StackMap
Subscribe

core vs exxperts

Self-hosted, always-on "personal AI OS": watches your apps, keeps a persistent memory graph, and acts autonomously within guardrails — a product, not a library for building agents. — versus — Local-first agentic runtime with persistent AI rooms and approval-gated memory: every memory write needs your OK; rooms, KB and artifacts are plain files on disk.

The curated verdict

Both are self-hosted 'personal AI with persistent memory' products, but they pick opposite defaults: core watches your apps and acts autonomously within guardrails, exxperts gates every single memory write behind your explicit approval.

coreexxperts
Stars1.9k216
Forks18219
LanguageTypeScriptTypeScript
LicenseNOASSERTIONNOASSERTION
Last activitytodayyesterday
Topicsagents, memorymemory, agents, local
Curated connections83

core — the curator's take

Reach for CORE when you want an event-driven, self-hosted personal assistant that notices things on its own, remembers across sessions via a memory graph, and acts across your apps with per-action approval gates. NOT the pick if you want a framework to embed agents inside your own software (it's a product/OS, not a toolkit), nor if you need to run a multi-agent team/company with org charts and budgets — that's paperclip's lane.

exxperts — the curator's take

Use it when you want a personal AI that remembers you but on your terms — every memory write passes an approval gate, and all state is auditable files under ~/.exxperts. Two surfaces (web app + CLI/TUI) share the same rooms. NOT a chat-over-docs RAG frontend (that's Open WebUI territory) and not a coding agent — rooms never get an unrestricted shell. Single-user, local-only by design; and mind the PolyForm Noncommercial license: commercial use needs a separate deal with Exxeta.