OpenClaw (aka ClawdBot aka Moltbot) has everyone chatting and buying Mac Minis. Yes something interesting happened in China: Chinese cloud providers didnโt wait to see whether it would win before productizing it. They went ahead and built deployment wrappers (with their own LLMs...
OpenClaw (aka ClawdBot aka Moltbot) has everyone chatting and buying Mac Minis. Yes something interesting happened in China: Chinese cloud providers didnโt wait to see whether it would win before productizing it. They went ahead and built deployment wrappers (with their own LLMs plugged in of course) to sell access to the public.
An open-source, unstable, compute-hungry agent shows up. No clear roadmap. Real security risks. And instead of debating readiness, cloud platforms step in and wrap it: hosting, bundled compute, local models, deployment recipes, comms integrations. Not endorsement โ enablement. Thatโs the move most Western enterprises and vendors still hesitate to make.
We treat agents as something that must be proven, governed, and philosophically settled before theyโre allowed near operations. Chinese cloud players treat them as a new workload class: messy, risky, but inevitable. Their question isnโt โis this mature?โ Itโs โwhat needs to exist so others can try this cheaply?โ
That difference matters. Because once deployment friction collapses, behaviour changes. People experiment. Ecosystems form. Defaults harden. Power quietly shifts to whoever controls packaging and distribution โ not whoever wrote the cleverest agent loop.
This also exposes the real risk surface. Not hallucinations. Not autonomy panic. But organisations with no operating model for software that acts. When an agent makes a wrong move, who owns it? Who shuts it down? Who learns from it?
This story isnโt about whoโs ahead in AI. Itโs about who is willing to operationalise uncertainty โ and who keeps hiding behind readiness debates while the substrate gets built elsewhere.
https://lnkd.in/eXzWWyuj
#AI #China #Transformation #Agent #Strategy
