131–140 of 362 posts
So OpenClaw that steals your data and profiles you for the US gov. No thanks.
and at the same time, it feels like all the AI companies - not just elon - are doing everything they can to burn trust.
I've been using it for the last month or so. IMO in the same way we went from tab complete -> prompts -> agents, this feels like a next step on that evolution. I highly suspect others will be following suit. I was surprised with how much it felt natural to interact with agents in this way. Biggest advantage is each one owns its own routines, context, and domain, and they can communicate between each other. Similar to…
> I wanted to make something that didn't feel like just my logo on a shirt, so I had one of my bots reach out to ~40 fabric suppliers in vietnam, negotiate prices, lock one in, and get samples made. Isn't this one of the problems foreseen with this? For you, it was a single prompt - for 40 companies, this probably took up some time. What happens when fifty people fire off a 15-second "get me a shirt" prompt? When fiv…
The primary person responsible couldn't explain much at all but man they were proud they came up with some brutal spreadsheets.
I've been using it for the last month or so. IMO in the same way we went from tab complete -> prompts -> agents, this feels like a next step on that evolution. I highly suspect others will be following suit. I was surprised with how much it felt natural to interact with agents in this way. Biggest advantage is each one owns its own routines, context, and domain, and they can communicate between each other. Similar to…
There is
though currently much worse
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's crazy dude, whenever we put up a job ad it's filled with thousands of LLM generated fake candidates in a few days. Looking at the examples they show here it is making more sense. Also where all the "content" on LinkedIn comes from.
Only way I was able to get a job recently was via one of a few recruitment firms I was working with. Presumably this will become more common. Basically vendors "selling" actual real humans they vetted.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A reasonable pushback. It originally only reached out to 5, didnt hear back, so reached out to 5 more. I personally pushed it to reach out to an additional 30 after that. One of the difficulties of sourcing this is a lot of the suppliers in vietnam are only contactable via whatsapp. Emails are monitored far less. It's one of the reasons I haven't been successful with this in the past despite trying - it's a very word…
I don't think your reply addresses the point of my comment at all, which is that people receiving messages from AI agents isn't scalable in the same way that people sending messages from AI agents is.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I assume they store your session state/token for whatever SaaS it needs to work with but not the creds.
Many people assumed they didnt upload your whole home dir when you launched their IDE
Interesting how everyone seems to be following OpenAI on UX. When I used Antigravity and they suddenly switched to Codex type UI I was very annoyed because I kept checking if this is Codex or Antigravity. Either way, I still don't think that computer use is solved. It worked horribly on Codex and Antigravity the last time I tried. Maybe I was doing something wrong.
I feel like we'd be better off if we just stopped at chatbots...why are we so eager to make the internet even more botted
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Is it allowed to use automated tools to interact with any system? I'd hope so, because that's what we're doing right now. Your browser is automatically speaking HTTP for you so that you don't have to. Am I having a bit of a laugh? Maybe. But really, services should be user-agent agnostic. That's the whole "agent" part of User Agent and the founders of the Internet had incredible foresight to name it this way. > Is…
> request data and receive what the other server voluntarily transmits? Taking your position to its logical conclusion implies that we shouldn't try to mitigate DDoSes either. In many cases, what the other server voluntarily transmits has so far been based on the tacit assumption that a person, with person-level time and computational power, is doing the receiving. While in principle a machine could be doing it even…
Not really. At any time you can, and should, choose not to reply to traffic that is wasting your bandwidth - ban IPs, use DDOS mitigation services, etc. My position is simply that regulation doesn't belong in this space, and it's ok for the 'net to be a dog eat dog world. Kind of what keeps technology advancing and exciting.