← Back to context Comment by gas9S9zw3P9c 8 hours ago I fail to understand why 888 KiB matters if it's just a wrapper around a cloud api. 6 comments gas9S9zw3P9c Reply ramon156 7 hours ago Have you seen OpenClaw's codebase? 680.000 LOC.I care how big it is. Rebelgecko 6 hours ago A lot of the *claws emphasize binary size and lines of code. I think for better or worse people treat codebase size as a proxy for "how much of the project is unsupervised, unmaintainable, buggy AI slop?" boznz 4 hours ago 8 is lucky number in China mihaelm 7 hours ago Because of resource-constrained environments, the primary deployment target seem to be microcontrollers. You can get ESP32 boards for pretty cheap. renewiltord 7 hours ago Because it means you can run it on an ESP32 which is a low power microprocessor package.
Rebelgecko 6 hours ago A lot of the *claws emphasize binary size and lines of code. I think for better or worse people treat codebase size as a proxy for "how much of the project is unsupervised, unmaintainable, buggy AI slop?"
mihaelm 7 hours ago Because of resource-constrained environments, the primary deployment target seem to be microcontrollers. You can get ESP32 boards for pretty cheap.
renewiltord 7 hours ago Because it means you can run it on an ESP32 which is a low power microprocessor package.
Have you seen OpenClaw's codebase? 680.000 LOC.
I care how big it is.
A lot of the *claws emphasize binary size and lines of code. I think for better or worse people treat codebase size as a proxy for "how much of the project is unsupervised, unmaintainable, buggy AI slop?"
8 is lucky number in China
Because of resource-constrained environments, the primary deployment target seem to be microcontrollers. You can get ESP32 boards for pretty cheap.
Because it means you can run it on an ESP32 which is a low power microprocessor package.