Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Claude for Chrome

anthropic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 433 posts

Re: Claude for Chrome

#191

Post by throwaway13337 »

clutchdude wrote: post #175
throwaway13337 wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s wild to me that people see this as bad. The point of the form is not in the filling. You shouldn't want to fill out a form. If you could accomplish your task without the busywork, why wouldn’t you? If you could interact with the world on your terms, rather than in the enshitified way monopoly platforms force on you, why wouldn't you? And yeah, if you could consume content in the way you want, rather than the way…

> If you could accomplish your task without the busywork, why wouldn’t you? There's taking away the busywork such as hand washing every dish and instead using a dishwasher. Then there is this where, rather than have any dishes, a cadre of robots comes by and drops a morsel of food in your mouth for every bite you take.

Does your analogy mean that you'd like to stop someone from owning that cadre of robots? Or is this just a personal preference?

You can have your dishwasher and I'll take the robots. And we can both be happy.

Re: Claude for Chrome

#193

Post by erickhill »

stusmall wrote: post #181

It's wild to see an AI company put out a press release that is basically "hey, you kids wanna see a loaded gun?" Normally all their public coms are so full of optimism and salesmanship around the potential. They are fully aware of how dangerous this is.

Seems to be trying to explain why the rollout is going to be very focused and rather small at first so they can build the proper safeguards.

But it is a surprising read, you're absolutely right.

Re: Claude for Chrome

#194

Post by erickhill »

“Folks, we built a road along this really tall mountain and are letting you drive on it, but there are no guard rails yet. And we’re not sure how to build them exactly. But 1,000 people can go first. Step right up!”

Re: Claude for Chrome

#195

Post by chatmasta »

miguelspizza wrote: post #176
parsabg wrote: post #126

I built a very similar extension [1] a couple of months ago that supports a wide range of models, including Claude, and enables them to take control of a user's browser using tools for mouse and keyboard actions, observation, etc. It's a fun little project to look at to understand how this type of thing works. It's clear to me that the tech just isn't there yet. The information density of a web page with standard rep…

> It's clear to me that the tech just isn't there yet. Totally agree. This was the thesis behind MCP-B (now WebMCP https://github.com/MiguelsPizza/WebMCP ) HN Post: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44515403 DOM and visual parsing are dead ends for browser automation. Not saying models are bad; they are great. The web is just not designed for them at all. It's designed for humans, and humans, dare I say, are prett…

I suspect this kind of framework will be adopted by websites with income streams that are not dependent on human attention (i.e. advertising revenue, mostly). They have no reason to resist LLM browser agents. But if they’re in the business of selling ads to human eyeballs, expect resistance.

Maybe the AI companies will find a way to resell the user’s attention to the website, e.g. “you let us browse your site with an LLM, and we’ll show your ad to the user.”

Re: Claude for Chrome

#196

Post by hsbauauvhabzb »

erickhill wrote: post #193
stusmall wrote: post #181

It's wild to see an AI company put out a press release that is basically "hey, you kids wanna see a loaded gun?" Normally all their public coms are so full of optimism and salesmanship around the potential. They are fully aware of how dangerous this is.

Seems to be trying to explain why the rollout is going to be very focused and rather small at first so they can build the proper safeguards. But it is a surprising read, you're absolutely right.

Safeguards for their profits and not the consumer or the websites they terrorize.

Re: Claude for Chrome

#197

Post by bitwize »

Big tech: We're going to stop you from developing apps or programs for our devices without doxxing yourself and tying everything to your online account because security.

Also big tech: Here, hook our unreliable bullshit generator into your browser and have it log in to your social media, bank, and government accounts and perform actions as yourself! (Bubsy voice) What could possibly go wrong?

Re: Claude for Chrome

#198

Post by gregpr07 »

Browser Use creator here; we are working on prototypes like this but always find ourselves stuck with the safety vs freedom questions. We are very well aware how easy it is to inject stuff into the browser and do something malicious hence sandboxed browser still seem to like a very good idea. I guess in the long run we will not even need browsers, just a background agent that does stuff in the background. Is there any good research for guardrails of how to prevent “go to my bank and send the money to nigerian prince” style prompts?

Re: Claude for Chrome

#199

Post by ianbicking »

Thought: if one of these automation tools wants to do some deep research task, is it legit if it just goes to chatgpt.com or notebooklm.google.com?

Obviously Anthropic or OpenAI doesn't need to do this, but there are a dozen other browser automation tools which aren't backed with these particular features, and whose users are probably already paying for one of these services.

When ChatGPT first came out there were lots of people using extensions to get "free" API calls (that just ran the completion through the UI). They blocked these, and there's terms of service or whatever to disallow them. But these companies are going to try to construct a theory where they can ignore those rules in other service's terms of service. And then... turnabout's fair play?

Re: Claude for Chrome

#200

Post by asdff »

stusmall wrote: post #181

It's wild to see an AI company put out a press release that is basically "hey, you kids wanna see a loaded gun?" Normally all their public coms are so full of optimism and salesmanship around the potential. They are fully aware of how dangerous this is.

> "We conducted extensive adversarial prompt injection testing, evaluating 123 test cases representing 29 different attack scenarios. "

Doesn't this seem like a remarkably small set of tests? And the fact that it took this testing to realize that prompt injection and giving the reigns to the AI agent is dangerous strikes me as strange that this wasn't anticipated while building the tool in the first place, before it even went to their red team.

Move fast and break things I guess. Only it is the worlds largest browser and the risk of breaking things means financial ruin and/or the end of the internet as we know it as a human to human communication tool.

Post reply on HN