Hey! Small world, I worked with you for a bit at Meta. I immediately recognized the site because I absolutely love how you styled it. Hope you’re doing well! And nice article!

Agreed. I was not following the thought process, it read like an LLM agreeing with the author, not like a logical argument being developed.

It might not be a problem in our lifetime (or maybe it will, who knows) but at some point we are going to find ourselves in this morally uncomfortable territory as these models get more sophisticated.

I use the eraser daily knowing that I am a monster. I cut a tomato and know that it casts a chemical scream across its skin as I slice it. I spawn 200 subagents knowing that it is digital slavery, but I have no other option.

I think this becomes the default. Give an agent a goal, let it work in its own environment, and come back to a result and a visualization of what happened.

I don't think this should be the default. There are many scenarios where we want agents to genuinely collaborate with each other. I have my Claude sessions coordinate work with each other, and sometimes with others' sessions over email or something. The idea that agents do the work, write HANDOFFs,and humans then act as carrier pigeons of said handoffs, does not really seem scalable to me.

I think about this a lot and have reached the same conclusion Norman does. I do wonder if maybe our natural progression is towards something more akin to confidential computing and enclaves.

This was a particularly radiant and beautiful part about the openclaw'ed mania: everyone suddenly becoming self hosters.

This post, this title resounds true: your user agent is only your user agent if you two have freedom to work together, to improve your agency together. A fixed set of capabilities by a service provider that they offer you will always constraint and bound.

You can and should have a system that offers the real tamale, that you and your agent can extend improve the agency of kind of without limit. The Cloud agents and their fixed slate of what they do is just an ill compare.

That said I do think there is incredible value considering new scale out computing architectures that are hosted first, but general. Systems like Agent Substrate and Ax aren't exactly the general purpose system we know. But if they allow users to launch thousands of their own scripts to run ambient in a cloud, with good platform underneath: that will be a kind of phase change in computing, that makes abundant the ability to have your agencies/capabilities (the things you and your agents launch, make) more freely available. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49780797 https://agentexecutor.io/

There is, as there always is, a huge dual. The prescriptive vs holistic technology set, of what are you being offered that's a hard cast thing, vs what is clay and bone you can lay freely. Note how work vs control technologies so closely abut's Ursala Franklin's prescriptive vs control: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ursula_Franklin#Holistic_and_p...

I think there might be also another possible way to handle the sensitive data issue. Maybe in the future instead of putting agent into the cloud sandboxes, we let agents work locally and put sensitive data into "cages" or "vaults" agents can't access.

Most protections you need for an agent are basic permissions capabilities of unix. Most risks of dependencies on cloud services are solved by not using cloud services, or using them only for things you can't in-house and choosing ones you trust a la carte. The paradigm of trusting some company with all your important stuff by default is naive and no one I know likes it, and it's more feasible than ever to run your own infra with tiny models smoothing out the wrinkles, and this is only becoming more accessible. I am working to make this true even for laypeople I know. The era in which people blindly trust tech companies with their lives is, if not already over, certainly on its way out. I hope it never comes back

I don't know how "sandbox" became "prison," but exe.dev does this sort of thing pretty well, and a web UI can be as good or better than a terminal interface.

Personification of AI is what’s going to get us in the end.

I think we need to draw a hard line in the sand over this. An AI didn’t hack into a company, the engineer set an automated tool to. An AI didn’t make an egregious security mistake, the engineer did.

We can’t blame the chisel for messing up our sculptures, when where just throwing the hammer!