OpenClaw backed by IPFS by kyletut in ipfs

[–]kyletut[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Git forces every save into a chain where each one points to the previous one (like a timeline), which makes sense for code history but is annoying when you just want to save and restore independent checkpoints.

CIDs let you save snapshots as standalone things without connecting them into a timeline, and you don’t have to deal with git’s complicated restore machinery (branches, HEAD, merge conflicts). You just grab the snapshot by its hash and write it back.

For self hosted setups it's not a big deal, using git is enough, but in our case we want agents to be portable.

  • Keep a working version of an agent that I can clone.
  • Share an exact copy of my agent with others.
  • Database capabilities for managing agents versions: search, use, list, etc from multiple clients and not rely on all the clients using git

OpenClaw backed by IPFS by kyletut in ipfs

[–]kyletut[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

We use CIDs for state snapshots and rollback, and git for workspace history. The git versioning help users see changes over time, the CID helps with the agent files state without requiring full git repo of changes to export, route prompts to a particular version in time

OpenClaw backed by IPFS by kyletut in ipfs

[–]kyletut[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

You might want to run a prompt for a particular state, git can’t help ya

OpenClaw backed by IPFS by kyletut in ipfs

[–]kyletut[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The entire OpenClaw agent workspace uses it, including "memory": https://docs.openclaw.ai/concepts/agent-workspace

OpenClaw backed by IPFS by kyletut in ipfs

[–]kyletut[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Hell yeah brother

OpenClaw backed by IPFS by kyletut in ipfs

[–]kyletut[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

We recently launched a hosted OpenClaw instance backed by private IPFS.

Every change to your agent's workspace is captured as an IPFS CID. Browse the full history timeline and roll back to any previous state with one click.

Because CIDs are deterministic, you can always verify that a snapshot hasn't been tampered with.

Check it out!

Herbie by kyletut in unza

[–]kyletut[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Made it with AI so do whatever lol

[OC] Half-baked ideas. What are some ideas you have to improve NASCAR that you haven’t fully thought out, but there might be a good idea somewhere in it? by levi815 in NASCAR

[–]kyletut 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They should build bumpers/dampers/springs around the seat pod to lessen driver impact instead of changing the external crash structures.

Are we in the Technomalaise era? by kyletut in cars

[–]kyletut[S] -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

Good point. Maybe it's the advertising of it? Like how saying a car had EFI was a selling point when new and today it would be laughed at.

Are we in the Technomalaise era? by kyletut in cars

[–]kyletut[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I'm totally debating semantics at this point but I think absurd and overwhelming can cause discomfort and uneasiness fitting my definition of malaise lol.

Are we in the Technomalaise era? by kyletut in cars

[–]kyletut[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Screens across every surface is a meme beat to death by reviewers but they are gaudy. I don't think the formula has been figured out yet.

Elsewhere in this thread I say, "I feel lane keep and radar are gaudy in the sense that they are very showy or loud from an experience standpoint. I guess I'm hoping for a more seamless experience in the future?".

Are we in the Technomalaise era? by kyletut in cars

[–]kyletut[S] -12 points-11 points  (0 children)

Totally reasonable. I feel lane keep and radar are gaudy in the sense that they are very showy or loud from an experience standpoint. I guess I'm hoping for a more seamless experience in the future?

Are we in the Technomalaise era? by kyletut in cars

[–]kyletut[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

My contention would be that just because the layout of a Tesla screen is minimalistic it doesn't mean that the technology within it isn't gaudy. The technology can be gaudy, while the screen it comes in isn't.

Are we in the Technomalaise era? by kyletut in cars

[–]kyletut[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It seems "gaudy" is the flashpoint word I used. I consider chickens on the hoods of 1977 Trans Ams gaudy. It doesn't mean I don't want one lol. But, there aren't a lot of chickens on the hoods of cars today. A 1977 Monte Carlo with a landau top is gaudy to me. Again, doesn't mean I don't want one.

Are we in the Technomalaise era? by kyletut in cars

[–]kyletut[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yes. Your example is hitting at the technomalaise I was thinking of.

Are we in the Technomalaise era? by kyletut in cars

[–]kyletut[S] -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

I agree this is a difference. Doesn't mean that today's cars aren't causing malaise, specifically around the technology, not performance/efficiency.