StackMap
Subscribe

deja-vu vs hivemind

Indexes the session histories your coding agents already wrote — 17 harnesses, months retroactive — and serves recall over MCP. 84.9% hit@1 on LongMemEval-S, no LLM, no embeddings. One Go binary. — versus — Activeloop's shared brain for agent TEAMS: traces from Claude Code, Codex, Cursor & co become reusable skills every teammate's agent can execute — cloud-backed, 25% cheaper on LoCoMo.

The curated verdict

Both mine the session histories your coding agents already wrote; deja-vu serves personal retroactive recall over MCP, hivemind turns team traces into skills every teammate's agent can run.

deja-vuhivemind
Stars8231.6k
Forks78107
LanguageGoTypeScript
LicenseMITApache-2.0
Last activity2 days ago2 days ago
Topicsmemory, codingmemory, coding
Curated connections75

deja-vu — the curator's take

The inversion is the insight: every memory tool starts empty and records forward; deja starts FULL from history already on disk, and the no-LLM/no-embedding design means ~1.5ms search, zero keys, zero cost. When NOT: it remembers what your agents did, not curated knowledge — there's no write path for distilled lessons; and its benchmark numbers are self-published, so the standing caution on this shelf applies: benchmark recall on your own corpus.

hivemind — the curator's take

The pitch is the org-level version of agent memory: one engineer's agent figures out the tricky migration on Monday, every agent on the team executes the pattern Tuesday. Auto-learning from traces across seven agent hosts, with real LoCoMo receipts (25% cheaper, 1.7x fewer tokens vs no shared memory). Reach for it when the unit of learning is the team, not the seat. NOT local-first: cloud-backed on Deeplake is the architecture AND the business model (Activeloop, YC) — traces of your engineers' sessions leave the machine, so clear it with whoever owns your IP policy before the whole team wires in.