I still strongly believe every developer should be vibecoding their own cowork/openclaw/devin

Here are the prompts I use for my AI environment, though it's changed a bunch since the last snapshot

https://github.com/rbren/personal-ai-devbox

Neat! I might give it a try.

What do you mean by interfaces in "These interfaces can do literally anything on the host machine. You're responsible for your own security"?

Also, your backdooring image links to a 404.

Thanks for the link. You mention security; is the _average_ developer safer going with OpenClaw?

Funny, I just released my dev setup as “Open prompt”

https://github.com/rbren/personal-ai-devbox

A reasonably sized OSS model that's this good at coding is a HUGE step forward.

We've done some vibe checks on it with OpenHands and it indeed performs roughly as good as Sonnet 4.5.

OSS models are catching up

This is why it's worth investing in a model-agnostic setup. Don't tie yourself into a single model provider!

OpenHands, Toad, and OpenCode are fully OSS and LLM-agnostic

The OpenHands CLI has had some major improvements since v1: https://github.com/OpenHands/OpenHands

MIT license and model agnostic

I’d also keep a close eye on Toad which is launching this month:

https://willmcgugan.github.io/announcing-toad/

I use lychee. It’s been great. Uploads could be a bit rough a few versions back but they’ve been seamless for a while

If you want to hack on an emerging agent SDK (specializing in software development), join us at https://github.com/OpenHands/software-agent-sdk

Spoiler: it's not actually that easy. Compaction, security, sandboxing, planning, custom tools--all this is really hard to get right.

We're about to launch an SDK that gives devs all these building blocks, specifically oriented around software agents. Would love feedback if anyone wants to look: https://github.com/OpenHands/software-agent-sdk

Only on HN is there a “well, actually” with little substance followed by a comment about a launch.

The article isn’t about writing production ready agents, so it does appear to be that easy

How autonomous/controllable are the agents with this SDK?

When I build an agent my standard is Cursor, which updates the UI at every reportable step of the way, and gives you a ton of control opportunities, which I find creates a lot of confidence.

Is this level of detail and control possible with the OpenHands SDK? I’m asking because the last SDK that was simple to get into lacked that kind of control.

That's the idea! We have a confirmation_mode that can interrupt at any step in the process.

If you're looking for open source agents, which can run locally, in Docker, or in the cloud, and which have a consistent track record of acing benchmark scores like SWE-bench, check out https://github.com/All-Hands-AI/OpenHands

We're about to release our Agent SDK (https://github.com/All-Hands-AI/agent-sdk/) which provides devs with all the nuts and bolts you need to define custom prompts, tools, security profiles, and multi-agent interfaces

Any news about devstral small 1.2? magistral 1.2 was a huge leap forward.

How about GPT 20b and 120b?

Qwen3?

I’d like to see a “no jerks” license. It’d be MIT by default, but call out specific bad actors as being disallowed from using the software. That way your average corporate user wouldn’t need to consult a lawyer before adopting

It will be as useless in terms of enforcement as "shall be used for good, not evil." https://www.json.org/license.html

I think they're suggesting a license that says "except Apple, Amazon, Google, Huawei, ..." not a license that literally says "no jerks".

The problem of attempting to enumerate the jerks does seem pretty... insurmountable... to me though.

Yeah, and even if you like the idea, this is not dependable. How do you know, as a user, that you'll not end up in the jerk list tomorrow?

Presumably the license would, like practically all open source licenses, be irrevocable. You aren't guaranteed new versions will be issued under the same license (short of a contract saying otherwise, just like every other piece of open source software) but the existing license that did not list you as a jerk can't be revoked...

True, but that's still a risk that adds to the risk of the authors switching the license.

BTW, if the jerk list is tied to the license, if the project had external contributors, they all need to agree to add or remove someone from the list, like any license change…

> BTW, if the jerk list is tied to the license, if the project had external contributors, they all need to agree to add [...] someone from the list, like any license change…

Not if you base this off a license like MIT that allows sublicensing under more restrictive terms (not a lawyer, not legal advice)

Untrue - all that needs to happen is that future work needs to be released with the new list attached.

This software shall not be used for evil. With the exception of IBM, who, together with their partners and minions, are allowed to use this software for evil.