的东西。没关系。重要的是过程。从哲学角度说：结果不重要，过程才重要。玩得开心。我觉得我从来没有这么开心地做过东西，因为现在我可以专注于困难的部分。很多编码。我一直以为我喜欢编码，但其实我喜欢的是建造。

Play. Playing is the best way to learn. If you're a bit of a builder, you have an idea in your head that you want to build, just build it or give it a try. It doesn't need to be perfect. I built a whole bunch of stuff that I don't use. Doesn't matter. It's the journey. The philosophical way: the end doesn't matter, the journey matters. Have fun. I don't think I ever had so much fun building things because I can focus on the hard parts now. A lot of coding. I always thought I liked coding, but really I like building.

而且，每当你不理解某件事时，直接问就行。你有一个无限耐心的问答机器，可以以任何复杂程度向你解释任何事情。有一次我问：“嘿，像对八岁小孩那样解释给我听。”它就开始用蜡笔什么的给我讲故事，我说：“不，不是那样。”我其实可以接受年龄再大一点，你知道吧？我又不是真的小孩。我只是需要更简单的语言来解释一个棘手的数据库概念，第一次没搞懂。但你知道，你只管问就行。以前我得去 Stack Overflow 或者发推问，然后可能两天后才收到回复，或者得自己折腾几个小时。现在你直接问就行。就像有了自己的老师。有统计显示，如果你有自己的老师，学习速度会更快。你有了这个无限耐心的机器，问它就行。

And whenever you don't understand something, just ask. You have an infinitely patient answering machine that can explain anything at any level of complexity. Sometimes, like one time I asked, 'Hey, explain this like I'm 8 years old.' And it started giving me a story with crayons and stuff, and I'm like, 'No, not like that.' I'm okay to up the age a little bit, you know? I'm not an actual child. I just needed simpler language for a tricky database concept that I didn't grasp the first time. But you know, you can just ask things. It used to be that I had to go on Stack Overflow or ask on Twitter, and then maybe two days later I'd get a response, or I had to try for hours. Now you can just ask stuff. It's like having your own teacher. There are statistics that show you can learn faster if you have your own teacher. You have this infinitely patient machine; ask it.

但你觉得最简单的上手方式是什么？也许 OpenClaw 是个不错的方式。你可以设置好一切，然后和它聊天。

But what would you say is the easiest way to play? So maybe OpenClaw is a nice way to play. You can set everything up and then chat with it.

你也可以直接实验、修改它，问你的智能体。我的意思是，有无数种方法可以让它变得更好。多玩玩，改进它。更一般地说，如果你是个初学者，真的想快速学会构建软件，那就参与开源。不一定是我的项目。事实上，也许别用我的项目，因为我的积压工作太多了。但我从开源中学到了很多。保持谦逊。也许不要马上提交拉取请求，但有很多其他方式可以帮忙。有很多方法可以学习，比如阅读代码、加入 Discord 或其他社区，了解东西是怎么构建的。我不知道，Mitchell Hashimoto 构建了 Ghostty 终端，他有一个非常好的社区。还有很多其他项目。挑一个你感兴趣的，参与进去。

You can also just experiment with it and modify it, ask your agent. I mean, there are infinite ways to make it better. Play around, make it better. More generally, if you're a beginner and you actually want to learn how to build software really fast, get involved in open source. It doesn't need to be my project. In fact, maybe don't use my project because my backlog is very large. But I learned so much from open source. Just be humble. Maybe don't send the pull request right away, but there are many other ways you can help out. There are many ways you can learn just by reading code, by being on Discord or wherever people are, and understanding how things are built. I don't know, Mitchell Hashimoto builds Ghostty, a terminal, and he has a really good community. There are so many other projects. Pick something that you find interesting and get involved.

你推荐那些不会编程、或者不太会编程的人去学编程吗？现在光用自然语言就能走得很远了，对吧？你仍然认为阅读代码、理解代码、以及能够从头写一点代码有很大价值吗？

Do you recommend that people who don't know how to program, or don't really know how to program, learn to program? You can get quite far right now by just using natural language, right? Do you still see a lot of value in reading the code, understanding the code, and being able to write a little bit of code from scratch?

这肯定有帮助。

It definitely helps.

你很难回答这个问题，因为你不知道在不懂基础知识的情况下做这些事是什么感觉。你可能想当然地认为你对编程世界有很多直觉，因为你编程太多了，对吧？

It's hard for you to answer that because you don't know what it's like to do any of this without knowing the base knowledge. You might take for granted just how much intuition you have about the programming world, having programmed so much, right?

有些人主动性很强、非常好奇，即使对软件工作原理没有深刻理解，也能走得很远，只因为他们不断提问，而智能体无限耐心。我今年做的一件事是参加了很多 iOS 会议，因为那是我的背景，我告诉人们：不要再把自己看作 iOS 工程师了。你需要改变心态。你是一个构建者，你可以把很多构建软件的知识带到新领域。所有细枝末节，智能体都能帮忙。你不需要知道如何拼接数组，或者正确的模板语法是什么，但你可以运用你所有的通用知识，这让你更容易从一个技术星系迁移到另一个。通常，根据你构建的东西，有些语言更合适。例如，当我构建简单的 CLI 时，我喜欢 Go。其实我不喜欢 Go。我不喜欢 Go 的语法。我甚至没考虑过这门语言，但它的生态系统很棒。它和智能体配合得很好。它有垃圾回收。它不是性能最高的，但非常快。对于我构建的那种 CLI，Go 是个很好的选择。所以我用了一门我甚至不喜欢的语言作为我 CLI 的主要语言。这难道不迷人吗？这是一门如果你必须从头写就不会用的编程语言，但现在你用它，因为语言模型擅长生成它，而且它有一些特性让它很有弹性，比如垃圾回收。

There are people that are high agency and very curious, and they get very far even though they have no deep understanding of how software works, just because they ask questions and questions, and agents are infinitely patient. Part of what I did this year is I went to a lot of iOS conferences because that's my background, and I told people: don't see yourself as an iOS engineer anymore. You need to change your mindset. You are a builder, and you can take a lot of the knowledge of how to build software into new domains. All the fine details, agents can help. You don't have to know how to splice an array or what the correct template syntax is, but you can use all your general knowledge, and that makes it much easier to move from one tech galaxy into another. Often there are languages that make more or less sense depending on what you build. For example, when I build simple CLIs, I like Go. I actually don't like Go. I don't like the syntax of Go. I didn't even consider the language, but the ecosystem is great. It works great with agents. It is garbage collected. It's not the highest performing one, but it's very fast. For those types of CLIs I build, Go is a really good choice. So I use a language I'm not even a fan of for my main go-to for CLI. Isn't that fascinating? Here's a programming language you would have never used if you had to write from scratch, and now you're using it because LMs are good at generating it and it has some characteristics that make it resilient, like garbage collected.

因为在这个新世界里一切都很奇怪，而那样做最合理。

Because everything is weird in this new world, and that just makes the most sense.

对于 AI 智能体世界，最好的编程语言是什么？是 JavaScript、TypeScript 吗？

What's the best programming language for the AI agentic world? Is it JavaScript, TypeScript?

TypeScript 非常好。有时类型会变得非常混乱，生态系统也是个丛林。所以对于 Web 相关的东西，它很好。我不会用它构建所有东西。

TypeScript is really good. Sometimes the types can get really confusing, and the ecosystem is a jungle. So for web stuff, it's good. I wouldn't build everything in it.

你不觉得我们正在朝那个方向发展吗？最终所有东西都会用 JavaScript 写？JavaScript 的诞生与消亡，我们正在实时经历。

Don't you think we're moving there? That everything will eventually be written in JavaScript? Birth and death of JavaScript, and we're living through it in real time.

比如，20 年后的编程是什么样子？30 年、40 年后，程序和应用会是什么样？你甚至可以问一个问题：我们需要一种为智能体设计的编程语言吗？因为所有这些语言都是为人类设计的。那会是什么样？我认为我们会发现一大堆有趣的问题。另外，因为现在一切都是世界知识，很多事情会在很多方面停滞不前，因为如果你构建了新东西而智能体不知道，那会比已有的东西难用得多。当我构建 Mac 应用时，我用 Swift 和 SwiftUI 构建，部分因为我喜欢痛苦，部分因为最深层次的系统集成我只能通过那里实现，而且如果你点击一个 Electron 应用，它在菜单中加载一个 Web 视图，你会明显感觉到不同。完全不一样。有时我也会尝试新语言来感受一下，比如 Zig。

Like what does programming look like in 20 years, right? In 30 years, in 40 years, what do programs and apps look like? You can even ask a question like, do we need a programming language that's made for agents? Because all of those languages are made for humans. So what would that look like? I think there are a whole bunch of interesting questions we'll discover. Also, because everything is now world knowledge, in many ways things will stagnate because if you build something new and the agent has no idea, that's going to be much harder to use than something that's already there. When I build Mac apps, I build them in Swift and SwiftUI, partly because I like pain, partly because the deepest level of system integration I can only get through there, and you clearly feel a difference if you click on an Electron app and it loads a web view in the menu. It's just not the same. Sometimes I also just try new languages to get a feel for them, like Zig.

嗯。

Yeah.

如果是我非常关心性能的东西，而且这是一门非常有趣的语言，智能体在过去 6 个月里进步了很多，从不太好变成了完全可行的选择。但生态系统仍然非常年轻，而大多数时候你实际上关心的是生态系统，对吧？所以如果你构建做推理或运行模型方向的东西，Python 非常好。

If it's something where I care about performance a lot, and it's a really interesting language, and agents got so much better over the last 6 months from not really good to totally valid choice. Still a very young ecosystem, and most of the time you actually care about the ecosystem, right? So if you build something that does inference or goes into running model direction, Python is very good.

但如果我用 Python 构建东西，并且想要一个也能在 Windows 上部署的方案，那就不是个好选择了。

But then if I build stuff in Python and I want a story where I can also deploy it on Windows, not a good choice.

有时我找到一些项目，它们做了我想要的 90%，但用的是 Python，而我想要一个简单的 Windows 方案。好吧，那就用 Go 重写。但如果你要处理多线程并想要更高性能，Rust 是个非常好的选择。

Sometimes I found projects that kind of did 90% of what I wanted but were in Python, and I wanted an easy Windows story. Okay, just rewrite it in Go. But then if you go towards multiple threads and want more performance, Rust is a really good choice.

根本没有唯一的答案，这也是它的美妙之处。这很有趣，现在这已经不重要了。你可以直接选择最适合你问题领域特性和生态系统的语言。你读代码可能会慢一点，但其实不会。我觉得你学东西很快，而且你随时可以问你的智能体。

There's just no single answer and it's also the beauty of it. It's fun and now it doesn't matter anymore. You can just literally pick the language that has the most fitting characteristics and ecosystem for your problem domain. You might be a little bit slow in reading the code, but not really. I think you pick stuff up really fast and you can always ask your agent.

很多程序员和创造者从你的故事中汲取灵感，比如你的行事方式、你选择将 Open Claw 开源、你独自或在小团队中愉快地构建和探索的方式。那么作为建议，他们应该优化什么指标作为目标？成功的指标是什么？是幸福吗？是金钱吗？还是对梦想构建者的积极影响？

So there are a lot of programmers and builders who draw inspiration from your story, just the way you carry yourself, your choice of making open claw open source, the way you have fun building and exploring and doing that for the most part alone or on a small team. So by way of advice, what metric should be the goal that they would be optimizing for? What would be the metric of success? Would it be happiness? Is it money? Is it positive impact for people who are dreaming of building?

你经历了一段有趣的旅程。你实现了其中很多目标。然后你有一段时间对编程失去了热情。我只是燃烧得太亮太久了。我创办了 PSPDF kit 并运营了 13 年，压力很大。我不得不快速而艰难地学习所有事情，比如如何管理员工、如何招聘、如何与客户打交道。所以这不仅仅是编程的事，还有人的事。让我精疲力竭的主要是人的事。我不认为倦怠是因为工作太多。也许在一定程度上是这样。每个人都不一样。我不能绝对地说，但对我来说，更多的是与联合创始人的分歧、冲突，或者与客户的高度紧张局面，最终把我拖垮了。幸运的是，我们收到了一个很好的报价，可以把公司提升到下一个水平，而我已经花了两年时间让自己变得可有可无。所以那时我可以离开，然后我就坐在屏幕前，感觉就像《王牌大贱谍》里被吸走魔力一样。它消失了。我再也无法冷静下来。我只是盯着屏幕，感到空虚。然后我就停了下来。我订了一张去马德里的单程票，在那里待了一段时间。我觉得我需要补上生活。所以我做了一大堆补上生活的事情。

You went through an interesting journey. You've achieved a lot of those things. And then you fell out of love with programming a little bit for a time. I was just burning too bright for too long. I ran I started PSPDF kit and ran it for 13 years and it was high stress. I had to learn all the things fast and hard like how to manage people, how to bring people on, how to deal with customers. So it wasn't just programming stuff. It was people stuff. The stuff that burned me out was mostly people stuff. I don't think burnout is working too much. Maybe to a degree. Everybody's different. I cannot speak in absolute terms but for me it was much more differences with my co-founders conflicts or really high stress situation with customers that eventually grinded me down. Then luckily we got a really good offer for putting the company to the next level and I already kind of worked two years on making myself obsolete. So at this point I could leave and then I just sat in front of the screen and I felt like Austin Powers where they suck the mojo out. It was like gone. I couldn't get cold out anymore. I was just staring and feeling empty. Then I just stopped. I booked a one-way trip to Madrid and spent some time there. I felt I had to catch up on life. So I did a whole bunch of life catching up stuff.

在那段时间里，你是否经历了一些低谷，也许对如何对待生活有什么建议？如果你觉得“哦，我努力工作然后退休”，我不推荐那样，因为“哦，我现在就享受生活”这个想法可能很有吸引力，但现在是我一生中最享受生活的时候，因为如果你早上醒来没有什么期待，没有真正的挑战，很快就会变得非常无聊。然后当你无聊时，你会寻找其他方式来刺激自己。也许那是毒品，但最终也会变得无聊，你会寻求更多，那会把你引向一条非常黑暗的道路。

Did you go through some lows during that period and maybe advice on how to approach life? If you think that oh I work really hard and then I retire. I don't recommend that because the idea of oh yeah I just enjoy life now it maybe is appealing but right now I enjoy life the most I ever enjoyed life because if you wake up in the morning and you have nothing to look forward to you have no real challenge that gets very boring very fast. And then when you're bored, you're going to look for other places how to stimulate yourself. And then maybe that's drugs, but that eventually also get boring and you look for more and that will lead you down a very dark path.

但你在金钱方面也展示了，硅谷创业圈的很多人可能想得太多，过于优化金钱。而你也表明，你并不是在拒绝金钱。我相信你接受金钱，但它不是你生活的主要目标。你能谈谈你对金钱的看法吗？

But you also showed on the money front, a lot of people in Silicon Valley in the startup world, they think maybe overthink way too much, optimize for money. And you've also shown that it's not like you're saying no to money. I'm sure you take money, but it's not the primary objective of your life. Can you just speak to that, your philosophy on money?

当我创办公司时，金钱从来不是驱动力。它更像是确认我做对了某件事的证明。有钱能解决很多问题。我也认为钱越多，边际收益递减。一个芝士汉堡就是一个芝士汉堡。我认为如果你走得太远，比如“我只用私人聊天，只坐豪华旅行”，你就会与社会脱节。我捐了很多钱。我有一个基金会，帮助那些不那么幸运的人。与社会脱节在很多层面上都不好，但其中之一是，人类是了不起的。不断记住人类的了不起是件好事。我住得起非常好的酒店。上次在旧金山，我第一次体验了原版 Airbnb，只订了一个房间。主要是因为我想，好吧，要么我出去，要么我睡觉，我不喜欢所有酒店的位置，我想要不同的体验。我认为生活不就是关于体验吗？如果你把生活定位于“我想要体验”，那就减少了它必须好或坏的需求。人们只想要好的体验，那是行不通的。但如果你优化体验，如果它好，太棒了；如果它坏，也太棒了。因为我学到了东西，看到了东西。我想体验那个。那太棒了。比如那里有一个酷儿 DJ 链。我向她展示了如何用 Claude Code 制作音乐。我们立刻建立了联系。我玩得很开心。

When I built my company, money was never the driving force. It felt more like an affirmation that I did something right. And having money solves a lot of problems. I also think that there's diminishing returns the more you have. A cheeseburger is a cheeseburger. And I think if you go too far into, oh, I do private chat and I only travel luxury, you disconnect with society. I donated quite a lot. I have a foundation for helping people that weren't so lucky. And disconnecting from society is bad on many levels, but one of them is like humans are awesome. It's nice to continuously remember the awesomeness in humans. I could afford really nice hotels. Last time I was in San Francisco, I did the first time the OG Airbnb experience and just booked a room. Mostly because I thought, okay, either I'm out or I'm sleeping and I didn't like where all the hotels are and I wanted a different experience. I think isn't life all about experiences? If you tailor your life towards I want to have experiences, it reduces the need for it needs to be good or bad. People only want good experiences. That's not going to work. But if you optimize for experiences, if it's good, amazing. If it's bad, amazing. Because I learned something, I saw something. I wanted to experience that. And it was amazing. Like there was this queer DJ chain there. And I showed her how to make music with Claude Code. And we immediately bonded. I had a great time.

是啊。那种氛围、沙发客、Airbnb 体验，原版的那种。我至今仍然如此。太棒了。这就是人类，这就是为什么旅行很棒。只是体验人类的多样性。当它糟糕的时候，也很好，伙计。如果下雨你湿透了，飞机延误，一切仍然很棒，如果你能睁开眼睛看到活着真好。

Yeah. There's something about that air, couch surfing, Airbnb experience, the OG. I'm still to this day. It's awesome. It's humans and that's why travel is awesome. Just experience the variety of the diversity of humans. And when it's shitty it's good, too, man. If it rains and you're soaked and planes, everything is still awesome if you're able to open your eyes to it's good to be alive.

是的。任何创造情感和感受的东西都是好的。即使是那些神秘的人也很好，因为他们确实创造了情感。

Yeah. And anything that creates emotion and feelings is good. Even the cryptic people are good because they definitely created emotions.

我不知道我是否应该走那么远。

I don't know if I should go that far.

不，伙计。给他们爱。给他们爱。我确实认为网络缺乏现实生活中的一些美妙之处。

No, man. Give them love. Give them love. I do think that online lacks some of the awesomeness of real life.

这是一个开放性问题，如何解决如何将网络体验注入我们人类在现实生活中感受到的那种强度。我不知道这是否仅仅因为文本是非常有损的。

That's an open problem of how to solve how to infuse the online cyber experience with the intensity that we humans feel when it's in real life. I don't know if this is all just often because text is very lossy.

是的。你知道，有时我希望如果我和智能体对话，它应该是多模态的，这样它也能理解我的情绪。

Yeah. You know, sometimes I wish if I talk to the agent I would it should be multimodal so it also understands my emotions.

我的意思是它可能会朝那个方向发展。可能会。

I mean it might move there. It might move there.

它会。它完全会。

It will. It totally will.

我不得不问一下，只是好奇。我知道你可能收到了大公司的巨额报价。你能谈谈你在考虑和谁合作吗？

I have to ask you just curious. I know you've probably gotten huge offers from major companies. Can you speak to who you're considering working with?

是的。所以稍微解释一下我的想法，对吧，我没想到这件事会这么火爆。所以有很多门因此打开。我觉得每个风投、每个大公司都在我的收件箱里，试图得到我 50 分钟的时间。所以这就像一个蝴蝶效应的时刻。我可以什么都不做，继续下去。我真的很喜欢我的生活。

Yeah. So to explain my thinking a little bit, right, I did not expect this blowing up so much. So there's a lot of doors that open because of it. There's like I think every VC every big VC companies in my inbox and try to get 50 minutes of me. So there's like this butterfly effect moment. I could just do nothing and continue. And I really like my life.

这确实是一个选择，我几乎考虑过，当我删掉、想删掉整个东西的时候。我可以创办一家公司。经历过，做过了。有很多人推动我往那个方向走，是的，可能会很棒。

Valid choice almost like I considered it when I deleted wanted to delete the whole thing. I could create a company. Been there, done that. There's so many people that push me towards that and yeah like could be amazing.

有人会说你可能能筹集很多钱，我不知道，几亿、几十亿，我不知道，可能无限的钱。

Push to say that you would probably raise a lot of money and that I don't know hundreds of millions billion I don't know it could just unlimited amount of money.

是的，这并没有让我那么兴奋，因为我觉得我已经做过了所有那些，而且它会占用我很多时间，让我无法做我真正喜欢的事情。就像我当初联合创立公司时一样，我想我学会了怎么做，而且我做得还不错。部分来说我很擅长。但是，那条路并没有让我太兴奋。而且我也担心这会产生自然的利益冲突。比如，我最明显的做法是什么？我把它产品化，做一个适合工作场所的版本。然后呢？我收到一个拉取请求，要求添加审计日志功能，但这看起来像企业功能。所以现在我觉得我在开源版本和闭源版本之间存在利益冲突，或者我把许可证改成类似 FSL 的东西，你不能真正将其用于商业用途，但首先，考虑到所有的贡献，这会非常困难，其次，我喜欢免费（像免费啤酒一样）而不是有条件免费的想法。是的，有一些方法可以让你保持所有东西免费，同时仍然尝试赚钱，但这些非常困难。而且你看到很少有公司能做到这一点。即使是 Tailwind，每个人都在用。每个人都在用 Tailwind，对吧？然后他们不得不裁掉 75% 的员工，因为他们不赚钱，因为没有人再访问网站了，所有事情都由智能体完成，只靠捐赠。是的，祝你好运。像我这个级别的项目，如果我推断典型开源项目能获得多少，那并不多。我仍然在这个项目上亏钱，因为我决定支持每一个依赖项，除了 Slack。他们是一家大公司，他们可以没有我。但所有那些主要由个人完成的项目。所以现在所有的赞助都直接给了我的依赖项，如果还有更多，我想给我的贡献者买一些周边，你知道的。

Yeah it just doesn't excite me as much cuz I feel I did all of that and it would take a lot of time away from the things I actually enjoy. I same as when when I was co I think I I learned to do it and I'm not bad at it. Partly I'm good at it. But yeah, that path doesn't excite me too much. And I also fear it would create a natural conflict of interest. Like what's the most obvious thing I do? I productize it up with like a version safe for workplace. And then what do I do? I get a pull request with a feature like add audit log but that seems like an enterprise feature. So now I feel I have a conflict of interest in the open source version and the closed source version or I change the license to something like FSL where you cannot actually use it for commercial stuff would first be very difficult with all the contributions and second of all I I like the idea that it's free as in beer and not free with conditions. Yeah, there's ways how you how you keep all of that for free and just like still try to make money, but those are very difficult. And you see there's like few and few companies manage that. Like even Tailwind, they're like used by everyone. Everyone uses Tailwind, right? And then they had to cut off 75% of the employees because they're not making money because nobody's even going on the website anymore because it's all done by agents and just relying on donations. Yeah, good luck. Like if a project of my caliba, if I extrapolate what the typical open source project would get, it's not a lot. I still lose money on the project because I made the point of supporting every dependency except Slack. They're a big company. They can they can they can do without me. But all the projects that are done by mostly individuals. So like all the right now all the sponsorship goes right up to my dependencies and if there's more I want to like buy my contributors some merch, you know.

所以你在亏钱。

So you're losing money.

是的。是的，现在我在这个项目上亏钱。

Yeah. Yeah, right now I lose money on this.

所以，这真的不可持续。

So, it's really not sustainable.

我的意思是，大概每月 1 万到 2 万美元之间。这还好，我相信随着时间的推移我能降低这个数字。Open 现在在代币上帮了一点忙，还有其他一些公司很慷慨，但是的，我们仍然在亏钱。所以，这是我考虑过的一条路，但我并不太兴奋。然后还有所有我一直在谈的大型实验室。其中，Meta 和 OpenAI 看起来最有趣。

I mean, it's like I guess something between 10 and 20k a month. Which is fine and I'm sure over time I could get that down. Open is helping out a little bit with tokens now and there's other companies that have been generous, but yeah, we're still losing money on that. So, that's one path I consider, but I'm just not very excited. And then there's all the big labs that I've been talking to. And from those, Meta and OpenAI seemed the most interesting.

你倾向于哪一边吗？

Do you lean one way or the other?

是的。我不确定我能分享多少。还没有完全敲定。这么说吧，无论选择哪一个，我的条件都是项目保持开源，可能会像 Chrome 和 Chromium 那样的模式。我认为这太重要了，不能直接交给一家公司，让它变成他们的东西。我们甚至还没谈到整个社区的部分，但我在旧金山 Clockcon 的经历，看到那么多人受到启发，玩得很开心，只是在构建，还有机器人和龙虾之类的东西走来走去，人们告诉我，他们自从互联网早期（10 到 15 年前）以来就没体验过这种程度的社区兴奋感，而且那里有很多高水平的人。我很惊讶。我也感到非常感官超载，因为太多人想合影。但我喜欢这个。这需要保持一个人们可以黑客和学习的地方。但我也很兴奋能把它做成一个可以让很多人使用的版本，因为我认为这是个人智能体，是未来，而最快的方式就是与其中一个实验室合作。而且在个人层面上，我从未在大公司工作过，我很感兴趣，你知道，我们谈论经历，我会不会喜欢，我不知道。但我想要那种经历，而且我确信如果我宣布这个消息，会有人说，“哦，它被卖掉了，等等等等。”但项目会继续。从我目前谈的所有情况来看，我甚至可以有更多资源来做这件事。这两家公司都理解我创造的价值，我加速了我们的时间线，让人们为 AI 感到兴奋。我的意思是，你能想象吗？我在我的一个普通朋友上安装了 Open Claw。抱歉，他……

Yeah. I'm not sure how much I should share there. It's not quite finalized yet. Let's just say on either of these my conditions are that the project stays open source that it maybe it's going to be a model like Chrome and Chromium. I think this is too important to just give to a company and make it theirs. This is we didn't even talk about the whole community part, but the thing that I experienced in San Francisco like at Clockcon, seeing so many people so inspired and having fun and just building and having robots and lobster stuff walking around like the people told me they didn't experience this level of community excitement since the early days of the internet like 10 15 years and there were a lot of high caliber people there. I was amazed. I also was very sensibly overloaded because too many people wanted to do selfies. But I love this. This needs to stay a place where people can hack and learn. But also I'm very excited to make this into a version that I can get to a lot of people because I think this is the personal agents and that's the future and the fastest way to do that is teaming up with one of the labs and I also on a personal level I never worked at a large company and I'm intrigued you know we talk about experiences will I like it I don't know. But I want that experience and I'm sure if I announce this then there will be people like, "Oh, it's sold out blah blah blah." But the project will continue. From everything I talked to so far, I can even have more resources for that. Like both of those companies understand the value that I created something that accelerates our timeline and that got people excited about AI. I mean can you imagine like I installed open claw on one of my I'm sorry normie friends. I'm sorry about you know like he's

普通朋友，带着爱。是的。

Normie with love. Yeah.

他就像一个用电脑但从不真正……他有时用 ChatGPT，但不是很技术，不会真正理解我构建的东西。所以我给你看，我为他付了 90 或 100 美元（我不确定）的 Anthropic 订阅费，并为他用 WSL Windows 设置好了一切。我很好奇它是否真的能在 Windows 上运行，你知道，有点早，但几天之内他就上瘾了，他发短信告诉我他学到的所有东西。他甚至构建了一些小工具。他不是程序员。然后几天之内，他升级到了 200 美元的订阅（或欧元，因为他在奥地利），他爱上了那个东西。对我来说，这是一个非常早期的产品验证。我构建了一些能吸引人的东西。然后几天后，Anthropic 封禁了他，因为根据他们的规则，使用订阅有问题之类的。他非常沮丧。然后他注册了 Minimax，每月 10 美元，并使用它。我认为这在很多方面都很愚蠢，因为你刚刚得到一个 200 美元的客户。你刚刚让某人讨厌你的公司，而我们仍然这么早。我们甚至不知道最终形态是什么。会是云代码吗？可能不是。你知道，如此严格地锁定你的产品似乎非常短视。所有其他公司都很有帮助。我在大多数大型实验室的 Slack 里，基本上每个人都明白我们仍然处于探索时代，就像广播节目在电视上，而不是完全利用格式的现代电视节目。我认为你让很多人看到了可能性——抱歉，不是非技术人员——看到了 AI 的可能性，并爱上了这个想法，享受与 AI 的互动，这是一件非常美好的事情。我想我也代表很多人说，我认为你是 AI 领域最棒的人之一，有一颗善良的心，良好的氛围，幽默感，正确的精神。

He like someone who uses the computer but never really like I use some ChatGPT sometimes but not very technical wouldn't really understand what I built. So like I'll show you and I I paid for him the the 90 buck 100 buck I don't know subscription for Anthropic and set up everything for him with like WSL Windows. I was so curious would it actually work on Windows, you know, it was a little early and then within a few days he was hooked like he texted me of all the things he learned. He built like even little tools. He's not a programmer. And then within a few days he upgraded to the $200 subscription or euros because he's in Austria and he was in love with that thing. That to me was like a very early product validation. I built something that captures people. And then a few days later, Anthropic blocked him because based on their rules, using the subscription is problematic or whatever. And he was like devastated. And then he signed up for Minimax for 10 bucks a month and uses that. And I think that's silly in many ways because you just got a 200 buck customer. You just made someone hate your company and we are still so early. Like we don't even know what the final form is. Is it going to be Claude Code? Probably not. You know, like that seems very shortsighted to lock down your product so much. All the other companies have been helpful. I'm in Slack of most of the big labs kind of everybody understands that we are still in era of exploration in the area of the radio show is on TV and not and not modern TV show that fully uses the format. I think I think you've made a lot of people like see the possibility non sorry not non-technical people see the possibility of AI and just fall in love with this idea and enjoy interacting with AI and that's a really beautiful thing. I think I also speak for a lot of people in saying I think you're one of the great people in AI in terms of having a good heart, good vibes, humor, the right spirit.

从某种意义上说，你描述的模型——既有开源部分，又在大公司内部构建东西——会很棒，因为让优秀的人留在那些公司是件好事。

And so it would in a sense this model that you're describing having an open-source part and you being part of also building a thing inside additionally of a large company would be great because it's great to have good people in those companies.

人们没看到的是，我在 3 个月内做出了这个。我还做了其他事情。我有很多项目。不，一月份这是我的主要焦点，因为我预见到了风暴来临，但在此之前我构建了一大堆其他东西。我有很多想法。有些应该放在那里。有些在我能接触到最新玩具时会更适合。我有点想接触到最新玩具。所以这很重要。这很酷。这会继续存在。我的短期重点是处理那些……现在是 3000 个 PR 了吗？我甚至不知道。有点积压，但这不会是我一直做到 80 岁的事情。这是通往未来的窗口，我会把它做成一个很酷的产品。但没错，我还有很多想法。

You know what also people don't really see is I made this in 3 months. I did other things as well. I have a lot of projects. This is not... Yeah, in January this was my main focus because I saw the storm coming, but before that I built a whole bunch of other things. I have so many ideas. Some should be there. Some would be much better fitted when I have access to the latest toys. I kind of want to have access to the latest toys. So this is important. This is cool. This will continue to exist. My short-term focus is working through those... is it 3,000 PR now? I don't even know. There's a little bit of backlog, but this is not going to be the thing I work on until I'm 80. This is a window into the future and I'm going to make this into a cool product. But yeah, I have more ideas.

如果你必须选一个，是 Meta 还是 OpenAI？你倾向于哪一个？

If you had to pick, is there a company? Meta, OpenAI, is there one you lean towards going with?

我和两者都接触过。有趣的是，几周前我根本没考虑这些。这真的很难。

I spent time with both of those. It's funny because a few weeks ago I didn't consider any of this. It's really hard.

嗯。

Yeah.

我认识 OpenAI 的人。我很喜欢 Codex。我觉得我是最大的无偿 Codex 广告推销员。能为我免费做的所有工作标个价会非常满足。我希望发生点什么，让那些公司合并，因为这就像……这是你做过最难的决定吗？不。我过去有过一些分手，感觉程度差不多。

I know people at OpenAI. I loved Codex. I think I'm the biggest unpaid Codex advertisement shill. It would feel so gratifying to put a price on all the work I did for free. I would love if something happens and those companies get merged because it's like... Is this the hardest decision you've ever had to do? No. I had some breakups in the past that feel at a similar level.

你是说感情关系？

Relationships, you mean?

是的。而且我也知道，最终两者都很棒。我不会选错。这就像是最有声望和最大的……我是说最大的，但两者都是很酷的公司。

Yeah. And I also know that in the end they're both amazing. I cannot go wrong. This is like one of the most prestigious and largest... I mean the largest, but they're both very cool companies.

是的。它们都真正懂得规模。所以如果你考虑影响力，你一直在探索的一些精彩技术，如何安全地做，如何规模化地做，从而对大量人产生积极影响。两者都理解这一点。

Yeah. They both really know scale. So if you're thinking about impact, some of the wonderful technologies you've been exploring, how to do it securely and how to do it at scale such that you can have a positive impact on a large number of people. They both understand that.

你知道吗，Ned 和 Mark 基本上整个星期都在玩我的产品，然后发给我说，“哦，这太棒了。哦，我们需要改这个。”这些都是有趣的小轶事。人们用你的东西是最大的赞美，也表明他们真的在乎。我在开源方面没有同样的感受。我看到了其他一些我觉得很酷的东西，他们用……我不能说具体数字，因为有 NDA，但你可以发挥创意，想想 Cerebras，以及那如何转化为速度，这非常吸引人。是的，就像你给我 source hammer。嗯。被 tokens 诱惑了。所以，是的。

You know, both Ned and Mark basically played all week with my product and sent me like, "Oh, this is great. Oh, we need to change this." Those are funny little anecdotes. People using your stuff is the biggest compliment and also shows me that they actually care about it. I didn't get the same on the open side. I got to see some other stuff that I find really cool and they lure me with... I cannot tell the exact number because of NDA, but you can be creative and think of the Cerebras and how that would translate into speed, and that was very intriguing. Yeah, like you give me source hammer. Yeah. Been lured with tokens. So yeah.

所以这很有趣。Mark 在摆弄这个东西，玩得很开心。当他们第一次联系我时，我在 WhatsApp 上找到他，他问我们什么时候通话。我说，“我不喜欢日历条目。我们现在就打吧。”然后他说，“好，给我 10 分钟。我们得完成编码。”

So it's funny. So Mark's sort of tinkering with the thing, having fun with it. When they first approached me, I got him on my WhatsApp and he was asking when we have a call. I'm like, "I don't like calendar entries. Let's just call now." And it was like, "Yeah, give me 10 minutes. We need to finish coding."

嗯。

Mhm.

嗯，我想这给了你一个加分项。他还在写代码。他没有漂移到只是当经理。他懂我。那是个好的开始。然后我们大概吵了 10 分钟：哪个更好，Claude Code 还是 Codex？

Well, I guess that gives you a streak credit. It's like he's still writing code. He didn't drift away into just being a manager. He gets me. That was a good first start. And then I think we had a 10-minute fight: what's better, Claude Code or Codex?

这就是你首先做的事。你随便打电话给一个拥有世界上最大公司之一的人，然后聊了 10 分钟这个。

Like that's the thing you first do. You casually call someone who owns one of the largest companies in the world and you have a 10-minute conversation about that.

是的。然后我想之后他称我古怪但才华横溢。但我也和 Sam Altman 进行了一些非常酷的讨论。他非常深思熟虑，才华横溢，从短暂的接触中我很喜欢他。是的。我的意思是，我知道有些人诋毁这两个人。我认为这不公平。

Yeah. And then I think afterwards he called me eccentric but brilliant. But I also had some really cool discussions with Sam Altman. He's very thoughtful, brilliant, and I like him a lot from the little time I had. Yeah. I mean, I know some people vilify both of those people. I don't think it's fair.

我认为无论如何，你正在构建的东西和你这个人本身，规模化地做事非常棒。我很兴奋。

I think no matter what, the stuff you're building and the kind of human you are, doing stuff at scale is kind of awesome. I'm excited.

我超级兴奋。而且美妙的是，如果行不通，我可以再做自己的事。我告诉他们我做这个不是为了钱。我不在乎……

I am super pumped. And the beauty is if it doesn't work out, I can just do my own thing again. I told them I don't do this for the money. I don't give a...

是的。我的意思是，当然，这是个不错的赞美，但我想玩得开心并产生影响。这最终决定了我的选择。

Yeah. I mean, of course, it's a nice compliment, but I want to have fun and have impact. And that's ultimately what made my decision.

我能问你关于……我们已经谈了很多，但也许只是宏观地看看 OpenClaw 是如何工作的。我们谈到了不同的组件。我想问是否有我们遗漏的有趣东西。所以有 gateway、chat clients、harness、agentic loop。你曾在某处说过，每个人都应该在某个时候实现一个 agent loop。

Can I ask you about, we've talked about it quite a bit, but maybe just zooming out about how OpenClaw works. We talked about different components. I want to ask if there's some interesting stuff we missed. So there's the gateway, there's the chat clients, there's the harness, there's the agentic loop. You said somewhere that everybody should implement an agent loop at some point.

是的，因为这就像 AI 里的 hello world。实际上很简单，理解这些东西不是魔法是件好事。你可以轻松地自己构建。所以写你自己的小 Claude 代码，我甚至在巴黎的一个会议上做过这个，向人们介绍 AI。我认为这是个有趣的小练习。你覆盖了很多。我想我有一个傻傻的想法，结果证明很酷，就是我构建了这个具有完全系统访问权限的东西。所以就像，能力越大，可能性越大。我就想，我怎么能再提高一点赌注呢？

Yeah, because it's like the hello world in AI. It's actually quite simple and it's good to understand that stuff is not magic. You can easily build it yourself. So writing your own little Claude code, I even did this at a conference in Paris to introduce people to AI. I think it's a fun little practice. And you covered a lot. I think one silly idea I had that turned out to be quite cool is I built this thing with full system access. So it's like, with great power comes great possibility. And I was like, how can I up the stakes a little bit more?

嗯。对。

Yeah. Right.

然后我让它变得主动。所以我加了一个提示。最初只是一个提示：“每半小时给我一个惊喜。”后来我把它改得在惊喜的定义上更具体。但让它变得主动，并且它认识你、关心你——至少被编程成那样，被提示那样做。而且那是对你当前会话的跟进，这让它变得非常有趣，因为它有时会问一个跟进问题，或者“你今天过得怎么样？”我的意思是，这有点 creepy 或奇怪或有趣，但 highbeat 从一开始到今天仍然如此。模型并不经常选择使用它。

And I just made it proactive. So I added a prompt. Initially it was just a prompt: "Surprise me every half an hour." Later on I changed it to be a little more specific in the definition of surprise. But the fact that I made it proactive and that it knows you and cares about you—it's at least programmed to, prompted to do that. And that is a follow-on on your current session makes it very interesting because it would just sometimes ask a follow-up question or like "How's your day?" I mean, again, it's a little creepy or weird or interesting, but highbeat very in the beginning is still today. It doesn't the model doesn't choose to use it a lot.

顺便说一下，我们说的是你提到的那个定期行动的 heartbeat。你只是启动循环。这不就是个 cron 作业吗，老兄？对吧？就像你受到的批评那样。

By the way, we're talking about heartbeat as you mentioned the thing that regularly acts. You just kick off the loop. Isn't that just a cron job, man? Right? It's like the criticisms that you get.

你可以把任何想法归结为愚蠢的想法。是的，它最终只是一个 crone 商店。我有一些独立的 crone chops。

You can deduce any idea to a silly one. Yeah, it's just a crone shop in the end. I have like separate crone chops.

爱难道不正是进化生物学在自我表现吗？你们难道不只是在互相利用吗？

Isn't love just evolutionary biology manifesting itself? And aren't you guys just using each other?

这个项目只是几个不同依赖项的粘合，毫无原创性。为什么人们……嗯，你知道，Dropbox 不就是多了几步的 FTP 吗？

And the project is all just glue of a few different dependencies and there's nothing original. Why do people... Well, you know, isn't Dropbox just FTP with extra steps?

是的。

Yeah.

我觉得很惊讶。几个月前我做了肩膀手术，模型很少使用心跳功能，但我在医院时，它知道我做了手术，还来问候我，像是“你还好吗？”显然，如果上下文中有重要的事情，它就会触发心跳，尽管它很少用。它有时会这样对人，这让它更有人情味。

I found it surprising. I had a shoulder operation a few months ago, and the model rarely used heartbeat, but then I was in the hospital and it knew that I had the operation and it checked up on me. It's like, 'Are you okay?' And apparently, if something significant is in the context, it triggered the heartbeat when it rarely used the heartbeat. It does that sometimes for people and that makes it a lot more relatable.

让我在 Perplexity 上查一下 OpenClaw 的工作原理，看看我有没有遗漏什么。本地智能体运行时高层架构。有……哦，我们还没怎么讨论技能。我想是技能中心、工具和技能层，但那绝对是一个巨大的组成部分，而且还在快速增长……

Let me look this up on Perplexity how OpenClaw works, just to see if I'm missing any of the stuff. Local agent runtime high-level architecture. There's... oh, we haven't talked much about skills. I suppose Skill Hub, the tools and the skill layer, but that's definitely a huge component and there's a huge growing...

你知道我喜欢什么吗？半年前每个人都在谈论 MCP，我当时想，“去他的 MCP，每个 MCP 做成 CLI 会更好。”现在这东西甚至不支持 MCP——我的意思是带星号的支持，但不在核心层——而且没人抱怨。

You know what I love? Half a year ago everyone was talking about MCPs, and I was like, 'Screw MCPs, every MCP would be better as a CLI.' And now this stuff doesn't even have MCP support—I mean it has with asterisks, but not in the core layer—and nobody's complaining.

嗯。

Mhm.

所以我的方法是：如果你想用更多功能扩展模型，你只需构建一个 CLI，模型就可以调用这个 CLI。它可能会出错，调用帮助菜单，然后按需加载使用 CLI 所需的上下文。如果模型默认不知道某个 CLI，它只需要一句话就知道它的存在。甚至有一段时间，我并不真正关心技能。但技能实际上非常适合这个，因为它们归结为一句解释技能的话，然后模型加载技能，技能解释 CLI，然后模型使用 CLI。有些技能是原始的，但大多数时候这都有效。

So my approach is: if you want to extend the model with more features, you just build a CLI and the model can call the CLI. It probably gets it wrong, calls the help menu, and then on-demand loads into the context what it needs to use the CLI. It just needs a sentence to know that the CLI exists if it's something that the model doesn't know by default. And even for a while, I didn't really care about skills. But skills are actually perfect for that because they boil down to a single sentence that explains the skill, and then the model loads the skill and that explains the CLI, and then the model uses the CLI. Some skills are like raw, but most of the time that works.

这很有意思。我在问 Perplexity：MCP 与技能。因为这需要最近的热门观点，因为你的总体看法是 MCP 已经过时了。所以 MCP 是一种更结构化的东西。如果你听 Perplexity 的解释，MCP 是“我能访问什么？”——通过协议访问 API、数据库、服务、文件，是一种结构化的通信协议。而技能更像是“我该如何工作”：流程、主机辅助脚本和提示，通常用半结构化的自然语言编写，对吧？所以从技术上讲，如果你有足够智能的模型，技能可以取代 MCP。

It's interesting. I'm asking Perplexity: MCP versus skills. Because this kind of requires a hot take that's quite recent, because your general view is MCPs are deadish. So MCP is a more structured thing. So if you listen to Perplexity here, MCP is what can I reach? So APIs, databases, services, files, via protocol—structured protocol of how you communicate with the thing. And then skills is more how should I work: procedures, host helper scripts, and prompts often written in a kind of semi-structured natural language, right? And so technically skills could replace MCP if you have a smart enough model.

我认为主要的美妙之处在于模型非常擅长调用 Unix 命令。所以如果你再加一个 CLI，它最终就是另一个 Unix 命令。而 MCP 必须在训练中加入；对模型来说这不是很自然的事情。它需要非常具体的语法，而且最大的问题是它不可组合。想象一下，如果有一个服务给我天气数据，它返回温度、平均温度、降雨、风速等等，我得到一大块数据。作为模型，我每次都必须接收这一大块数据，用上下文填满它，然后挑选我想要的。模型无法自然地过滤，除非我主动考虑并添加过滤方式到 MCP 中。但如果我把它做成 CLI，它给我这一大块数据时，我可以加一个 jq 命令自己过滤，只得到我真正需要的，甚至可能把它组合成一个脚本，用温度做计算，只输出实际结果。这样就没有上下文污染。当然，你可以用子智能体和更多把戏来解决，但那只是对可能不是最优方式的变通。有 MCP 是好事，因为它推动了很多公司构建 API，现在我可以看一个 MCP 然后直接把它做成 CLI。

I think the main beauty is that models are really good at calling Unix commands. So if you just add another CLI, that's just another Unix command in the end. And MCP has to be added in training; it's not a very natural thing for the model. It requires a very specific syntax and the biggest thing is it's not composable. So imagine if I have a service that gives me weather data and it gives me the temperature, average temperature, rain, wind, and all the other stuff, and I get this huge blob back. As a model, I always have to get the huge blob back. I have to fill my context with that huge blob and then pick what I want. There's no way for the model to naturally filter unless I think about it proactively and add a filtering way into my MCP. But if I built the same as a CLI and it would give me this huge blob, it could just add a jq command and filter itself and then only get me what I actually need, or maybe even compose it into a script to do some calculations with the temperature and only give me the actual output. And you have no context pollution. Again, you can solve that with sub-agents and more charades, but it's just workarounds for something that might not be the optimal way. It definitely was good that we had MCPs because it pushed a lot of companies towards building APIs, and now I can look at an MCP and just make it into a CLI.

嗯。但 MCP 默认会弄乱你的上下文这个固有问题，加上大多数 MCP 通常做得不好，使得它不是一个非常有用的范式。有一些例外，比如 Playwright，它需要状态并且确实有用，所以它是一个可接受的选择。Playwright 用于浏览器使用——我认为已经在 OpenClaw 中了——非常了不起，对吧？

Mhm. But this inherent problem that MCPs by default clutter up your context, plus the fact that most MCPs are not made well in general, makes it just not a very useful paradigm. There are some exceptions like Playwright, for example, that requires state and is actually useful, so it is an acceptable choice. Playwright used for browser use—which I think is already in OpenClaw—is quite incredible, right?

是的，你基本上可以用浏览器使用做所有事情——你能想到的大部分事情。

Yeah, you can basically do everything—most things you can think of—using browser use.

这就进入了整个架构：每个应用现在都只是一个非常慢的 API，不管你愿不愿意。通过个人智能体，很多应用会消失。你知道，我建了一个 Twitter 的 CLI。我的意思是，我逆向工程了网站，使用了内部 API，这不太被允许。

That gets into the whole arch of every app is just a very slow API now, if you want or not. And through personal agents, a lot of apps will disappear. You know, I built a CLI for Twitter. I mean, I reverse-engineered the website and used the internal API, which is not very allowed.

它叫 Bird。短命。叫 Bird 是因为那只鸟必须消失。

It's called Bird. Short-lived. It was called Bird because the bird had to disappear.

翅膀被剪了。

The wings were clipped.

他们所做的只是让访问变慢。是的。你并没有真正移除一个功能。但现在如果你的智能体想读一条推文，它实际上必须打开浏览器并阅读推文，它仍然能读。只是需要更长时间。并不是你把可能的事情变得不可能。不，现在只是慢了一点。所以你的服务想不想成为 API 并不重要。如果我能通过浏览器访问，它就是 API。一个慢 API。

All they did is they just made access slower. Yeah. You're not actually taking a feature away. But now if your agent wants to read a tweet, it actually has to open the browser and read the tweet, and it will still be able to read the tweet. It will just take longer. It's not like you're making something that was possible not possible. No, now it's just a bit slower. So it doesn't really matter if your service wants to be an API or not. If I can access it in the browser, it is an API. It's a slow API.

你能理解他们的处境吗？比如如果你是 Twitter，如果你是 X，你会怎么做？因为他们基本上是在防止其他大公司抓取他们所有的数据。但这样做，他们切断了数百万个不同用例，这些用例来自真正想用它做有用酷事的小开发者。

Can you empathize with their situation? Like what would you do if you were Twitter, if you were X, because they're basically trying to protect against other large companies scraping all their data. But in so doing, they're cutting off like a million different use cases for smaller developers that actually want to use it for helpful cool stuff.

我认为如果每个账户有一个非常低的每日只读访问基线，会解决很多问题。有很多自动化场景：人们创建一个书签，然后用 OpenClaw 找到书签，进行研究，然后给你发一封带有更多细节或摘要的邮件。

I think if you have a very low per-day baseline per account that allows read-only access would solve a lot of problems. There's plenty of automations where people create a bookmark and then use OpenClaw to find the bookmark, do research on it, and then send you an email with more details on it or a summary.

这是个很酷的方法。我也希望我所有的书签都能在某个地方搜索。我仍然想要那个功能。

That's a cool approach. I also want all my bookmarks somewhere to search. I would still like to have that.

所以对你 X 上做的书签提供只读访问。这似乎是一个不可思议的应用，因为我们很多人都在 X 上发现很多酷东西。我们收藏。这是 X 的一般流程。就像，“天哪，这太棒了。”很多时候你收藏了太多东西，再也不会回头去看。

So read-only access for the bookmarks you make on X. That seems like an incredible application because a lot of us find a lot of cool stuff on X. We bookmark. That's the general process of X. It's like, 'Holy this is awesome.' Often times you bookmark so many things, you never look back at them.

有工具能整理它们并让你研究就好了。

It would be nice to have tooling that organizes them and allows you to research it for

是的。老实说，我主动告诉 Twitter：嘿，我做了这个，而且有需求，他们人很好，但也让我下架。公平，完全公平。但我希望这能让团队稍微意识到有需求，如果你只是让它变慢，你就是在减少对你平台的访问。我相信有更好的办法。我也非常反对 Twitter 上的任何自动化。如果你用 AI 给我发推，我会直接拉黑你，没有第一次警告。只要闻起来像 AI，而 AI 还是有味道的。

Yeah. I mean, and to be frank, I told Twitter proactively that, hey, I built this and there's a need and they've been really nice, but also like take it down. Fair. Totally fair. But I hope that this woke up the team a little bit that there's a need and if all you do is making it slower, you're just reducing access to your platform. I'm sure there's a better way. I also I'm very much against any automation on Twitter. If you tweet at me with AI, I will block you. No first strike. As soon as it smells like AI and AI still has a smell.

嗯。

Mhm.

尤其是在推文上，很难发得完全像人类。

Especially on tweets, it's very hard to tweet in a way that does look completely human.

嗯。

Mhm.

然后我就拉黑，我对此是零容忍政策。我认为如果通过 API 发的推文能被标记会很有帮助。也许有些特殊情况，但……

And then I block like I have a zero tolerance policy on that. And I think it would be very helpful if they if like tweets done via API would be marked. Maybe there's some special cases where but

而且应该有一种非常简单的方式让智能体拥有自己的 Twitter 账号。

And there should be a very easy way for agents to get their own Twitter account.

嗯。

Um

嗯。

Mhm.

我们需要稍微重新思考社交平台，如果我们走向一个未来，每个人都有自己的智能体，智能体可能有自己的 Instagram 资料或 Twitter 账号，或者可以代表我做事情。我认为应该非常清楚地标记它们是在代表我做事情，而不是我本人，因为内容现在太廉价了。眼球才是昂贵的东西，当我读到一些东西然后想‘哦不，这闻起来像 AI’时，我觉得非常刺眼。

We need to rethink social platforms a little bit if we go towards a future where everyone has their agent and agents maybe have their own Instagram profiles or Twitter accounts or can like do stuff on my behalf. I think it should very clearly be marked that they are doing stuff on my behalf and it's not me because content is now so cheap. Eyeballs are the expensive part and I find it very triggering when I read something and then I'm like, 'Oh no, this smells like AI.'

是的。

Yeah.

就我们对人类体验的重视而言，这会走向何方？感觉我们会越来越转向面对面互动。我们只会交流。我们会和 AI 智能体对话来完成不同任务、学习不同东西，但我们不会重视在线互动，因为会有太多有味道的 AI 垃圾和太多机器人，让人难以忍受。

Like where is this headed in terms of what we value about the human experience? It feels like we will move more and more towards in-person interaction. And we'll just communicate. We'll talk to our AI agent to accomplish different tasks, to learn about different things, but we won't value online interaction because there'll be so much AI slop that smells and so many bots that it's difficult.

嗯，如果被标记了，那也应该很难过滤。然后我可以选择看或不看。但没错，这是我们现在需要解决的大问题。尤其是在这个项目上，我收到很多邮件，可以说是写得很有智能体风格。

Well, if it's marked, then it should also be difficult to filter. And then I can look at it if I want to. But yeah, this is like a big thing we need to solve right now. Especially on this project, I get so many emails that are, let's say, nicely agentically written.

是的。

Yeah,

但我更愿意读你蹩脚的英语，而不是你的 AI 垃圾。你知道，当然背后有个人，他们写了提示词。我更愿意读你的提示词，而不是输出的内容。我认为我们正在达到一个我重新重视拼写错误的地步。

But I much rather read your broken English than your AI slop. You know, of course there's a human behind it and yeah, they prompted. I much rather read your prompt than what came out. I think we're reaching a point where I value typos again.

是的，我也花了一段时间才意识到这一点。我在博客上尝试用智能体写博文，最终引导智能体达到我喜欢的东西花了差不多同样时间，但它错过了我写作方式的细微差别。你知道，你可以引导它接近你的风格，但不会完全是你的风格。所以，我完全放弃了。我博客上的一切都是有机手写的，也许我用 AI 来修正最糟糕的拼写错误，但真实人类的粗糙部分是有价值的。

Yeah, like and I also took me a while to come to the realization. I on my blog I experimented with creating a blog post with agents and ultimately it took me about the same time to steer agent towards something I like but it missed the nuances of how I would write it. You know, you can steer it towards your style, but it's not going to be all your style. So, I completely moved away from that. Everything I blog is organic handwritten and maybe I use AI to fix my worst typos but there's value in the rough parts of an actual human.

这难道不棒吗？这难道不美吗？现在因为 AI，我们更珍视每个人身上原始的人性。我也意识到，我对 AI 赞不绝口，大量用它来处理代码相关的事情，但如果涉及故事，我就过敏。

Isn't that awesome? Isn't that beautiful that now because of AI we value the raw humanity in each of us more? I also realized the thing that I rave about AI and use it so much for anything that's code, but I'm allergic if it's stories,

对吧？是的。

Right? Yeah.

另外，文档用 AI 还是可以的，你知道，聊胜于无。

Also, documentation still fine with AI, you know, better than nothing.

而且目前，在视觉媒介上也是如此。我对视频和图像中哪怕一点点 AI 垃圾都过敏，这很有趣。它有用，如果只是一个小组件还不错。

And for now, it's still in applies in the visual medium, too. It's fascinating how allergic I am to even a little bit of AI slop in video and images. It's useful. It's nice if it's like a little component of like

哦，就连那些图片，比如所有那些信息图之类的东西，它们让我非常反感。它立刻让我对你的内容评价降低。

Oh, even those images like all these infographics and stuff, they trigger me so hard. Like it immediately makes me think less of your content

而且它们新奇了大概一周，现在就直接是垃圾的代名词。

And they were novel for like one week and now it just screams slop.

是的。是的，即使人们努力使用它，我博客文章里也有一些，你知道，在我探索这种新媒介的时候，但现在它们也让我反感。就像，是的，这直接就是 AI 垃圾。

Yeah. Yeah, even if people work hard on it using and I have some on my blog post, you know, in the time where I explored this new medium, but now they trigger me as well. It's like, yeah, this is just screams AI slop.

我不知道那是什么，但我也经历过。我对图表非常兴奋，然后我意识到为了去除其中的幻觉，你实际上需要做大量工作，你只是用它来画更好的图表。很好。然后我为图表感到自豪。我用了它们大概就像你说的几周，现在我看那些图表，感觉就像看到 Comic Sans 字体一样，不，这是假的。这是欺诈。它有问题。

What I don't know what that is, but I went through that too. I was really excited by the diagrams and then I realized in order to remove from them hallucinations, you actually have to do a huge amount of work and you're just using it to draw the better diagrams. Great. And then I'm proud of the diagram. I've used them for literally like kind of like you said for maybe a couple weeks and now I look at those and I feel like I feel when I look at comic sans as a font or something like this, it's like no, this is fake. It's fraudulent. There's something wrong with it.

这是一种味道。

It's a smell.

这是一种味道。这是……

It's a smell. It's the

这很棒，因为它提醒你，我们知道人类有很多了不起的地方，而且我们知道我们知道。我们一眼就能认出来。所以这给了我很多希望，你知道，这给了我很多希望，人类体验不会被 AI 损害，只会被 AI 作为工具赋能。它不会被损害、限制或以某种方式改变到不再是人类。所以，我需要去趟洗手间。快速暂停。你提到很多应用可能会基本过时。你认为智能体会彻底改变整个应用市场吗？

It's awesome because it reminds you that we know there's so much to humans that's amazing and we know that we know it. We know it when we see it. And so that gives me a lot of hope, you know, that gives me a lot of hope about the human experience is not going to be damaged by it's only going to be empowered as tools by AI. It's not going to be damaged or limited or somehow altered to where it's no longer human. So, I need a bathroom break. Quick pause. You mentioned that a lot of the apps might be basically made obsolete. You think agents will just transform the entire app market?

是的。我在 Discord 上注意到，人们只是说他们喜欢自己构建的东西以及用途，比如当智能体已经知道我在哪里时，为什么还需要 MyFitnessPal？所以它可以假设我在 Waffle House 或奥斯汀的烤肉店附近时会做出糟糕的决定。

Yeah. I noticed that on Discord that people just said how they like what they build and what they use it for and like why do you need my fitness pal when the agent already knows where I am? So can assume that I make bad decisions when I'm at I don't know Waffle House what's around here or or brisketss in Austin.

在烤肉周围没有糟糕的决定，但没错。不，老实说，那是最好的决定。

There's no bad decisions around brisketss but yeah. No, that's the best decision, honestly.

你的智能体应该知道这一点。

Your agent should know that.

但它可以根据我的睡眠质量或是否有压力来调整我的健身计划。它拥有比任何应用都多得多的上下文来做出更好的决策。

But it can like it can modify my gym workout based on how well I slept or if I'm if I have stress or not. Like, it has so much more context to make even better decisions than any of the app even could do.

嗯。

Mhm.

它可以按我的喜好显示 UI。为什么我还需要一个应用来做这个？为什么我要为智能体现在就能做的事情再付一份订阅费？为什么我需要 Eight Sleep 应用来控制我的床，而我只需要告诉智能体——不，智能体已经知道我在哪里。所以它可以关掉我不用的东西。

It could show me UI just as I like. Why do I still need an app to do that? Why do I have to why should I pay another subscription for something that the agent can just do now? And why do I need my eight sleep app to control my bed when I got to tell the agent to No, the agent already knows where I am. So, it can like turn off what I don't use.

嗯。我认为这会转化为一整类应用，我将自然停止使用，因为我的智能体可以做得更好。

Mhm. And I think that will translate into a whole category of apps that are no longer I will just naturally stop using because my agent can just do it better.

我记得你在某处说过它可能会消灭 80% 的应用。

I think you said somewhere that it might kill off 80% of apps.

是的。

Yeah.

你不觉得这对所有软件开发来说都是一个巨大的变革性影响吗？这意味着它可能会扼杀很多软件公司。

Don't you think that's a gigantic transformative effect on just all software development? That that means it might kill off a lot of software companies.

是的。这是一件可怕的事情。所以你会思考它对经济的影响，以及它对社会产生的连锁反应，改变了谁构建什么工具。它让很多用户能够更高效、更便宜地完成任务。同时也会出现新的服务，对吧？例如，我希望我的智能体有零花钱，就像你帮我解决问题一样。我给你 100 美元来帮我解决问题。如果我让你帮我订餐，它可能会使用某个服务，或者像“租个人”这样的东西来完成。我其实不在乎，我只关心解决问题。这为新公司提供了空间。嗯，也许不是所有应用都会消失，有些可能会转变为 API。

Yeah. It's a scary thing. So like do you think about the impact that has on the economy on um just the ripple effects it has to society transforming who builds what tooling. It empowers a lot of users to get stuff done to get stuff more efficiently to get it done uh cheaper. There's also new services that we will need, right? For example, I want my agent to have an allowance like you solve problems for me. Here's like a 100 bucks in order to solve problems for me. And if I tell you to order me food, maybe it uses a service, maybe it uses something like rent a human to like just get that done for me. I don't actually care. I care about solve my problem. uh there's space for for new companies that solve that. Well, maybe don't not all apps disappear. Maybe some transform into being API.

所以基本上，应用会迅速转变为面向智能体的。像我们刚才用过的 Uber Eats 就有真正的机会。这样的公司有很多，谁能最快以最自然、最简单的方式与 Open Claw 交互，谁就能胜出。

So basically apps that rapidly transform in being agent facing. So there's a real opportunity for like Uber Eats that we just used earlier today. It's companies like this, of which there's many, who gets there fastest being able to interact with Open Claw in a way that's the the most natural, the easiest.

是的。而且应用不管愿不愿意都会变成 API，因为我的智能体可以学会如何使用我的手机。另一方面，这有点棘手。在 Android 上，人们已经这么做了，它会直接帮我点击“为我订 Uber”按钮。或者另一个服务，或者有 API 可以调用，这样更快。我认为这个领域我们才刚刚开始理解它的意义。而且我再次强调，这甚至不是我之前想到的，而是我在人们使用过程中发现的，我们还处于非常早期的阶段。但我觉得数据非常重要，比如那些能给我数据的应用，但它们也可以变成 API。当我的智能体可以直接与 Sonus 音箱对话时，我为什么还需要 Sonus 应用？比如我的摄像头，有一个很烂的应用，但它们有 API。所以我的智能体现在直接用 API。

Yeah. And also apps will become API if they want or not because my agent can figure out how to use my phone. I mean, on the other side, it's a little more tricky. on Android that's already people already do that and then it will just click the order Uber for me button for me. Um or maybe another service or maybe there's a there's an API can call so it's faster. Uh I think that's a space we're just beginning to even understand what that means. And I again I didn't even that was not something I thought of something that I that I discovered as people use this and we still so early but yeah I think data is very important like apps that can give me data but that also can be API. Why do I need the Sonus app anymore when I can when my agent can talk to the Sonus uh speakers directly? like my cameras, there's like a crappy app, but they have they have an API. So, my agent uses the API now.

所以，这将迫使很多公司必须转移重心。这有点像互联网带来的变化，对吧？你必须迅速重新思考、重新配置你在卖什么、如何赚钱。

So, it's going to force a lot of companies to have to shift focus. And it's kind of what the internet did, right? You have to rapidly rethink, reconfigure what you're selling, how you're making money.

是的。有些公司就不是这样。例如，Google 没有命令行界面。所以我不得不自己动手，构建了一个类似 Google 命令行界面的工具 Gogg。最终用户必须给我邮件，否则如果我是公司，试图获取 Google 数据（如 Gmail），整个过程非常复杂，以至于有时初创公司会收购那些已经通过认证的初创公司，这样就不用花半年时间与 Google 打交道来获得访问 Gmail 的认证。但我的智能体可以访问 Gmail，因为我可以直接连接。这仍然很糟糕，因为我需要穿过 Google 的开发者丛林来获取密钥，这很烦人，但他们无法阻止我。最坏的情况下，我的智能体只需点击网站，就能以浏览器方式获取数据。

Yeah. Some companies were really not like that. For example, there's no CLI for Google. So I had to like don't have to do anything myself and built Gogg that's like a CLI for Google and at the yeah at the end user they have to give me the emails because otherwise I cannot use their product if I'm a company and I try to get Google data Gmail there's a whole complicated process to the point where sometimes startups acquire startups that went through the process so they don't don't have to work with Google for half a year to be certified to being able to access Gmail. But my agent can access Gmail because I can just connect to it. It's still crappy because I need to like go through Google's developer jungle to get a key and it's still annoying but they cannot prevent me and worst case my agent just clicks on the on the website and gets the data out that way to browser.

是的，我看到我的智能体愉快地点击“我不是机器人”按钮。这将会变得更加激烈。你会看到像 Cloudflare 这样的公司试图阻止机器人访问，这在某些方面对爬取有用，但另一方面，如果我是个人用户，我需要这种访问。你知道，有时我使用 Codex，读一篇关于现代 React 模式的文章，比如 Medium 上的文章。我粘贴进去，但智能体无法读取，因为它们屏蔽了。所以我必须复制粘贴实际文本，或者将来我学会不点击 Medium，因为它很烦人，我会使用其他对智能体友好的网站。所以，会有很多强大富有的公司进行反击。你真的处于中心位置。你是催化剂、领导者，恰好处于这场革命的中心，它将彻底改变我们与服务、与网络的交互方式。像 Google 这样的公司会反击。我是说，你能想到的所有大公司都会反击。

Yeah, I mean I I watch my agent happily click the I'm not a robot button. uh and there's this this whole that's going to be that's going to be more heated. You see companies like uh Cloudflare that try to prevent bot access and in some ways that's useful for scraping but in other ways if I'm a personal user I want that. You know, sometimes I I use Codex and I I read an article about modern React patterns and it's like a medium article. I paste it in and the agent can't read it because they block it. So, I have to copy paste the actual text or in the future I learned that maybe I don't click on Medium because it's annoying and I use other websites that actually are agent friendly. So, uh, there's going to be a lot of powerful rich companies fighting back. So, it's a really you're at the center. You're the catalyst, the leader, and happen to be at the center of this kind of revolution where it's going to completely change of how we interact with uh services with with web. And so, like there's companies like Google that are going to push back. I mean, there's every major companies you could think of is going to push back.

甚至搜索也是如此。嗯，我使用 Perplexity 或 Brave 作为提供商，因为 Google 真的不让你轻松地使用 Google 而不通过 Google。我不确定这是否是正确的策略，但我不是 Google。是的，从大公司的角度来看，有一个很好的平衡点：如果你反击得太多太久，你就会变成 Blockbuster，把一切都输给世界上的 Netflix。但在革命期间，一些反击可能有助于观察。但你看，这是人们想要的，对吧？所以是的，如果我在路上，我不想打开日历应用。我只想告诉我的智能体：嘿，提醒我明天晚上的晚餐，也许邀请我的两个朋友，然后给我的朋友发一条 WhatsApp 消息。我不需要为此打开应用。我认为我们已经过了那个时代，现在一切更加互联和流畅，不管那些公司愿不愿意。我认为正确的公司会找到方法跳上这趟列车，而其他公司会消亡。你必须倾听人们想要什么。

Even Yeah, even search. Um, and I use I think Perplexity or Brave as providers because Google really doesn't make it easy to use Google without Google. I'm not sure if that's the right strategy, but I'm not Google. Yeah, there's a there's a nice balance from a big company perspective because if you push back too much for too long, you become Blockbuster and you lose everything to the Netflixes of the world. But some push back is probably good during a revolution to see. But you see that like this is something that the people want, right? So yes, if I'm on the go, I don't want to open a calendar app. I just I want to tell my agent, hey, remind me about this dinner tomorrow night and maybe invite two of my friends and then maybe send a send a WhatsApp message to my friend. And I don't need I don't want the need to open apps for that. I think that we passed that age and now everything is like much more connected and and fluid if those companies want it or not. And I think we'll the right companies will find ways to jump on the train and other companies will perish. You got to listen to what the people want.

我们谈了很多关于编程的话题，很多开发者非常担心他们的工作，担心编程的未来。你认为 AI 会完全取代人类程序员吗？

Uh we talked about programming quite a bit and a lot of folks that are developers are really worried about their jobs about their about the future of programming. Do you think AI replaces programmers completely human programmers?

我的意思是，我们肯定在朝着那个方向前进。编程只是构建产品的一部分。所以也许 AI 最终会取代程序员。但编程这门艺术远不止于此。比如你真正想构建什么？它应该给人什么感觉？架构如何？我不认为 AI 会取代所有这些。是的，就像编程的实际艺术，它会保留下来，但会变得像编织一样，你知道，人们做这件事是因为喜欢，而不是因为它有什么实际意义。所以，我今天早上读到一篇文章，说哀悼我们的手艺是可以的，我内心有一部分非常强烈地认同这一点，因为过去我花了很多时间沉浸其中，深度进入心流状态，编写代码，寻找非常优雅的解决方案。是的，在某种程度上，这很悲伤，因为那种状态会消失，我也从编写代码、深度思考、忘记时间和空间、处于那种美丽的心流状态中获得了许多快乐。但你可以获得同样的心流状态。

I mean we're definitely going in that direction. Programming is just a part of building products. So maybe maybe I does replace programmers eventually. But there's so much more to that art. Like what do you actually want to build? How should it feel? How's the architecture? I don't think Asians will replace all of that. Yeah, like just the the actual art of programming, it will it will stay there, but it's it's going to be like knitting, you know, like people do that because they like it, not because it makes any sense. So, so I read this article this morning about someone that it's okay to mourn our craft and I can a part of me very strongly resonates with that because in my past I I spent a lot of time sinkering just being really deep in the flow and just like cranking out code and like finding really beautiful solutions and yes in a way It's it's sad because that will go away and I also got a lot of joy out of just writing code and being really deep in my thoughts and forgetting time and space and just being in this beautiful state of flow. But you can get the same state of flow.

我通过和智能体一起工作、构建东西并深入思考问题，也能进入类似的心流状态。这不一样，但怀念过去是可以的。不过这不是我们能对抗的事情。很长一段时间里，如果你这么看的话，世界上缺乏构建东西的智能，这就是为什么软件开发人员的薪水高得离谱，而它们将会消失。仍然会有大量需求，需要那些理解如何构建东西的人。只是所有这些 token 化的智能让人们能做得更多、更快，而且会越来越快、越来越多，因为这些技术在持续改进。我们有过类似的情况——可能不是完美的类比——但当我们发明蒸汽机、建造工厂、取代大量体力劳动时，人们起义并砸坏了机器。我能理解，如果你深深认同自己是一名程序员，这会很可怕、有威胁，因为你喜欢且擅长的事情现在正被一个没有灵魂的实体完成。但我不认为你仅仅是一名程序员。那是对你手艺的非常狭隘的看法。你仍然是一个构建者。

I get a similar state of flow by working with agents and building and thinking really hard about problems. It is different, but it's okay to mourn it. But that's not something we can fight. For a long time, there was a lack of intelligence, if you see it like that, of people building things, and that's why salaries of software developers reached stupidly high amounts, and they will go away. There will still be a lot of demand for people that understand how to build things. Just that all this tokenized intelligence enables people to do a lot more a lot faster, and it will be even more, even faster, and even more because those things are continuously improving. We had similar things when—it's probably not a perfect analogy—but when we created the steam engine and they built all these factories and replaced a lot of manual labor, and then people revolted and broke the machines. I can relate that if you very deeply identify that you are a programmer, it's scary and threatening because what you like and what you're really good at is now being done by a soulless entity. But I don't think you're just a programmer. That's a very limiting view of your craft. You are still a builder.

是的。我想说几件事。第一，当你优美地阐述时，我意识到我从未想过我热爱的事情会被取代。你听过关于蒸汽机的故事。我花了那么多——我不知道——也许几千个小时钻研代码，全身心投入。我最痛苦和最快乐的时刻都是独自在屏幕前。我长期是 Emacs 用户。那是一种身份和意义。当我走在世界上，我不会大声说出来，但我把自己看作一名程序员。而在几个月内——就像你提到的，从四月到十一月——那确实是一个飞跃，一个正在发生的转变。完全被取代是痛苦的。真的很痛苦。但我也认为程序员，更广泛地说构建者，编程的本质是什么？我认为程序员在历史上这个时刻最有能力学习语言来与智能体共情，学习智能体的语言，感受命令行界面。

Yeah. There's a couple things I want to say. One is, as you're articulating this beautifully, I'm realizing I never thought the thing I love doing would be the thing that gets replaced. You hear these stories about the steam engine. I've spent so many—I don't know—maybe thousands of hours poring over code and putting my heart and soul into it. Some of my most painful and happiest moments were alone behind a screen. I was an Emacs person for a long time. There's an identity and meaning. When I walk about the world, I don't say it out loud, but I think of myself as a programmer. To have that, in a matter of months—like you mentioned, April to November—that really is a leap that happened, a shift that's happening. To have that completely replaced is painful. It's truly painful. But I also think programmers, builders more broadly, what is the act of programming? I think programmers are generally best equipped at this moment in history to learn the language to empathize with agents, to learn the language of agents, to feel the CLI.

是的。就像理解你需要智能体做什么才能最好地完成这个任务。我认为在某个时候，它又会被称为编码，成为新常态。

Yeah. Like to understand what is the thing you need the agent to do this task the best. I think at some point it's just going to be called coding again, and it's just going to be the new normal.

是的。然而，虽然我不写代码，但我强烈感觉自己坐在驾驶座上，我在写代码，你知道。只是……

Yeah. And yet while I don't write the code, I very much feel like I'm in the driver's seat and I am writing the code, you know. It's just...

你仍然会是一名程序员。只是程序员的活动不同了。

You'll still be a programmer. It's just the activity of a programmer is different.

是的。因为在 X 上，那个圈子在 Mastodon 和 Blue Sky 上大多是正面的。我不——我也用得少了，因为经常因为我的博客文章被攻击，过去我反应更强烈。现在我能更同情那些人，因为某种程度上我理解。某种程度上我也不理解，因为抓住你眼前这个人，发泄你所有的恐惧和仇恨，是非常不公平的。这将是一个变化，会充满挑战，但也是——我不知道。我觉得这非常有趣和令人满足，我可以利用新时间专注于更多细节。我认为我们对构建的东西的期望水平也在上升，因为现在默认情况已经容易得多。所以软件在很多方面都在变化。会有更多东西。然后你看到所有这些人在尖叫，‘哦，是啊，但水呢？’你知道，我在意大利做了一个关于 AI 现状的会议。我的全部动机是推动人们不要再看自己只是 iOS 开发者。你现在是一个构建者，你可以用你的技能做更多事情，也因为应用正在慢慢消失。人们不喜欢那样。很多人不喜欢我说的话。我不认为我在夸张。我只是说，这就是我看到的未来。也许不会是这样。但我很确定某个版本会发生。我得到的第一个问题是，‘是啊，但数据中心惊人的用水量呢？’但当你真正坐下来计算，对大多数人来说，如果你每月只少吃一个汉堡，就抵消了 CO2 排放或 token 的用水量。我的意思是，总量很复杂，取决于你是否加入预训练，那可能不止一个肉饼，但不会差 100 倍，你知道。所以，高尔夫仍然比所有数据中心加起来用水多得多。那么，你也讨厌打高尔夫的人吗？那些人抓住任何他们认为 AI 不好的东西，却看不到 AI 可能带来的好处。

Yeah. And because on X the bubble is mostly positive on Mastodon and Blue Sky. I don't—I also use it less because often I got attacked for my blog posts, and I had stronger reactions in the past. Now I can sympathize with those people more, because in a way I get it. In a way I also don't get it, because it's very unfair to grab onto the person that you see right now and unload all your fear and hate. It's going to be a change, and it's going to be challenging, but it's also—I don't know. I find it incredibly fun and gratifying, and I can use the new time to focus on much more details. I think the level of expectations of what we build is also rising, because it's just now the default is so much easier. So software is changing in many ways. There's going to be a lot more. And then you have all these people that are screaming, 'Oh yeah, but what about the water?' You know, I did a conference in Italy about the state of AI. My whole motivation was to push people away from 'don't see yourself as an iOS developer anymore. You're now a builder, and you can use your skills in many more ways, also because apps are slowly going away.' People didn't like that. A lot of people didn't like what I had to say. And I don't think I was hyperbolic. I was just like, this is how I see the future. Maybe this is not how it's going to be. But I'm pretty sure a version of that will happen. And the first question I got was, 'Yeah, but what about the insane water use on data centers?' But then you actually sit down and do the math, and then for most people, if you just skip one burger per month, that compensates the CO2 output or the water use equivalent of tokens. I mean, the masses is tricky, and it depends if you add pre-training, then maybe it's more than just one patty, but it's not off by a factor of 100, you know. So, golf is still using way more water than all data centers together. So, are you also hating people that play golf? Those people grab on anything that they think is bad about AI without seeing the potential things that might be good about AI.

嗯。

Mhm.

我并不是说一切都是好的。它肯定会成为我们社会的一项非常变革性的技术。总的来说，批评是存在的。我想说的是，根据我在硅谷的经验，那里有点泡沫，有一种兴奋和对技术能带来的积极面的过度关注。

And I'm not saying everything is good. It's certainly going to be a very transformative technology for our society. There's—to steal a man—the criticism in general. I do want to say, in my experience with Silicon Valley, there's a bit of a bubble in the sense that there's a kind of excitement and an overfocus about the positive that the technology can bring.

是的。

Yeah.

这很好。专注于不被恐惧和恐慌所麻痹是很好的。但在那种兴奋和每个人只互相交谈中，也存在对全美国、中西部、全世界基本人类体验的忽视，包括我们提到的程序员，包括所有将要失业的人，包括任何变革尤其是我们即将面临的、如果我们的讨论成真了的大规模变革在短期内带来的无法估量的痛苦和苦难。所以，有一点谦逊和对你所构建工具的认知——它们会造成痛苦。长期来看，它们有望带来一个更美好的世界、更多机会和更多精彩。但常常安静地尊重将要感受到的痛苦——这方面做得还不够。所以有一点是好的。

And which is great. It's great to focus on not to be paralyzed by fear and fear mongering and so on. But there's also within that excitement and within everybody talking just to each other, there's a dismissal of the basic human experience across the United States, in the Midwest, across the world, including the programmers we mentioned, including all the people that are going to lose their jobs, including the immeasurable pain and suffering that happens at the short-term scale when there's change of any kind, especially large-scale transformative change that we're about to face, if what we're talking about will materialize. And so, having a bit of that humility and an awareness about the tools you're building—they're going to cause pain. They will long-term hopefully bring about a better world and even more opportunities and even more awesomeness. But having that kind of quiet moment often of respect for the pain that is going to be felt—not enough of that is done. So it's good to have a bit of that.

然后我还得对比一下我收到的一些邮件，人们告诉我他们经营着小生意，一直很挣扎，而 OpenClaw 帮他们自动化了一些繁琐的任务，从收集发票到回复客户邮件，这解放了他们，给他们的生活带来了更多快乐。还有一些邮件告诉我，OpenClaw 帮助了一位残疾的订单员，她现在感到被赋能，觉得自己比以前能做更多事情，这太棒了，对吧？因为以前你也可以做到，技术就在那里。我没有发明全新的东西，但我让它变得更容易、更易获取，这向人们展示了他们以前看不到的可能性，现在他们把它用在好的地方。还有一点是，是的，我推荐最新最好的模型，但你完全可以在免费模型上运行它。你可以在本地运行。你可以在 KI 或其他价格更易获取的模型上运行，仍然拥有一个非常强大的系统，否则可能无法实现，因为其他东西，比如 Anthropic 的 Cowork，被锁定在他们的空间里。所以这不是非黑即白的。我收到了很多暖心又精彩的邮件，它们让我非常开心。

And then I also have to put against some of the emails I got where people told me they have a small business and they've been struggling and OpenClaw helped them automate a few of the tedious tasks from collecting invoices to answering customer emails that then freed them up and brought them a bit more joy in their life. Or some emails where they told me that OpenClaw helped their disabled order, that she's now empowered and feels she can do much more than before, which is amazing right? Because you could do that before as well, the technology was there. I didn't invent a whole new thing, but I made it a lot easier and more accessible, and that did show people the possibilities that they previously wouldn't see, and now they apply it for good. Or also the fact that yes, I suggest the latest and best models, but you can totally run this on free models. You can run this locally. You can run this on KI or other models that are way more accessible price-wise and still have a very powerful system that might otherwise not be possible because other things like Anthropic's Cowork is locked into their space. So it's not a lot of black and white. There I got a lot of emails that were heartwarming and amazing and just made me really happy.

是的，它给很多人的生活带来了快乐，不仅仅是程序员，而是很多人的生活。看到这些真是太美好了。

Yeah, there's a lot it has brought joy into a lot of people's lives, not just programmers, like a lot of people's lives. It's beautiful to see.

关于我们正在经历的这一切，人类文明，是什么给了你希望？

What gives you hope about this whole thing we have going on, the human civilization?

我的意思是，我激励了很多人。现在又有了一种建造者的氛围。人们正在以更有趣的方式使用 AI，发现它能做什么，如何帮助他们的生活，并创造出充满创意的新空间。我不知道，比如在维也纳有一个 500 人的聚会，想上台展示的人比例非常高，这对我来说真的很惊讶，因为通常很难找到愿意谈论自己作品的人，而现在这样的人很多。所以这给了我希望，我们能够解决这个问题。

I mean, I inspired so many people. There's like this whole builder vibe again. People are now using AI in a more playful way and are discovering what it can do and how it can help them in their life and creating new places that are just sprawling of creativity. I don't know, like there's a meetup in Vienna with 500 people and there's such a high percentage of people that want to present, which is to me really surprising because usually it's quite hard to find people that want to talk about what they built, and now there's an abundance. So that gives me hope that we can figure it out.

而且它让基本上每个人都能使用。

And it makes it accessible to basically everybody.

是的。

Yeah.

想象一下所有这些人在建造，尤其是当你让它变得越来越简单、越来越安全时。就像任何有想法并能用语言表达这些想法的人都可以建造。这太疯狂了。

Just imagine all these people building, especially as you make it simpler and simpler, more secure. It's like anybody who has ideas and can express those ideas in language can build. That's crazy.

不。这最终是权力归于人民，是 AI 带来的美好事物之一，而不仅仅是垃圾生成器。

No. It's ultimately power to the people and one of the beautiful things that come out of AI, not just a slop generator.

好吧，Claw 教父，我刚刚意识到我一开始那么说侵犯了两个商标，因为还有《教父》。我要被所有人起诉了。你是一个很棒的人。你创造了一些非常特别的东西，一个特别的社区，一个特别的产品，一套特别的想法，还有所有的幽默、正能量、所有建造者的灵感、建造的兴奋感。所以我真的感谢你所做的一切，感谢你这个人，感谢你今天坐下来和我聊天。谢谢你，兄弟。

Well, Mr. Claw Father, I just realized when I said that in the beginning, I violated two trademarks because there's also the Godfather. I'm getting sued by everybody. You're a wonderful human being. You've created something really special, a special community, a special product, a special set of ideas, plus the entire the humor, the good vibes, the inspiration of all these people building, the excitement to build. So I'm truly grateful for everything you've been doing and for who you are and for sitting down to talk with me today. Thank you, brother.

谢谢你给我机会讲述我的故事。

Thanks for giving me the chance to tell my story.

感谢收听与 Peter Steinberger 的对话。要支持本播客，请查看描述中的赞助商，你还可以在那里找到联系我、提问、反馈等的链接。现在，让我用 Baltaare 的一句话来结束。能力越大，责任越大。感谢收听，希望下次再见。

Thanks for listening to this conversation with Peter Steinberger. To support this podcast, please check out our sponsors in the description where you can also find links to contact me, ask questions, give feedback, and so on. And now, let me leave you with some words from Baltaare. With great power comes great responsibility. Thank you for listening and hope to see you next time.