Hi Fam. Any Hermes users can assist with local connection issue? I am trying to stabilize a recurring Hermes Desktop connection issue that has been happening for months. Claude/Codex need it fix it on nearly every bootup :( The Windows Hermes Desktop app is configured in **remote mode**, not local gateway mode. It connects to a Hermes gateway running on a Hetzner VPS through a local SSH port forward. The model: Hermes Desktop on Windows > Windows SSH local port forward > SSH into Hetzner server Hermes > Hermes gateway on VPS lookback via SSH (I am non-technical, so if this is not correct way tell me!) When the issue happens, Hermes Desktop shows: > Hermes couldn't start > The background gateway didn't come up > Your remote gateway session has expired The immediate recovery is usually: 1. Restart the SSH tunnel. 2. Refresh the Electron remote OAuth/basic-auth session. 3. Relaunch Hermes Desktop. This works, but it keeps recurring. Thanks All.

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DaYoXM5v8Xt/?igsh=ZHExa3NvOWx2MTJi

Most ICM setups I see here are single-operator: one person, one agent, one context tree that's basically externalized working memory. We're running it differently — as the shared know-how of a small engineering firm (~15 people: industrial automation, control-panel building, light EPC). That one shift, from personal to organizational, changes the whole problem. In a company, the context isn't just my memory — it's the procedures everyone has to follow, and procedures have to be governed, auditable, and improvable by people who will never open a terminal. Here's the core of what we've landed on. One markdown source, three readers. The ICM KB — plain markdown in GitHub — is at the same time: - the agent's operating context (what it reads to act: load costs into the ERP, build quotes, enforce the process); - the company's procedure manual, rendered into a navigable wiki — search, cross-links, the graph of how procedures interconnect — which is what employees actually read; - the ISO 9001 controlled-document system, because Git already is change control: versioned, attributed, diffed, immutable — stronger than the Word-on-a-shared-drive most small firms limp along with. No parallel copies, so nothing drifts. Git is the evidence vault; the wiki is the auditor's reading room. (Worth stating for this crowd: ISO 9001 mandates control — identification, approval, versioning, availability of the current version — it mandates no specific format. A git-backed static site clears that bar cleanly.) The agent is the abstraction layer — this is what makes it survive in a company of non-technical people. Nobody learns markdown, Git, or pull requests. They talk. The agent enforces the current procedure while they work; and when someone says "step 3 is wrong, we do Z now," it turns that into a proposed change to the controlled document. The quality lead gets a plain-language summary and approves or rejects. Proposing is frictionless and open to everyone; approving is a controlled human gate. The Git/PR machinery stays invisible underneath.