It's going to be very tempting to give tool access to these agents because that is the main way they become useful, but the security model of that is challenging. Every day users will have a hard time understanding the security risk of decisions.
Slightly off-topic: How do yo feel Opus 5.5 can be even better. Like with Fable 5.2 it’s tough to notice the difference in my line of work and what mattered to my business I’m not even sure Fable was better.
I then ended up with the question, what more could i wish for from a model? I feel like all coding work is done now. I couldnt come up with more stuff to do. L
Why on earth would any third party continue to use Anthropic’s offerings to manage their AI needs? They clearly are going to cannibalize any profitable integrator.
This is something I wonder about as well. If this is their strategy then using anthropic to help you write software, directly as a feature of your product, or their office software is just giving away trade secrets/road maps/etc to a competitor.
Specifically I wonder how Google feels leasing TPUs to Anthropic while they're clearly developing enterprise office software to directly compete with Google.
Anthropic have thrown a lot at the wall and yet they’re still not leading in any software, even Claude Code has been usurped by endless examples of third-party harnesses / editors / IDEs. Anthropic continue to prove that deep expertise + obsession when building software leads to better products.
> Why on earth would any third party continue to use Anthropic’s offerings to manage their AI needs? They clearly are going to cannibalize any profitable integrator.
Because their competitors will. In other words company A wants to get there faster than a company B in the same market. If there are no competitors and it's monopoly and it's only company A vs Anthropic, then yeah they should think twice perhaps before sending their code to Anthropic (or anyone else like that).
I know that companies are selling data of how there white-collar worked to AI for a lot of money. The founder gets the money, but whilst he thinks he’s replacing his employees he might be also replacing his company.
I don’t know how this all plays out. FWIW I’ve turned off the data usage agreement and probs everybody should and be a bit more closed generally :/.
I kinda don't see how that's relevant? Anthropic doesn't need Granola or any other such tool to be using Claude in order for Anthropic to know that it's a product worth copying. But I guess my point then pushes things towards "Anthropic is able to copy you even if you don't use their service", which could be said for any AI lab. Just look at Muse following the hype around Grok Bot or Instinct. I'll leave it as an exercise for the reader to find more examples.
I think it's also an argument that no private labs should've developed the underlying models. It's been wreckless, based on theft of work, and now creates a power imbalance we haven't seen in a long time if ever.
If we could do it all over again we should've made it a public private development where the cutting edge research and models were developed as a public good and let private actors develop it for business and other offerings. Things would undoubtedly moved slower, but I think that would have been a benefit as well.
Because they're not spying on your meetings or your code to do it -- it happens regardless, if they take the time.
Also, because anyone who's worried about their company getting out competeted by Anthropic hasn't looked up anyway, so you can't expect much in regards to their longterm strategy. That's "iPhone Moment" thinking; completely insufficient for the gravity of 2027.
It'll be like bringing a translator. Your AIs have your own project context loaded. Except, they are really probably more knowledgeable than the humans who haven't read any of the relevant documents for the meeting yet.
Except Claude will bs in the same way as a human about having read everything and when called out will just partially it "You're right. I did overstate how much I context I had read. Page 14 was beyond the context of what I had read. Would you like me to read all of the project now?" [pinky promise this time. Spoiler: it'll lie again]
Your dream is to be stuck on a Zoom call with an agent telling you “you’re absolutely right”?
I suppose perhaps I’m being unfair. Maybe your dream is for you and all other workers being replaced by an AI entirely. I’m sure no unforeseen negative consequences could arise from such an outcome.
Everyone knows your rug pull kind of failed by missing the IPO target 40% short. Just stop it with these half baked product releases no one cares about and fix Claude Code.
It's going to be very tempting to give tool access to these agents because that is the main way they become useful, but the security model of that is challenging. Every day users will have a hard time understanding the security risk of decisions.
Slightly off-topic: How do yo feel Opus 5.5 can be even better. Like with Fable 5.2 it’s tough to notice the difference in my line of work and what mattered to my business I’m not even sure Fable was better.
I then ended up with the question, what more could i wish for from a model? I feel like all coding work is done now. I couldnt come up with more stuff to do. L
[delayed]
I wonder what happens if someone on the call says "I do not consent to being recorded by AI". Probably nothing.
There's a consent clickthrough when you join the meeting. If you don't consent, you don't join the meeting.
At minute 13, u/cobychapple noted they don't consent to recording. At minute 14, Trevor..."
At minute 14, Trevor, the manager of u/copychapple was notified that one of his directs is resisting AI adoption.
Perhaps speak a bit about how to weaponize smallpox or cook meth at home and Claude will self terminate the connection on their end.
Why on earth would any third party continue to use Anthropic’s offerings to manage their AI needs? They clearly are going to cannibalize any profitable integrator.
This is something I wonder about as well. If this is their strategy then using anthropic to help you write software, directly as a feature of your product, or their office software is just giving away trade secrets/road maps/etc to a competitor.
Specifically I wonder how Google feels leasing TPUs to Anthropic while they're clearly developing enterprise office software to directly compete with Google.
Anthropic have thrown a lot at the wall and yet they’re still not leading in any software, even Claude Code has been usurped by endless examples of third-party harnesses / editors / IDEs. Anthropic continue to prove that deep expertise + obsession when building software leads to better products.
Explain Microsoft Teams :)
Explain Slack?
First mover advantage and money ( IPO)
> Why on earth would any third party continue to use Anthropic’s offerings to manage their AI needs? They clearly are going to cannibalize any profitable integrator.
Because their competitors will. In other words company A wants to get there faster than a company B in the same market. If there are no competitors and it's monopoly and it's only company A vs Anthropic, then yeah they should think twice perhaps before sending their code to Anthropic (or anyone else like that).
I know that companies are selling data of how there white-collar worked to AI for a lot of money. The founder gets the money, but whilst he thinks he’s replacing his employees he might be also replacing his company.
I don’t know how this all plays out. FWIW I’ve turned off the data usage agreement and probs everybody should and be a bit more closed generally :/.
I kinda don't see how that's relevant? Anthropic doesn't need Granola or any other such tool to be using Claude in order for Anthropic to know that it's a product worth copying. But I guess my point then pushes things towards "Anthropic is able to copy you even if you don't use their service", which could be said for any AI lab. Just look at Muse following the hype around Grok Bot or Instinct. I'll leave it as an exercise for the reader to find more examples.
Who is the profitable integrator making money off agent-in-meetings right now?
Duopoly is the only answer, and it’s why we need antitrust back in the U.S.
I think it's also an argument that no private labs should've developed the underlying models. It's been wreckless, based on theft of work, and now creates a power imbalance we haven't seen in a long time if ever.
If we could do it all over again we should've made it a public private development where the cutting edge research and models were developed as a public good and let private actors develop it for business and other offerings. Things would undoubtedly moved slower, but I think that would have been a benefit as well.
Seems like there’s plenty of competition idk
Because they have the smartest models?
Because they're not spying on your meetings or your code to do it -- it happens regardless, if they take the time.
Also, because anyone who's worried about their company getting out competeted by Anthropic hasn't looked up anyway, so you can't expect much in regards to their longterm strategy. That's "iPhone Moment" thinking; completely insufficient for the gravity of 2027.
How long before we have a meeting with multiple Claudes wearing different hats?
Will external contacts join calls with their own Claudes?
Are Claudes going to switch to a non speech audio protocol when humans leave the channel?
Are they going to communicate with ultrasound when humans are present?
All of the above is hilarious, terrifying and exactly what I am also assuming will start happening very very quickly.
It'll be like bringing a translator. Your AIs have your own project context loaded. Except, they are really probably more knowledgeable than the humans who haven't read any of the relevant documents for the meeting yet.
At some point some human needs to understand and decide at least something all these meetings are about.
But we are quickly moving away from that point.
Except Claude will bs in the same way as a human about having read everything and when called out will just partially it "You're right. I did overstate how much I context I had read. Page 14 was beyond the context of what I had read. Would you like me to read all of the project now?" [pinky promise this time. Spoiler: it'll lie again]
Please get me off this planet
Idk man this just feels like moving towards the sci-fi future I’ve always dreamed of
Like of course the ai is in on your calls and you can just ask it to do stuff… anything less wouldn’t be sci-fi cool
And then what? What services could you offer to make a living?
AI is displacing jobs faster than it is creating them. A Claude agent in a meeting doesn’t really mean much if you have no meeting to attend
Your dream is to be stuck on a Zoom call with an agent telling you “you’re absolutely right”?
I suppose perhaps I’m being unfair. Maybe your dream is for you and all other workers being replaced by an AI entirely. I’m sure no unforeseen negative consequences could arise from such an outcome.
I think it was sarcasm :-)
oh don't be so negative. the dream is probably something like TARS from Interstellar
Interstellar is a great movie, but I would absolutely not consider it a dream world to live in. Unless we're counting nightmares too.
This meeting could have been a prompt
I guess you can just ask Claude about any idea you have and it should absolutely agree with it. Please don't tell your em this trick.
Everyone knows your rug pull kind of failed by missing the IPO target 40% short. Just stop it with these half baked product releases no one cares about and fix Claude Code.
Come on in ! Transfer all your data from your current walled corporate garden, to ours ! This corporate cage has AI !
Nothing says agi and creativity as recreating gsuite.
I mean... haven't most of us built this already?
Wiring an LLM into elevenlabs and having it sit amidst humans sending each other voice memos is great. I don't need a closed-source solution for that.
We do it here:
https://magenta.cryptograss.live/