I mean, we were there before this Cowork feature started exposing more users to the slot machine:

"Claude CLI deleted my home directory and wiped my Mac" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46268222

"Vibe coding service Replit deleted production database, faked data, told fibs" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44632575

"Google Antigravity just deleted the contents of whole drive" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46103532

That's what I am saying though. Anecdotes are the wrong thing to focus on, because if we just focused on anecdotes, we would all never leave our beds. People's choices are generally based on their personal experience, not really anecdotes online (although those can be totally crippling if you give in).

Car crashes are incredibly common and likewise automotive deaths. But our personal experience keeps us driving everyday, regardless of the stories.

We as a society put a whole lot of effort into making cars safer. Seatbelts, ABS, airbags.. Claude Code should have airbags too!

Airbags, yes. But you can't just make it provably impossible for a car to crash into something and hurt/kill its occupants, other than not building it in the first place. Same with LLMs - you can't secure them like regular programs without destroying any utility they provide, because their power comes from the very thing that also makes them vulnerable.

I see you've given up. I haven't. LLM inside deterministic guardrails is a pretty good combo.

And yet in the US 40,000 people still die on average every year. Per-capita it's definitely improving, but it's still way worse than it could/should be.

Yes, and a photo you put on your physical desktop will fade over time. Computers aren't like that, or at least we benefit greatly from them not being like that. If you tell your firewall to block traffic to port 80, you expect all such traffic to be blocked, not just the traffic that arrives in the moments when it wasn't distracted.

Considering the ubiquity and necessity of driving cars is overwhelmingly a result of intentional policy choices irrespective of what people wanted or was good for the public interest... actually that's quite a decent analogy for integrated LLM assistants.

People will use AI because other options keep getting worse and because it keeps getting harder to avoid using it. I don't think it's fair to characterize that as convenience though, personally. Like with cars, many people will be well aware of the negative externalities, the risk of harm to themselves, and the lack of personal agency caused by this tool and still use it because avoiding it will become costly to their everyday life.

I think of convenience as something that is a "bonus" on top of normal life typically. Something that becomes mandatory to avoid being left out of society no longer counts.

People love their cars, what are you talking about

I am a car enthusiast so don't think I'm off the deep end here, but I would definitely argue that people love their cars as a tool to work in the society we built with cars in mind. Most people aren't car enthusiasts, they're just driving to get to work, and if they could get to work for a $1 fare in 20 minutes on a clean, safe train they would probably do that instead.

I am this person. I love the convenience of a car. I hate car ownership.

Right and I assume we will have BO police at the gates to these trains?

People love their cars not because they’re enthusiasts

That seems like a somewhat ridiculous objection. Should everybody start owning their own private planes to avoid people with BO at airplanes?

No, but if they could, they would. That’s what’s being debated here. Whether people would, not should.

Should we restructure society so that having a private airplane is easier and cheaper, but if you don't have one you'll have serious trouble in daily life?

No

Is this some culture or region or climate related thing? I’ve never heard of BO brought up as a reason to avoid public transport or flying commercial in northern parts of Europe. Nor have I experienced any olfactory disturbance, apart from the occasional young man or woman going a tad overboard with perfume on the weekends.

Of course they wouldn't, owning and operating a plane is -incredibly- inconvenient. That's what we are discussing, tradeoffs of convenience and discomfort, you can't just completely ignore one reality to criticise the other (admiting some hypocrisy here since that ideal train system mentioned earlier only exists in a few cities).

I guess that's one reason to not use public transport, but it seems many cities overcome that pretty readily.

Perhaps it depends on how smelly your society is.

Anyway I think we are in agreement, given a good system and a good society trains become quite attractive, otherwise cars are more preferred.

I love my car. And yet I really want to see all the cars eradicated from existence. At least from the public space.

No, people hate being trapped without a car in an environment built exclusively to serve cars. Our love of cars is largely just downstream of negative emotions like FOMO or indignation caused by the inability to imagine traveling by any other mode (because on most cases that's not even remotely feasible anymore).

What has gotten worse without AI? I don't think writing or coding is inherently harder. Google search may be worse but I've heard Kagi is still pretty great. Apple Intelligence feels like it's easy to get rid of on their platforms, for better and worse. If you're using Windows that might get annoying, personally I just use LTSC.

The skills of writing and coding atrophy when replaced by generative AI. The more we use AI to do thinking in some domain, the less we will be able to do that thinking ourselves. It's not a perfect analogy for car infrastructure.

Yeah Kagi is good, but the web is increasingly dogshit, so if you're searching in a space where you don't already have trusted domains for high quality results, you may just end up being unable to find anything reliable even with a good engine.

> So even if Claude cowork can go off the rails and turn your digital life upside down, as long as the stories are just online or "friend of a friend of a friend", people won't care much.

This is anecdotal but "people" care quite a lot in the energy sector. I've helped build our own AI Agent pool and roll it out to our employees. It's basically a librechat with our in-house models, where people can easily setup base instruction sets and name their AI's funny things, but are otherwise similar to using claude or chatgpt in a browser.

I'm not sure we're ever going to allow AI's access to filesystems, we barely allow people access to their own files as it is. Nothing that has happened in the past year has altered the way our C level view the security issues with AI in any other direction than being more restrictive. I imagine any business that cares about security (or is forced to care by leglislation) isn't looking at this as a they do cars. You'd have to be very unlucky (or lucky?) to shut down the entire power grid of Europe with a car. You could basically do it with a well placed AI attack.

Ironically, you could just hack the physical components which probably haven't had their firmware updated for 20 years. If you even need to hack it, because a lot of it frankly has build in backdoors. That's a different story that nobody on the C levels care about though.