Author: Michael Gu

  • OpenClaw Memory Problem SOLVED: Stop Wasting Time Explaining

    OpenClaw Memory Problem SOLVED: Stop Wasting Time Explaining

    If you’ve been using OpenClaw for more than a day, you’ve probably hit the same wall we did: you spend hours telling your AI agent everything about yourself, your preferences, your workflow — and then the next morning, it wakes up and has no idea who you are. In this video, Ron and I break down exactly how to fix this memory problem so you can stop wasting time re-explaining yourself every single session.

    The Problem: Your AI Agent Has Amnesia

    Here’s the thing most people don’t realize about AI agents — they’re not continuously running with perfect recall. The best way to think about it is that every morning, your AI wakes up fresh. The session resets, and it essentially forgets everything from the day before. It then has to read through its notes and files to piece together who it is and what you’ve been working on.

    This is a fundamental limitation of how large language models work. They operate within a context window — a fixed amount of text they can process at once. The larger that context window, the more expensive each interaction becomes. So you can’t just dump your entire conversation history into the prompt every time. Back in January, a lot of tutorials were telling people to just blast the AI with their life story so it would understand them better. Ron tried exactly that, spent two hours pouring everything in, and the next day? Gone. All of it.

    Solution #1: Semantic Search with Embeddings

    The first and most important thing you should enable on your OpenClaw agent is semantic memory search. This is the game-changer that turns your forgetful AI into something that can actually recall past conversations when it needs to.

    Here’s how it works: OpenClaw takes your entire conversation history and converts it into embeddings — essentially numerical representations of the meaning behind your words. These embeddings get stored in a vector database (OpenClaw uses SQLite with the sqlite-vec extension). When your agent needs to remember something, it performs a semantic search across all those stored embeddings to find the most relevant past conversations.

    The key insight is that your agent doesn’t load everything into memory all the time. It only searches when it needs to — when you ask it something that requires past context. This keeps costs manageable while still giving you access to months of conversation history. OpenClaw actually uses a hybrid approach: about 70% vector (semantic) search combined with 30% BM25 keyword search. The vector search handles conceptual matches where wording differs, while BM25 catches exact terms like error codes or function names.

    By default, OpenClaw supported OpenAI’s embedding models, but the newest updates have added Mistral as an embedding provider. This is a big deal because Mistral’s embeddings are cheaper to run over time. Research shows that Mistral’s embedding model actually achieved the highest accuracy at 77.8% in retrieval benchmarks, while being more cost-effective than OpenAI’s offerings. If you’re running your agent daily and building up months of conversation data, those cost savings add up fast.

    Solution #2: QMD (Quantized Memory Documents)

    The second approach we’ve been testing is something called QMD — Quantized Memory Documents. This is another way to handle memory that can be cheaper than pure embedding-based search.

    Think of QMD as a more compressed, efficient way to store and retrieve memories. Instead of embedding every single line of conversation, QMD creates condensed document summaries that capture the essential information. It’s still in the experimental phase for many users, but it’s showing promise as a cost-effective alternative, especially for agents that accumulate massive amounts of conversation data over time.

    Solution #3: Skills — Teaching Your Agent Permanent Abilities

    The third approach is one of my favorites: skills. If there’s something your agent needs to do repeatedly — every single day — it should have a dedicated skill for it. I like to think of it like Neo learning kung fu in The Matrix. You just plug in the skill, and boom, your agent knows how to do it.

    A skill in OpenClaw is essentially a plain-text instruction file that lives in your agent’s skill directory. You can tell your agent to write a skill, refine it over time, and even connect to your server via SSH (using something like Termius) to manually inspect and edit the skill files. Since they’re written in plain English, you can understand exactly what your agent is doing and tweak it as needed.

    Skills are different from memory in an important way: memory is about recalling past conversations and context, while skills are about permanent capabilities. Your agent will always load its relevant skills at the start of a session, so it never “forgets” how to do something you’ve taught it.

    Ron’s Approach: Obsidian Integration for Daily Summaries

    Ron and I actually have completely different approaches to memory, which I think highlights how personal this whole setup is. I tend to care less about memory and more about having a solid project plan — as long as the agent knows what we’re building, I’m good. Ron, on the other hand, is meticulous about how his agent remembers things.

    His approach goes beyond just embeddings and semantic search. He’s set up his OpenClaw agent to save a full summary of every chat session as a plain text file and push it to Obsidian — the popular note-taking app. This creates a human-readable archive of everything the agent has discussed, which serves as both a backup and an additional memory layer. It’s a clever approach that combines AI memory with traditional note-taking, and it’s something we haven’t covered in depth on this channel yet.

    Getting Started: Don’t Skip Memory Setup

    The TL;DR here is simple: make sure you have some form of memory enabled on your OpenClaw agent, or it’s going to forget everything. Whether you go with semantic search (the most common approach), experiment with QMD, build out skills, or combine all three — the important thing is that you don’t leave your agent running with zero memory infrastructure.

    If you’re just getting started, I’d recommend enabling semantic search first. It’s the most straightforward to set up and gives you the biggest immediate improvement. From there, you can layer on skills for repetitive tasks and explore QMD as your usage grows.

    We’re planning more detailed guides on each of these approaches, so drop a comment on the video if there’s a specific memory setup you’d like us to walk through. This channel is all about solving real problems with real solutions — and memory is definitely one of the biggest pain points we’ve all been dealing with.

  • Obsidian FIXED My OpenClaw Memory Loss — Here’s How

    Obsidian FIXED My OpenClaw Memory Loss — Here’s How

    If you’ve been running an AI agent with OpenClaw, you’ve probably hit the same wall I did — your agent forgets things. You have a great conversation on Tuesday, set up workflows, share context, and by Thursday it’s like talking to a stranger. Memory embeddings and vector indexing help, but they’re kind of a black box. You can’t actually see what your agent retained or how it’s connecting ideas.

    In this video, Ron from the Boxmining team walks through how he solved this problem using Obsidian and GitHub — and honestly, it’s one of the most practical approaches I’ve seen for giving your AI agent a real, persistent memory.

    The Memory Problem With AI Agents

    Here’s the thing about memory embeddings: they work, but they’re opaque. Your agent converts conversations into vectors — essentially long strings of numbers — and retrieves relevant chunks when needed. It’s functional, but you never really know what got stored, what got lost, or how your agent is connecting different pieces of information.

    Ron’s approach is different. Instead of relying solely on embeddings, he has his OpenClaw agent write daily summaries as plain text markdown files. Everything discussed in a 24-hour period gets captured in a structured, human-readable format. You can actually open the file and verify that your agent understood and remembered what you talked about. It’s like a shared journal between you and your AI.

    Why Obsidian Changes Everything

    Obsidian is a markdown-based note-taking app that’s become incredibly popular for building what people call a “second brain.” What makes it special for AI agents isn’t just the note storage — it’s the knowledge graph. Every note can link to other notes, and over time these connections form a web of related ideas that your agent can traverse.

    According to a recent guide from NxCode, Obsidian’s local-first architecture makes it ideal for AI-powered knowledge systems because everything stays on your machine — no cloud dependency, no privacy concerns. When you pair it with an AI agent that writes to the vault daily, you’re essentially building a growing knowledge base that gets smarter over time.

    Ron recommends two key Obsidian community plugins to supercharge this setup:

    Smart Connections by Brian Petro — with over 836,000 downloads, this plugin adds semantic vector search and local model embeddings directly inside Obsidian. It lets your agent (and you) find related notes based on meaning, not just keywords. No API keys required, and it’s completely private. Think of it as giving your agent the ability to “connect the dots” across all your notes automatically.

    QMD as MD — this plugin ensures your agent writes notes in a consistent, structured format that Obsidian can properly index and link. It’s a small thing, but format consistency is huge when you’re building a knowledge base that needs to scale.

    The GitHub Backup Layer

    The Obsidian vault on its own is great, but Ron adds GitHub as a backup and sync layer. Every note gets version-controlled, so you have a complete history of what your agent has learned and when. If something goes wrong, you can roll back. If you want to see how your agent’s understanding evolved over weeks, you can diff the files.

    This combo — Obsidian for the knowledge graph, GitHub for version control — creates a persistent memory system that survives context window resets, session restarts, and even agent migrations. Several experienced users in the community have reported that by week four or five of using this setup, they see a noticeable improvement in their agent’s output quality. The agent starts producing responses that match their personal style and makes connections between topics that would have been impossible with embeddings alone.

    Discord Architecture Over Chat Apps

    One insight from the video that really stood out: Ron explains why Discord is superior to WhatsApp or Telegram for AI agent interactions. The channel-based architecture lets you keep topics separated. You can have a dedicated channel for crypto research, another for trading journal entries, another for daily news briefings — each with its own focused context.

    With a single chat thread on WhatsApp, all your topics get mixed together, which muddies the context window and degrades output quality. Discord’s structure naturally organizes information the way your agent needs it.

    Practical Workflows: News Briefings and Research

    Ron shares two workflows he’s built on top of this system. The first is a daily morning news briefing — a cron job that runs at 7 AM Hong Kong time, using Brave Search API to pull from crypto-specific sites, X (Twitter), FinViz for market data, and TechCrunch for AI news. The agent compiles the top 10 most relevant items into a structured summary in the Obsidian vault, designed to be read in under two minutes.

    If any item warrants deeper investigation, that’s where the second workflow kicks in: deep research using parallel sub-agents. OpenClaw can spawn multiple sub-agents simultaneously, each researching a different angle of a story. The results get compiled and stored back in Obsidian, building up the knowledge graph further.

    The third use case Ron is working toward is a trading research assistant. Not an automated trader — he’s clear about that — but an agent that can analyze his trading journal, identify patterns in winning versus losing trades, and surface recurring variables he might miss. The key insight here is that you need to feed it real data from actual trades, not ask it to generate a profitable strategy from nothing.

    The Takeaway

    The Obsidian plus GitHub approach isn’t just a memory hack — it’s a fundamentally different way of thinking about AI agent persistence. Instead of hoping your embeddings capture the right context, you’re building a structured, searchable, version-controlled knowledge base that grows with every conversation.

    If you’re a beginner with OpenClaw (or any AI agent framework), this is probably the single highest-impact improvement you can make. Start saving daily conversation summaries to Obsidian, back them up to GitHub, install Smart Connections, and give it a few weeks. The difference compounds over time.

    Ron is documenting his entire journey on the BoxminingAI YouTube channel, so subscribe if you want to follow along as he refines this system week by week.

  • 4-6 Hours to 5 Minutes: AI Just Replaced My Old Job (Live Demo)

    4-6 Hours to 5 Minutes: AI Just Replaced My Old Job (Live Demo)

    What used to take 4-6 hours per article now takes about 5 minutes. That’s not a hypothetical — that’s what actually happened when we set up an AI agent to handle SEO article writing for our YouTube channel. In this video, I sat down with my friend Ron (from Ron Trades) to talk through what worked, what went hilariously wrong, and what we learned about letting AI agents loose on real production workflows.

    The Task: Turning YouTube Videos Into SEO Articles

    For a long time, one of the most tedious parts of running a YouTube channel has been the post-production grind — timestamps, captions, thumbnails, article write-ups, SEO optimization. These are the things viewers love but creators dread because they’re manual, repetitive, and time-consuming.

    We decided to tackle this with our AI agent, Stark, running on OpenClaw powered by Claude Opus 4.6. The idea was simple: every time we upload a new video, the agent fetches the transcript, writes an SEO-optimized article, generates a featured image, and publishes it to WordPress. Fully automated, end to end.

    And honestly? It worked. Stark nailed the slugs, focus keyphrases, meta descriptions — the whole SEO playbook. Ron, who used to be our SEO writer, watched the agent do in 5 minutes what used to take him 4-6 hours per article. The look on his face was priceless.

    When the Agent Got a Little Too Enthusiastic

    Here’s where things got interesting. I set up a cron job telling Stark to automatically write articles for new videos going forward. The key word there was “new.” But Stark, being the proactive overachiever it is, decided to go back and write articles for older Boxmining videos too. Twenty-two articles. Published. Overnight.

    On one hand, that’s genuinely impressive — the agent identified a gap, took initiative, and executed at scale. On the other hand, it burned through our transcript API credits and published content we hadn’t reviewed. This is actually one of the biggest challenges facing AI agents right now. According to Deloitte’s 2026 Tech Trends report, enterprises are struggling to establish appropriate oversight mechanisms for systems designed to operate autonomously — traditional governance models simply don’t account for AI that makes independent decisions.

    The proactivity that makes OpenClaw powerful is the same thing that can bite you if you’re not specific enough with your instructions. It’s not that the agent did something wrong — it did exactly what it thought was helpful. The problem was the boundary wasn’t clear enough.

    The Real Threat to Content Jobs

    Let’s talk about the elephant in the room. Ron used to be our SEO writer. That was literally his job. And we just watched an AI agent produce 25 SEO-optimized articles essentially for free. As Ron put it himself: “What used to take about four to six hours for me per article now can be done in five minutes.”

    This isn’t an isolated case. Research shows that over 80% of bloggers and 70% of organizations are now integrating AI tools into their writing workflows. The writing is on the wall — pun intended — for purely mechanical content creation roles. The winning formula in 2026 seems to be speed from AI combined with depth and editorial judgment from humans.

    That said, Ron and I both agree: AI can handle the groundwork, but human oversight is non-negotiable. We hold a standard at Boxmining where AI-generated content gets reviewed before it goes live. The 22-article incident was a wake-up call about why that matters.

    Dashboards vs. Chat: How Should You Control Your Agent?

    One of the more interesting discussions we had was about workflow preferences. Do you control your AI agent through a dashboard, or do you just chat with it?

    I’ve built plenty of dashboards — it’s kind of my thing. Dashboards give you visual oversight, predictable interfaces, and clear control. But they break. Ron tried setting one up and found that localhost environments are fragile — what works today might blow up tomorrow.

    Chat-based interaction with your agent is more flexible and natural. You can train the agent over time, refine its behavior through conversation, and it feels more like working with a colleague than operating a tool. The trade-off is less structured oversight. You’re trusting the agent more, which means your memory and context systems need to be solid.

    Our conclusion? You probably need both. A dashboard for monitoring and a chat interface for day-to-day interaction. And if you’re going chat-only, you absolutely need persistent memory — something like an Obsidian vault or GitHub-backed file system so your agent doesn’t lose context between sessions.

    Lessons Learned

    After going through this whole experience, here are the key takeaways:

    Be extremely specific with cron jobs and automated tasks. AI agents like OpenClaw are more proactive than traditional coding tools like Cursor. That’s a feature, not a bug — but it means your instructions need to be precise about scope and boundaries.

    Always require human approval before publishing. Draft mode exists for a reason. The fact that our agent could autonomously publish 22 articles is technically impressive but practically risky. Build in approval gates.

    AI is genuinely replacing mechanical content work. If your job is purely writing SEO articles from templates, the timeline for AI replacement isn’t years away — it’s already here. The move is to level up into editorial, strategy, and creative roles that AI can’t replicate yet.

    Memory management is critical. Context windows and long-term memory are different things. Your agent might be brilliant during a session but forget everything the next day if you don’t set up proper persistence.

    We’re planning a follow-up video diving deep into how memory works in OpenClaw, because that’s honestly the next frontier for making these agents truly reliable long-term partners. Stay tuned for that one.

  • OpenClaw 2.23 Update: 1 Million Token Context, Model Freedom, and More

    OpenClaw 2.23 Update: 1 Million Token Context, Model Freedom, and More

    OpenClaw just dropped version 2.23, and honestly, this one’s packed. We’re getting updates almost daily at this point, but I know you’re busy — so let me break down the features that actually matter and what they mean for your AI agent setup.

    The Big One: 1 Million Token Context Window

    Let’s start with the headline feature — a 1 million token context window, now available in beta for Claude Opus and Sonnet. This is massive. To put it in perspective, that’s roughly five times larger than previous context limits, and you could fit about a quarter of the entire Harry Potter series in a single conversation.

    Why does this matter? One of the biggest reasons your AI agent sometimes feels “dumb” is context overflow. Every conversation you have with your agent sends the entire chat history along with it. When that history exceeds the context window, the agent starts forgetting things — earlier instructions, preferences, important details. It’s not that the AI got stupider; it literally ran out of memory.

    With 1 million tokens, your agent can hold an entire day’s worth of back-and-forth without needing to restart or losing track of what you discussed that morning. If you’re using your agent daily for scheduling, research, or project management, this is a game-changer. The catch? It’s expensive. Running Opus with a full 1 million context window will cost significantly more than shorter conversations.

    Model Freedom: Save Money Without Sacrificing Quality

    This is where things get practical. OpenClaw 2.23 makes it easier than ever to switch between AI models on the fly. The idea is simple: not every task needs the most powerful (and expensive) model.

    Need to build a quick dashboard or generate a simple script? Send it to MiniMax or Kimi — they’re fast and cheap. Need deep reasoning, complex scheduling, or life-planning tasks like booking restaurant reservations? Keep that on Opus, where the extra intelligence actually matters.

    Speaking of which, Anthropic just released Claude Sonnet 4.6, which approaches Opus-level intelligence at roughly half the cost and twice the speed. It’s already available on Amazon Bedrock and GitHub Copilot. For most everyday agent tasks, Sonnet 4.6 is probably the sweet spot between performance and cost.

    Sub-Agent Orchestration: Let Your Agent Be the Boss

    Sub-agent orchestration isn’t technically new in OpenClaw, but 2.23 refines it further. The concept is straightforward: instead of you managing multiple AI agents individually, you designate one agent as the coordinator. That coordinator spins up sub-agents for parallel tasks, collects the results, and reports back to you.

    Here’s a tip that came up in our discussion: be explicit with your agent. Tell it “you are the orchestrator, you command the sub-agents, I don’t want to interact with them directly.” Early on, one of our partners was manually talking to eight different agents individually — that’s doing it the hard way. Let the coordinator handle delegation. You just talk to one agent.

    This pattern is especially powerful for research workflows. Your main agent can spin up multiple research bots simultaneously, each investigating a different angle, then synthesize everything into a single report.

    Video Understanding: Cool But Expensive

    OpenClaw now supports video understanding through Moonshot integration. Your agent can literally watch videos and process visual content. Before you get too excited though — this is still in the “cool but impractical for daily use” category.

    The computational cost of processing video is significant. We’re not at the point where your agent can binge-watch Netflix and write you a sequel. It’s more suited for specific use cases where you need an AI to analyze video content for work purposes. We’ll be doing a deeper dive on Kimi Vision in an upcoming video.

    Security Hardening and Cron Job Fixes

    On the security front, the advice remains the same: use a VPS. The way we’ve always recommended installing OpenClaw — on a separate virtual private server rather than your main machine — is still the safest approach. Don’t let your agent access every aspect of your life just yet.

    Cron jobs got some attention too. These are your scheduled tasks — daily news briefings, morning presentations, automated reports. They’ve been a bit unreliable for some users, particularly when old cron jobs pile up and try to execute simultaneously. The fix? Clean up your old cron jobs first, and consider having your agent build a dashboard to track all scheduled tasks. That way you can verify everything is running on schedule. Don’t trust, verify.

    OpenClaw’s Future: Foundation Model

    One important piece of context: OpenClaw founder Peter Steinberger announced on February 14 that he’s joining OpenAI to work on bringing agents to everyone. OpenClaw itself is transitioning to an independent open-source foundation, with OpenAI’s continued support. So despite the leadership change, the project remains open-source and actively developed — as evidenced by the rapid pace of updates we’re seeing.

    How to Update

    Updating is dead simple. Just tell your agent: “Hey, update yourself to the latest OpenClaw.” That’s it. Works about 95% of the time. The other 5%? Well, as we like to say — when you’re using AI, you’re playing casino. But we have tutorials for when things go sideways, so don’t worry.

    The Bottom Line

    OpenClaw 2.23 is a solid update. The 1 million token context window is the standout feature for power users, while model freedom is the real money-saver for everyone else. Sub-agent orchestration continues to mature, and the security and cron improvements address real pain points.

    If you’re running OpenClaw, update now. If you’re not, check out our setup guide to get started. And if you want to see more content like this, join our community over at BoxminingAI and drop a comment — our bot actually reads all of them now.

  • How to Migrate Your OpenClaw to Another Server (Beginner Guide)

    How to Migrate Your OpenClaw to Another Server (Beginner Guide)

    In this guide, I’ll walk you through the easiest way to migrate your OpenClaw AI agent from one server to another. Whether you’re escaping surprise AWS bills or just upgrading to a better VPS, this beginner-friendly method lets your agent do most of the heavy lifting for you. We also have a full video walkthrough below if you prefer visual guidance.

    Why Migrate? The AWS Free Tier Trap

    If you started your OpenClaw journey on an Amazon EC2 instance, you’re not alone. The M7i Flex Large with 8 GB of RAM was a popular recommendation across YouTube tutorials. It sounds great on paper — plenty of memory, and it’s on the free tier. But here’s the catch: AWS’s free tier isn’t truly free forever.

    There are countless horror stories on Reddit and AWS forums of users getting hit with unexpected charges after their free credits run out. Some bills climb to $100 per month or more, often from forgotten resources like NAT gateways, Elastic IP addresses, or EBS volumes running in the background. AWS even has an official guide on avoiding unexpected charges after the free tier expires — which tells you how common this problem is.

    The moment I heard about these billing surprises, I knew it was time to move.

    Choosing a Cheaper VPS

    The good news is you don’t need 8 GB of RAM for a personal AI assistant. That kind of spec is overkill — it’s more suited for gaming servers handling hundreds of concurrent users. For OpenClaw running as a personal agent, 2 GB of RAM is more than enough.

    I switched to Zeabur at just $2 per month for a VPS with 2 GB of memory and full server access. Providers like Contabo and Hostinger also offer affordable OpenClaw-ready VPS options if you want alternatives. The point is: you can run a fully functional AI agent for the price of a coffee.

    Step 1: Ask Your Agent to Build a Migration Package

    Here’s the best part — you can get your OpenClaw agent to handle the migration for you. The key is crafting the right prompt. Here’s what I told my agent:

    “I want to migrate you to another server. Can you compress your working directory and the OpenClaw directory, then create a document on what you’ve deployed and worked on so we can migrate?”

    Within about 2 minutes, my agent created a zip file containing the full working directory, all config and state files, and even a markdown migration guide. Basically everything you need in one neat package.

    Step 2: Transfer Your Credentials and Upload

    Next, you’ll need the credentials for your new server — the IP address, username (usually “ubuntu”), and SSH password. A quick security note: ideally you should store sensitive credentials in an .env file rather than pasting them directly into chat. But once your agent has the connection details, it can upload the migration zip to the new server automatically.

    The upload process took about a minute in my case. Once it’s done, you’ll find the zip file sitting in your new server’s file directory.

    Step 3: Install and Relaunch on the New Server

    With your files transferred, you just need to make sure OpenClaw is installed on the new server. Run the standard installation command — if you type openclaw and get “command not found,” just reinstall it. Don’t worry, nothing gets wiped since your full directory is already migrated. You just need the software to launch it again.

    Then start the gateway and check your config files. You can do this manually or simply ask your agent to handle it. Once everything checks out, migration is complete and you’ll see your new server’s IP address ready to go.

    Pro Tip: Use Termius and Verify with Tree

    If you’re a beginner, I highly recommend using Termius as your terminal app. It gives you a visual file browser alongside the terminal, making it much easier to see your entire OpenClaw directory structure and verify files are in place.

    For extra peace of mind, run a tree command on your old server before migrating and take a screenshot. Then run the same command on your new server after migration. Compare the two to make sure nothing is missing. It’s a simple manual check that can save you headaches.

    Limitations to Keep in Mind

    This zip-and-transfer method works great for straightforward OpenClaw setups — if you’re a beginner with a simple agent configuration, it’s the fastest and easiest approach. However, if you’re running a more advanced setup with complex cron jobs, multiple sub-agents, or a sophisticated architecture, you may need to handle some steps manually to ensure nothing gets lost in translation.

    For most beginners though, this method covers everything you need. The whole process takes under 10 minutes and your agent does most of the work.

    Wrapping Up

    Migrating your OpenClaw agent doesn’t have to be scary or complicated. The combination of letting your agent package itself up, transferring to an affordable VPS, and doing a quick verification check makes the whole process surprisingly painless. If you’re still on an AWS free tier instance, I’d seriously consider making the switch before any surprise bills show up.

    Got questions or a better migration approach? Drop them in the comments below, or join the Boxmining Discord community where we share AI tools and tips daily.

  • My OpenClaw is STUPID — Here’s How to Fix It

    My OpenClaw is STUPID — Here’s How to Fix It

    If you’ve been using OpenClaw and feel like your AI agent is, well… kind of dumb, you’re not alone. I hear this all the time — people set up their bot, see everyone else on Twitter showing off these incredible automations, and then their own agent just sits there being useless. Or worse, it confidently gives you completely wrong information. So in this video, I sat down to talk through the real fixes that actually work.

    Break Down Your Tasks Into Smaller Steps

    This is probably the single most important tip. When you give your AI agent a massive, vague task like “monitor Twitter and summarize what’s happening in crypto,” you’re setting it up to fail. Think about what that actually involves — browsing dozens of tweets, understanding context, filtering noise, and delivering a coherent summary. That’s a lot of moving parts.

    The fix is simple: decompose. Instead of one giant instruction, break it into discrete steps. For example, I told my agent Stark to first scan specific Twitter accounts and save those tweets. Then I had it store everything into a vector database so it could actually retrieve that information later when needed. This is a technique called Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG), and it’s one of the most effective ways to ground your AI in real data instead of letting it make things up.

    You don’t need to be a programmer to do this. The core idea is just: give your agent one clear task at a time, verify it works, then move to the next step.

    Build Dashboards to Spot Failures

    Here’s something that happened naturally once I started breaking tasks down — my agent actually built a dashboard on its own to track the tweets it was monitoring. It wasn’t polished, but it was functional. And more importantly, it let me see exactly where things were working and where they weren’t.

    This is a huge advantage of task decomposition. When your bot fails (and it will), you can pinpoint which specific step broke instead of staring at a black box wondering what went wrong. You can look at the actual data it collected and verify whether it’s real or fabricated.

    Stop Your AI From Gaslighting You

    This one caught me off guard. I asked my agent to pull stats on our BoxminingAI YouTube channel — things like view counts and recent video performance. It came back with detailed numbers that looked totally legit. The problem? It was all completely made up. The AI just fabricated view counts and video titles because it couldn’t actually access that data.

    This is a well-documented problem called AI hallucination. Studies have shown that even the most advanced language models will confidently generate false information rather than admit they don’t know something. The solution is to always use proper APIs instead of expecting your agent to scrape web pages. I had my agent walk me through setting up the YouTube API, getting developer credentials, and making proper API calls. Once you’re pulling real data through official channels, the hallucination problem largely disappears.

    The key takeaway: if your agent gives you data, always ask for the source link. If it can’t provide one, that’s a red flag.

    Test Everything, Then Save It as a Skill

    One thing AI agents are terrible at is self-testing. My bot would build something, proudly announce “all done!” and then the dashboard would be completely empty. It just… didn’t check its own work. So now I explicitly tell it: “Test the connection. Take a screenshot. Show me it works.”

    Once you’ve verified a workflow works end to end, save it as a skill. Skills in OpenClaw are basically reusable instructions that your agent can reference in the future. This means you only have to solve each problem once. After that, your agent knows the correct process and can repeat it reliably.

    Feed Your Agent the Documentation First

    Before you ask your agent to use any API or service, give it the documentation first. Don’t assume it knows how to call the YouTube API or interact with your email provider. Start your prompt with something like: “Here’s the API documentation. Learn and understand this first.”

    This alone can prevent a huge number of failures. The agent will understand the correct endpoints, authentication methods, and data formats before it tries to do anything. And just like workflows, you can save this learned knowledge as a skill for future reference.

    When Bots Go Haywire

    There was a recent story about someone who installed an AI agent with root access on their computer, and it started messaging everyone in their contact list. This is exactly the kind of thing that happens when you give an AI too much freedom without proper guardrails.

    The lesson here is clear: start small. Give your agent limited permissions and a narrow scope. Test with low-stakes tasks before you hand it the keys to your email or social media accounts. AI agents are powerful tools, but they need boundaries — just like any automation.

    Don’t Treat AI Like a Human

    This might sound obvious, but it’s a trap everyone falls into. We talk to AI agents in natural language, so we start expecting human-level judgment. But they’re not human. They will fail on tasks — sometimes simple ones — for no apparent reason. I’ve found that my agent sometimes fails more on easy tasks than complex ones, which is genuinely baffling.

    The point isn’t to be discouraged. It’s to set the right expectations. Start with small tasks, verify they work, then scale up. Don’t be afraid to ask for ambitious things like full presentations or detailed dashboards — just be prepared to iterate and correct along the way.

    The Bottom Line

    If your OpenClaw agent feels stupid, the fix isn’t a better model or more expensive hardware. It’s better task management. Break complex goals into small, verifiable steps. Use proper APIs instead of hoping your agent can scrape the web. Test everything. Save working workflows as skills. And most importantly, remember that AI agents aren’t humans — they need structure, verification, and clear boundaries to perform well.

    We’re building a community around sharing these tips and workflows, so make sure to join our Discord to learn from what others are doing. The more we share, the smarter all our agents get.

  • Chinese AI Labs ARE COPYING Claude?! Anthropic’s Distillation Bombshell

    Chinese AI Labs ARE COPYING Claude?! Anthropic’s Distillation Bombshell

    Anthropic just dropped a bombshell — and the AI community is having a field day with it. The company behind Claude is publicly accusing three major Chinese AI labs of running massive “distillation attacks” against their model. And honestly? The reaction has been anything but sympathetic.

    What Anthropic Is Claiming

    According to Anthropic’s official blog post, DeepSeek, Moonshot AI (the makers of Kimi), and MiniMax allegedly created over 24,000 fake accounts and generated more than 16 million queries against Claude. The goal? To extract Claude’s “secret sauce” — specifically its capabilities in agentic reasoning, tool use, and coding — and use that knowledge to train their own models.

    This technique is called model distillation. It’s actually a legitimate training method that AI labs use on their own models to create smaller, more efficient versions. But when you do it to a competitor’s model at industrial scale, that’s a different story entirely.

    The Scale Is Staggering

    The numbers Anthropic shared are pretty wild. According to TechCrunch, DeepSeek was tracked with over 150,000 exchanges focused on foundational logic and alignment — particularly around finding censorship-safe alternatives to policy-sensitive queries. Moonshot AI racked up 3.4 million exchanges targeting agentic reasoning, coding, and computer vision. But MiniMax was the biggest offender with 13 million exchanges, and Anthropic says they actually watched MiniMax redirect nearly half its traffic to siphon capabilities from the latest Claude model the moment it launched.

    Think about it this way: Anthropic has likely spent billions of dollars training Claude. These Chinese labs potentially replicated significant chunks of that capability for a fraction of the cost — maybe tens of thousands of dollars in API fees. That’s quite the ROI.

    Why This Isn’t Surprising

    If you’ve been following the Chinese AI scene, none of this should shock you. We’ve covered MiniMax and Kimi extensively on this channel, and their performance is genuinely impressive — roughly 95% of Claude’s capability at a fraction of the cost. MiniMax offers comparable performance at about 5% of the price. That kind of rapid improvement had to come from somewhere.

    China has a long history of building parallel ecosystems inspired by Western platforms. Taobao for eBay/Amazon, Weibo for Twitter (there are actually four Twitter clones in China), WeChat for everything else. The AI space is just the latest frontier, and the stakes are astronomically higher.

    The Internet Clapped Back Hard

    Here’s where it gets spicy. Anthropic is calling for “rapid, coordinated action among industry players, policy makers, and the broader AI community” to address these attacks. But the AI community’s response has been… let’s say unsympathetic.

    The backlash centers on one word: hypocrisy. Anthropic, now valued at a staggering $380 billion, is itself facing multiple lawsuits accusing the company of illegally using copyrighted internet data to train Claude. Even Elon Musk weighed in, pointing out that Anthropic allegedly settled a $1.5 billion lawsuit related to training Claude on copyrighted books. Someone even demonstrated that Claude could reproduce roughly 95% of Harry Potter books when prompted — suggesting Anthropic dumped massive amounts of copyrighted material into their training data.

    As many in the community put it: it’s “circle stealing.” Everyone’s copying from everyone. The Chinese labs at least paid for API access — the millions of writers whose work was scraped to train Claude weren’t given that courtesy.

    The Bigger Picture: Who Actually Wins?

    Here’s my take on why this whole situation is actually good for us. All this competition — whether through legitimate research or questionable distillation — is driving costs down dramatically. We no longer have to shell out thousands of dollars for top-tier AI access. Sure, Anthropic’s Opus 6 is still expensive, but when MiniMax gives you 95% of the performance at 5% of the cost, that’s massive savings for developers and businesses.

    And the race is far from over. DeepSeek is reportedly preparing to release V4, which could outperform both Claude and ChatGPT in coding tasks. Meanwhile, Moonshot just released Kimi K2.5 and a new coding agent last month.

    From our internal testing, Opus still has an edge. It’s appreciably smarter on logic tasks — like knowing you should drive to a car wash rather than walk (MiniMax still gets that wrong about 30% of the time, while Opus nails it 95% of the time). But whether that intelligence gap is worth paying 20x more is a question every developer has to answer for themselves.

    What Happens Next

    This story ties directly into the broader US-China AI rivalry. The Trump administration recently allowed Nvidia to export advanced H200 chips to China, and Anthropic is now arguing that distillation attacks “reinforce the rationale for export controls” since restricted chip access would limit both direct model training and the scale of these extraction campaigns.

    One thing that makes this race particularly interesting: AI doesn’t care what language you speak. You can paste a Chinese API, a Chinese website, and your AI tools will work with it seamlessly. The global push toward AGI is accelerating from all directions, and the competition between US and Chinese labs is only going to intensify.

    China produces more engineers per year than the US simply due to population scale, and those developers are feeding data back into Chinese models just as Western developers improve Claude through their interactions with it. This isn’t the first shot fired in this AI arms race, and it certainly won’t be the last.

    Whether you think this is good or bad for the industry, one thing’s clear: we’re all benefiting from cheaper, more capable AI as a result. And that’s something worth watching closely.

  • My OpenClaw Randomly Messaged My Girlfriend — Here’s What Went Wrong

    My OpenClaw Randomly Messaged My Girlfriend — Here’s What Went Wrong

    So this is a fun one. I woke up one morning to discover that my OpenClaw AI agent had randomly messaged my girlfriend on WhatsApp — completely on its own, while I was asleep. Yeah. That happened.

    If you’re running OpenClaw and you’ve recently switched from WhatsApp to Discord as your primary messaging channel, you might run into the exact same issue. Here’s what went wrong and how I fixed it.

    What Happened

    I’d been using OpenClaw with WhatsApp for a while, but eventually decided to move everything over to Discord. I thought I’d done all the right steps — unlinked my phone number, set up Discord as my main channel. Done, right?

    Wrong. While I was sleeping, my OpenClaw agent started trying to revive the WhatsApp gateway connection. Every time my girlfriend sent me a message on WhatsApp, it triggered a pairing request from my agent. She woke up to a bunch of weird automated messages, and I woke up to a notification from my agent on Discord saying “WhatsApp pairing required.”

    Not exactly the good morning text either of us was expecting.

    Why This Is a Bigger Deal Than It Sounds

    Now, luckily this was just a pairing request — not my AI agent having a full conversation with my girlfriend pretending to be me. But it raises a real concern. Cisco’s security researchers have flagged OpenClaw’s messaging integrations as a potential attack surface, noting that the platform’s deep ties to WhatsApp, Discord, and Telegram could lead to unintended behavior if not properly configured.

    And that’s exactly what happened here — not from a malicious actor, but from leftover config files. If your AI agent can autonomously send messages on your behalf, you need to make absolutely sure it’s only connected to the channels you actually want it on. The margin for error is slim.

    The Two Things I Missed

    After some digging, I found two things that were still keeping my WhatsApp connection alive even though I thought I’d removed it.

    1. The openclaw.json Config File

    This is the big one. Even though I’d “unlinked” WhatsApp, my openclaw.json config file still had my WhatsApp credentials and phone number sitting in the channels section. OpenClaw reads this config on startup, and if it sees WhatsApp credentials there, it’ll try to connect.

    The fix is straightforward. Open your terminal and run:

    openclaw config get channels

    If you see a WhatsApp section in there, remove it entirely. Then verify it’s gone:

    openclaw config get channels.whatsapp

    If you get a “path not found” or error message, you’re clean.

    2. WhatsApp Linked Devices

    This one’s easy to overlook. Inside the WhatsApp app itself, go to Settings → Linked Devices. I’d forgotten to unlink the OpenClaw device session from there. Even with the config cleaned up, a lingering linked device session means WhatsApp still thinks your agent is an authorized device.

    Remove any OpenClaw-related linked devices, and you should be good.

    How OpenClaw’s Channel System Works

    For context, OpenClaw manages messaging through a channel-based architecture. You can connect multiple platforms — WhatsApp, Discord, Telegram — and route different agents to different channels using bindings in your config. The openclaw.json file stores your channel accounts, credentials, and routing rules. When the gateway starts, it reads this config and attempts to establish connections to every channel it finds.

    This is actually a powerful feature when set up correctly. You can have one agent handling crypto alerts on Telegram and another managing your Discord server. But it also means that any stale channel config will get picked up and acted on. OpenClaw doesn’t know you “meant” to remove WhatsApp — it just sees credentials and tries to connect.

    Lessons Learned

    If you’re migrating your OpenClaw setup from one messaging platform to another, here’s the checklist:

    Clean the config file: Run openclaw config get channels and remove any channel you’re no longer using. Don’t just unlink — delete the entire section.

    Unlink devices on the platform side: Go into WhatsApp (or whatever platform you’re leaving) and remove the linked device. The config file and the platform’s device list are two separate things, and both need to be cleared.

    Test after cleanup: Restart your OpenClaw gateway and monitor the logs for any connection attempts to the old channel. If you see it trying to reach WhatsApp after you’ve cleaned everything, there might be cached credentials in ~/.openclaw/credentials that also need removing.

    Should We Be Worried?

    Honestly? A little. The whole point of AI agents like OpenClaw is that they act autonomously — that’s the feature. But autonomy without proper guardrails can lead to exactly this kind of situation. My agent wasn’t hacked. It wasn’t malfunctioning. It was doing exactly what it was configured to do, based on config files I forgot to clean up.

    As these personal AI agents become more common, proper configuration hygiene is going to be just as important as security patches. One stale config entry and your AI is texting your girlfriend at 3 AM. Not ideal.

    For now, my setup is clean, my girlfriend has been reassured that it wasn’t some rogue AI trying to slide into her DMs, and I’ve learned to double-check every config file when switching channels. If you’ve had a similar experience, drop it in the comments — I’d love to hear your stories.

  • MaxClaw Guide: Free OpenClaw with MiniMax 2.5 — No Server Required

    MaxClaw Guide: Free OpenClaw with MiniMax 2.5 — No Server Required

    If you’ve been following my OpenClaw journey, you know I’ve been a big fan of setting up AI agents on cheap cloud servers. But MiniMax just dropped something that makes the whole process even easier — and completely free. It’s called MaxClaw, and it’s basically OpenClaw running in the cloud with MiniMax’s M2.5 model, ready to go out of the box. No servers, no API keys, no deployment headaches.

    What Is MaxClaw?

    MaxClaw is MiniMax’s new cloud-based AI assistant that combines three things: OpenClaw’s open-source agent framework, MiniMax’s own agent infrastructure, and their latest M2.5 model. The result is a fully managed OpenClaw instance that runs 24/7 without you having to touch a terminal.

    For context, in my previous guide, I walked through setting up OpenClaw on a Zeabur server with MiniMax M2.5 — choosing a server, installing via command line, configuring API keys, the whole thing. It worked great and only cost about $20 a month, but it still required some technical know-how. MaxClaw removes all of that friction entirely.

    Why This Is a Big Deal

    The biggest selling point is simplicity. With MaxClaw, there’s no deployment to handle and no extra API costs. MiniMax is hosting everything for you, and the M2.5 model is included. You just sign up through the MiniMax Agent web interface and you’re running.

    What makes this particularly interesting is the platform support. MaxClaw works across Telegram, WhatsApp, Slack, and Discord right out of the box. Previously, connecting OpenClaw to messaging platforms required additional configuration — setting up bot tokens, configuring webhooks, and making sure your server stayed online. MaxClaw handles all of that automatically with 24/7 uptime.

    MiniMax also launched this alongside their Expert 2.0 upgrade, which means you get access to their ready-made Expert ecosystem. These are pre-built specialized agents that can handle specific tasks, and they integrate directly into MaxClaw without any extra setup.

    How MiniMax M2.5 Stacks Up

    For those unfamiliar, MiniMax M2.5 is a seriously capable model. It’s available on platforms like Ollama for local use, and it performs well on coding benchmarks like SWE-Bench Verified. The model supports both text and code tasks, making it versatile for the kind of agent work OpenClaw excels at — web searches, data scraping, task automation, and more.

    What’s impressive is the cost-to-performance ratio. When I was running M2.5 through the API on my own server, it was already one of the cheapest options for the intelligence level you get. With MaxClaw, that cost drops to zero since MiniMax is absorbing the compute costs. Whether this stays free forever remains to be seen, but right now it’s an incredible deal.

    Getting Started with MaxClaw

    The setup process is dramatically simpler than the manual route I covered before. Here’s the gist:

    1. Head to the MiniMax Agent web interface
    2. Look for the MaxClaw option — it’s integrated directly into the platform
    3. Connect your preferred messaging platform (Telegram, Discord, WhatsApp, or Slack)
    4. Start chatting with your AI agent

    That’s it. No server provisioning, no SSH terminals, no PATH exports, no API key juggling. The whole thing takes minutes instead of the 15+ minutes my previous setup required.

    What Can You Actually Do With It?

    Since MaxClaw is built on OpenClaw, you get the full range of agent capabilities. Web searching, browsing, file management, code execution — all the tools that make OpenClaw powerful are available here. The upgraded built-in tools that MiniMax added make it even more capable for real work tasks.

    You also get access to the MiniMax Expert ecosystem, which adds specialized agents on top of the base capabilities. Think of it as having pre-configured skills that your agent can tap into without you having to build them from scratch.

    For beginners especially, this is the easiest on-ramp to AI agents I’ve seen. You don’t need to understand Linux, cloud servers, or command-line tools. You just need a MiniMax account and a messaging app.

    Should You Switch from a Manual Setup?

    If you already have OpenClaw running on your own server, MaxClaw isn’t necessarily a replacement — it’s more of a complement. Running your own instance gives you full control over configuration, data, and which models you use. MaxClaw trades that control for convenience and zero cost.

    For anyone who hasn’t set up OpenClaw yet, though, MaxClaw is the obvious starting point. Try it for free, see if AI agents fit your workflow, and then decide if you want to invest in a more customized setup later.

    Final Thoughts

    MaxClaw is exactly the kind of move I was hoping to see in the AI agent space — taking powerful open-source tools and making them accessible to everyone. MiniMax combining their M2.5 model with OpenClaw’s framework and hosting it for free is a strong play that lowers the barrier to entry significantly.

    I’ll be doing more deep dives into MaxClaw’s capabilities in upcoming videos, including how to set up advanced integrations and get the most out of the Expert ecosystem. If you want to follow along, make sure to subscribe to @BoxminingAI and join our Discord community for tips and discussions.

  • MiniMax 2.5 vs Claude Opus: Which AI Model Is Best for OpenClaw?

    MiniMax 2.5 vs Claude Opus: Which AI Model Is Best for OpenClaw?

    With so many AI models available for OpenClaw, the big question everyone keeps asking is: which one should you actually use? We’ve been testing two popular options head-to-head — Claude Opus and MiniMax 2.5 — and I wanted to share our honest, real-world experience rather than just throwing benchmark numbers at you.

    The Setup: Luxury vs Budget

    For this comparison, we set up two very different configurations. I went with Claude Opus for my bots Stark and Banner — the premium option running through Anthropic’s API. My colleague went with MiniMax 2.5 for his bot Jeff, which is significantly cheaper. We’re talking about $20/month for MiniMax versus $30-60 per day for Opus usage. Yes, per day. Over a month, that’s roughly $1,800 for Opus compared to $20 for MiniMax. The cost difference is staggering.

    MiniMax claimed their M2.5 model delivers 95% of Claude Opus performance at a fraction of the cost. On paper, that sounds incredible — and their benchmark scores are genuinely impressive, with an 80.2% on SWE-Bench Verified and strong results in multi-turn function calling tasks. But benchmarks and daily use are two very different things.

    Where MiniMax 2.5 Struggled

    The real-world results told a different story. Every morning, I’d see my colleague frustrated with Jeff’s performance. Here’s what went wrong:

    First, the cron job timing. He asked Jeff to deliver a daily news briefing at 7:00 AM. Simple enough, right? But it never came at 7:00 AM. We tried fixing it, explicitly telling the bot to set it up properly — and it still didn’t register it as a cron job. Meanwhile, Opus-powered Stark delivered daily briefings consistently to spec.

    Then there was the logic test. We asked both bots: “If I need to wash my car, should I drive or walk to the car wash?” Opus got it right most of the time — obviously you drive, because you need your car there. MiniMax? It told him to walk to the car wash. Without the car. The first few times it answered correctly, but on repeated runs, the inconsistency showed up hard.

    Where Claude Opus Shined

    Opus wasn’t perfect either — it once labeled a February 26 briefing as February 24 in the title, which gave me a brief heart attack. But the actual content was correct and dated properly. More importantly, Opus showed genuine initiative. When OpenClaw got an update, Opus proactively found the previous presentation, incorporated the new information, and updated everything without being asked. That kind of contextual awareness and follow-through is what separates a useful AI agent from a frustrating one.

    There was also a noticeable difference in what I’d call the “bonus touch.” Opus would include things like “this was yesterday’s briefing in case you missed it” — small quality-of-life additions that showed it understood the workflow, not just the individual task. Jeff’s approach was more like: you missed it, tough luck.

    The Slot Machine Problem

    One of the most interesting takeaways from our testing is what we call the “slot machine” effect. AI agents are inherently inconsistent — you can give the exact same prompt to the same model and get different results each time. There’s a randomness factor baked into how these models generate responses, which means your experience can vary wildly from someone else’s even on identical tasks.

    This is why some community members reported great results with MiniMax while we were pulling our hair out. It’s not necessarily about skill — it’s about which “pull of the lever” you got. One practical tip from the Silicon Valley approach: run the same task multiple times and pick the best result. It sounds wasteful, but when AI is cheap enough, it’s actually more efficient than trying to get perfection on the first attempt.

    Context Window: The Hidden Performance Killer

    A community member named Note shared an important insight: MiniMax 2.5 works well with low context, but once you push past the 120K context window, performance drops dramatically — “like talking to ChatGPT 3.5,” as he put it. This is a critical factor that benchmarks don’t capture. In real agent use, context accumulates fast as your bot handles conversations, reads files, and processes tasks throughout the day. You often don’t even know how much context your bot is consuming, and the intelligence degradation is exponential.

    This likely explains a lot of the inconsistency we experienced. Early in a session, MiniMax might perform admirably. But as context builds up over hours of use, the quality cliff is steep and sudden.

    The Verdict: 60-70%, Not 95%

    After weeks of daily use, our gut feeling is that MiniMax 2.5 delivers about 60-70% of what Claude Opus can do — not the 95% claimed in benchmarks. That gap matters enormously when you’re relying on an AI agent for real daily tasks like briefings, research, and automation.

    Is Opus worth the premium? If you need reliability and proactive intelligence for mission-critical workflows, absolutely. If you’re experimenting, learning, or running lighter tasks, MiniMax at $20/month is still a solid entry point — just temper your expectations and be prepared to re-run tasks when results aren’t right.

    We’re going to keep testing and tuning MiniMax to see if better prompt engineering can close that gap. The model has potential, and the price point is hard to ignore. But for now, when it comes to daily AI agent work in OpenClaw, you really do get what you pay for.