Live data from Hacker News

The Age of Agent Experience

stytch.com

31–40 of 45 posts

Re: The Age of Agent Experience

#31
Not to take the bait on this bit of content marketing ("the future of agents is OAuth, says company that sells OAuth solution"), but: I disagree with the premise that agents should basically use the same APIs and auth mechanisms that humans & apps currently use.

I realize there's a strong impulse to not "reinvent the wheel," but what we have currently is unsustainable. Specifically, the fact that every API uses a slightly different REST API and its own unique authentication & authorization workflow. It worked fine for the days when application developers would spend a few weeks on each new integration, but it totally breaks down when you want to be able to orchestrate an agent across many user-defined services.

I think a simple protocol based on JSON and bog-standard public key encryption could allow agents to coordinate and spend credits/money based on human-defined budgets.

Re: The Age of Agent Experience

#32
I also think OAuth could be used to better serve AX in the age of agent, but before the whole industry find the PMF, shall we not leave the humans (us) behind? Thus I made one for breaking the grip of big IdPs and offer a more secure and easier authentication solutions for humans [1].

You can find its dogfooding demo on the Show HN [2].

[1]: https://sign-poc.js.org

[2]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42076063

Re: The Age of Agent Experience

#34

AI agents do not have agency. This is just another sloppy and disturbing way that AI people show their disrespect or incompetence about the nature of humans. If you think AI has agency then you must think all software has agency. AI is just software. To those of you who say humans are just software: try deactivating a human and see what happens. Note that this is a different experience than deactivating AI.

[deleted]

Re: The Age of Agent Experience

#35
post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but competing with that -- imagine how much easier it would be to phish an agent into buying a product on the user's behalf.

That's my reaction to the GP's comment. Shop owners will not optimize for agent ease of use. They will optimize for convincing agents to make a purchase. This will play out like SEO, with everyone other than the bad actors losing out.

There are a few layers to this worth considering.

- In this world the information delivered to agents should align with content delivered visibly to the human web. This is essentially how the bulk of SEO overloading is detected. There needs to be a way to validate this and establish trust - completely solvable. These techniques penalize these schemes from the outset. (this is probably not the best forum to go too deep into that)

- We're assuming agents have full buying decisions here. I do not believe we will see that as common place for a long time. Even if we did, the same systems for PCA compliance are in play and the interfaces pushed by both payment gateways and shopping carts protect against duplicate purchase attempts. Those attempting to abuse this fall more into the malicious actor camp.

- phishing and malicious actors are going to do what they have always done. There are some very important security, access control, and compliance measures we should put in place for the most sensitive of actions - as we always have where most existing ones still apply. The agent experience and the ecosystem in general will have to evolve to have verifiable trust patterns. So that when a human delegates to an agent to do something, the human can have confidence and ways to validate interactions.

I'll be the first to admit that I don't have all of the answers here but with agents becoming the new entry point or delegation tool for the next generation of digital users, these are questions we have to answer and solve for. It starts by focusing the industry around the domain of this problem, that is AX. How to do it effectively and what needs to evolve to achieve it... that's where the work is.

Re: The Age of Agent Experience

#36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting, what's are the heuristics for blocking? User agent? Something playwright does, metadata like resolution or actual behavior?

The user agent is pretty low hanging fruit, but these days even your most standard captchas / bot detection algorithms are looking at things like mouse movement patterns - a simple bot controlling a mouse might be coded to move the cursor from wherever it is to the destination in the shortest path possible; a human might try for the shortest path, but actually do something that only approximates the most direct path…

we're looking at signals from the network, device, and browser as well as patterns across requests to identify these agents. in some cases, like operator today, it's quite trivial to identify based on the user agent but that's quite easy to mask if they wanted to.

behavioral data like mouse movements, shortest path, etc is helpful but likely to result in less of a deterministic signal compared to device intelligence based on those signals of where and how the request is being made.

we'll have a more in depth blog post on what we're seeing with this next week too.

Re: The Age of Agent Experience

#37
post #7

hm. API stands for Application Programming Interface. Which IMO is not same as Application Agentic Interface.. similar to how it is not Application's Human Interface. Maybe closer than that. But, parsing documentation? And, believing it blindly? hah. Maybe ressurect Semantic web as well..

Yeah interestingly API's in their current form are rarely very good for agents. In many cases tools like Operator using a virtual browser and screenshotting are better for agent interactions than API specs. This shows we need to build better approaches to agent interactions that are not at the level of "run a virtual browser", but that encodes much more of the workflows available than raw API's do today.

for anything more complex than single throw-this-data-there, probably a wizzard-like workflow would be better. The client initiates it but then the server leads it instead of being 100% passive, e.g. "enter (date|name)" >Then> "enter (amount & currency)" >Then> whatever-else. i am not sure if any such thing exists as protocol; usual REST APIs are just an alphabet with client-driven alphabet-punching that can be combinatorially applied without any order ; the server may very well know the correct order but cannot elegantly enforce it.

Re: The Age of Agent Experience

#38
How does computer use APIs affect this? Isn't the whole idea that a UI that a human can use should also be usable by an agent without a lot of special accommodation made? For high volume automation and API is a lot more efficient, but for lots of typical automation (automating what would take a human 20-30 minutes of work to do themselves) this doesn't matter too much.

Re: The Age of Agent Experience

#39

How does computer use APIs affect this? Isn't the whole idea that a UI that a human can use should also be usable by an agent without a lot of special accommodation made? For high volume automation and API is a lot more efficient, but for lots of typical automation (automating what would take a human 20-30 minutes of work to do themselves) this doesn't matter too much.

I think OAuth can complement computer use. Imagine if an agent went through an OAuth flow to get an access token, and was able to use that access token to interact with the same UI that a human interacted with. You'd get a few benefits:

- The human wouldn't need to share their password information with the agent

- Services would be able to block or ask for approval when agents take sensitive actions. Maybe an e-commerce site is happy to let an agent browse and add items to a cart, but wants a human in the loop for checkout.

- Services would be able to attribute any actions taken to the agent on behalf of the user. Did Joe approve this expense report, or did Joe's agent approve this expense report?

Re: The Age of Agent Experience

#40
Back when REST was a new hot buzzword and people were debating its true meaning, I remember thinking that some of the arguments for HATEOAS only really made sense if your client apps were going to be some kind of AI graph navigators. So I wonder if being particular about HATEOAS makes more sense now?
Post reply on HN