BitShovel.One real problem at a time
Open the current workflowCurrent Workflow中文

One real problem at a time

中文

Q01 · RUN LOCATION · WORKFLOW 001

Where should an AI agent run: locally, in WSL2, or on a server?

Choose the smallest permission boundary that can finish the job without creating a maintenance burden you will not keep up with.

Question · first editionLast checked · 2026-08-15

Current decision

Current choice

Start private, interactive work locally. Use WSL2 for a concrete compatibility need, and a server only for proven unattended work.

Open the reasoning

The run location changes permission, network dependence, observability, maintenance, and the cost of leaving. Treating always-on as the default can create an operations burden before the task has proved useful.

Q01 / DECISION MAPTRIGGER → OPTIONS → ONE ACTION
This map establishes the order of the decision. It does not rank local, WSL2, or server environments universally; detailed fit, cost, and switching conditions follow below.

THREE PRACTICAL OPTIONS

Three real options

Choose from task conditions, not product language.

Open the comparison boundary

Use this as a starting point for the task in front of you, not as a universal security, performance, or cost rule.

01Local machineOpen conditions
Best when
The work is interactive, uses local files, should be easy to stop, and does not need to stay online.
Cost to carry
It shares machine resources and stops with sleep, network loss, or your working session.
Switch when
The task genuinely needs unattended continuation or repeatedly disrupts normal machine use.
02WSL2Open conditions
Best when
Windows is primary, while the toolchain or dependencies expect a Linux environment.
Cost to carry
Another file-system, network, permission, and resource boundary has to be understood.
Switch when
Diagnosing the compatibility layer costs more than using a direct local or separate environment.
03ServerOpen conditions
Best when
The work truly needs continued operation, remote triggers, or a stable service connection, with clear ownership.
Cost to carry
Patching, access control, logging, backup, spend, and failure recovery remain after setup.
Switch when
The task is not repeatedly used, or maintenance costs more time than remote operation saves.

MY PATH AND ITS LIMITS

Why this choice

I once treated WSL2 and a server as progress. Now I ask whether the task has earned an always-on environment.

Open experience and reasoning

From recollection, making AI run and making it remotely reachable were early milestones, so I accepted compatibility and server setup. Contemporary material supports some deployment and messaging connections, not long-term reliability or net time saved.

My current default is the smaller-permission, easier-to-exit environment. A server becomes necessary only after the task repeats and local interruption is an observed constraint.

What is supportedOpen record

Some deployment and messaging connections have contemporary records. Server addresses, accounts, configuration, and raw logs are not public.

What remains unverifiedOpen record

Exact first-install dates, the full motive behind every switch, and the net benefit of remote operation.

BEFORE YOU OPEN AN ENVIRONMENT

What to do next

Answer four questions before you reach for a server.

Four answers reveal which tasks do not need a server—or a wider permission boundary—in the first place.

  1. 01

    How long must the task run: minutes, hours, or overnight?

  2. 02

    Which files, accounts, and network resources must it access?

  3. 03

    Would failure on sleep or network loss actually be unacceptable?

  4. 04

    Who owns updates, logs, stopping, and failure recovery?

Continue or stop

Run location is one layer of a primary workflow—not the final answer.

The next question is what models, plugins, and skills cost over time.

Continue to Q02 · Extension cost