I think he accepted that offer exactly for this reason . He feels he can have a bigger impact within OpenAI (and maybe become a billionaire in the medium run?) that creating his own business (again) out of OpenClaw.
If search and summarization is good enough, and you basically write down automatically by default all your "tribal knowledge" in your chat app, using wikis or documentation systems starts to be redundant.
Unfortunately I think there are many places in the world like that. It just takes someone with even a mild mental illness, a relatively small family and the sudden early death of a parent to start a vicious cycle.
I mean, "effort" to me in this context is what the creator of $project thinks it is worth their time. Don't you agree? If you want to learn a new computer language yourself, vibecoding will probably not help you. If you want to create something to scratch your itch, and spend time and mental effort in getting it polished, isn't that effort? It is not automatic, even with vibecoding, getting out a good app/site that solves a need in an elegant, functional manner for the user.
I think your last point is the important one. I don't mind vibe coded app if they are polished. But a polished vibe coded app looks like a non-vibe-coded app because of the polishing. The polishing is 95% of the effort. This app here looks fully vibe coded, without much polishing, at least to me.
> It is not automatic, even with vibecoding, getting out a good app/site that solves a need in an elegant, functional manner for the user.
This feels like a vibecoded comment.
To address the "substance" of your "comment": yes, creating a polished product requires effort, but this is not a polished product: as pointed out by numerous commenters, it provides nothing new, and what it does provide is broken. Thus the GP's comment that it is vibecoded slop and not worth taking seriously.
My rhetorical question was broader, because GP comment was a generic one, not specific to this project.
I would ask you to be more mindful in your replies.
It doesn't matter, the answer is the same. Using vibecoding is less effort that not using it, so of late we see a lot of low-effort vibecoding projects, of which this is one. Ergo, vibecoding is an easily-spotted red flag for projects that are not worth taking seriously.
> I would ask you to be more mindful in your replies.
You should take your own advice. Also, don't be a dick.
> It doesn't matter, the answer is the same. Using vibecoding is less effort that not using it, so of late we see a lot of low-effort vibecoding projects, of which this is one. Ergo, vibecoding is an easily-spotted red flag for projects that are not worth taking seriously.
And the whole point of my initial reply was to question the definition of "effort".
> You should take your own advice. Also, don't be a dick.
I think your reply perfectly illustrates the situation.
Not a fruitful discussion anyway, enjoy clicking down arrows.
You're offering a product, not a vibe project, so I disagree.
If vibe coding would lower cost while maintaining quality then this would be a fair argument, but the reality is that its a lazy way and frankly it's not programming.
GP was speaking of the first thing they now check on every new project they find is whether it's vibecoded or there is actual "effort" in it. Hence my comment.
I'm probably projecting the idea I have of myself here but if someone says
> every exchange is about what's best for humanity and the public in general
it means that they are the kind of individual who deeply care for things to work, relationships to be good and fruitful and thus if they made someone pay for something, they think they must listen to them and comply their requests, because well, they are a paying customer and the customer is always right, they gave me their money etc etc
You can care about the work and your customer will still setting healthy boundaries and accepting that wanting to do good work for them doesn't mean you are beside them.
Business is fundamentally about partnership, transactional and moneyed partnerships, but partnership still. It's best when both suppliers and customers are aware of that and like any partnership, it structured and can be stopped by both partners. You don't technically owe them more than what's in the contract and that puts a hard stop which is easy to identify if needed.
I think they refer to the fact that, exposed as GP did, looks like there is a loophole if 2 teenagers started their relationship at 17 and 15, and once they become 18 and 16, sexting is suddenly illegal.
Sure, but long term business success aside, I’m sure most of the folks working at this company would die for a fraction of the adoption curve docker had.
Sitting on an idea doesn’t have to mean literally sitting and staring at the ceiling, thinking about it. It means you have an idea and let it stew for a while, your mind coming back to it on its own while you’re taking a shower, doing the dishes, going for a walk… The idea which never comes back is the one you abandon and would’ve been a waste of time to pursue. The idea which continues to be interesting and popping into your head is the worthwhile one.
When you jump straight into execution because it’s easy to do so, you lose the distinction.
Sitting on an idea doesn't necessarily mean being inactive. You can think at the same time as doing something else. "Shower thoughts" are often born of that process.
I know, and letting an agent/LLM "think" about some ideas does not waste your time either. Yes, it "wastes" energy and you need to read and think about the results after, we don't have neural interfaces to computer, so the inner thinking feedback loop will always be faster. But I keep thinking GP comment was unfair: you can just have your idea in the background to check whether it is good or not exactly the same, and after that time "discuss" it with an LLM, or ask it to implement the idea because you think it's solid enough. It's a false dichotomy.
I understand you, and I felt the same for a few days: the dopamine rush was hitting hard. You just need to control it (with a very big "just"), like any other dopamine rush.
reply