Many wealthy people use human assistants to offload mundane work.
This is cheap replacement for ordinary people.
It's going to be big. But probably it's best to wait for Google and Apple to step up their assistants.
This is cheap replacement for ordinary people.
It's going to be big. But probably it's best to wait for Google and Apple to step up their assistants.
OTOH, this isn't an issue for "ordinary people". They go to work, school, children's sports events, etc. If they had an assistant for free, most of them would probably find it difficult to generate enough volume to establish the muscle memory of using them. In my own professional life, this occurred with junior lawyers and legal assistants--the juniors just never found them useful because they didn't need them even though they were available. Even the partners ended up consolidating around sharing a few of them for the same reason.
Down in this thread someone mentions it being an advanced Alexa, which seems apt. Yes, a party novelty but not useful enough to be top of mind in the every day work flow.
The tech has existed for a while but nobody sane wants to be the one who takes responsibility for shipping a version of this thing that's supposed to be actually solid.
Issues I saw with OpenClaw:
- reliability (mostly due to context mgmt), esp. memory, consistency. Probably solvable eventually
- costs, partly solvable with context mgmt, but the way people were using it was "run in the background and do work for me constantly" so it's basically maxing out your Claude sub (or paying hundreds a day), the economics don't work
- you basically had to use Claude to get decent results, hence the costs (this is better now and will improve with time)
- the "my AI agent runs in a sandboxed docker container but I gave it my Gmail password" situation... (The solution is don't do that, lol)
See also simonw's "lethal trifecta":
>private data, untrusted content, and external communication
https://simonwillison.net/2025/Jun/16/the-lethal-trifecta/
The trifecta (prompt injection) is sorta-kinda solved by the latest models from what I understood. (But maybe Pliny the liberator has a different opinion!)
The "gave it my Gmail password" problem has a better answer than "don't do that." Security kicks itself out of the room when it only says no. Reserve the no for the worst days. The rest of the time, ship a better way.
That's why I built the platform to make credential leaks hard. It takes more than a single prompt. The credential vault is encrypted. Typed secret wrappers prevent accidental logging and serialization. Per-channel process isolation means a compromise in one adapter does not hand an attacker live sessions in the others.
"Don't do that" fails even for users trying their hardest. Good engineering makes mistakes hard and the right answer easy. Architecture carries the weight so the user does not have to.
On the trifecta being "sorta-kinda solved" by newer models, no. Model mitigations are a layer, not a substitute. Prompt injection has the shape of a confused-deputy problem and the answer to confused deputies has always been capabilities and isolation, not asking the already confused deputy to try harder.
You want the injection to fail EVEN when the model does not catch it.
The one I see the most is brokers. Agent talks to a thing, thing has credential and does the task for the agent. Or proxies that magically inject tokens.
I think this only works for credentials though?
It doesn't solve the personal information part (e.g. your actual emails), right?
As for security, my solution was: keep it simple and limit blast radius.
Expect it to blow things up, and set things up so it doesn't matter when it happens.
I don't like docker so I just made a Linux user called agent. Agent can blow up all the files in its own homedir, and cannot read mine.
I felt really clever until I realized there's an even better solution: just give it a laptop (or Mac mini, or server, or whatever we're doing this week).
Same result but less pain in my ass. Switching users is annoying (and sharing files, and permission issues...). Also, worrying about which user I'm running stuff as... The thing just shouldn't be on my machine in the first place. It should have its own!
Functionally, its own Linux user or root on a $3 VPS are the same thing. It blows up the VPS, I just reset it.
For keys, I don't do anything fancy. It can leak all my keys. But if anyone steals them, they can exhaust my entire $5 prepaid balance ;) Blast radius limited.
But yeah, needs, tastes and preferences may differ.
The layer that addresses content-level flow is information-flow enforcement above identity. TriOnyx (https://github.com/tri-onyx/tri-onyx) looks at that exact problem: taint and sensitivity tracking, gateway kills on threshold breach.
It complements Wirken. You need identity before you can meaningfully ask what agent A has been exposed to.
On the agent-gets-its-own-machine approach, that is fine as a blast-radius strategy and I have no quarrel with it. It trades isolation between channels for isolation between the agent and the host. If you only have one channel and disposable keys, it works. It stops working as soon as the agent holds something you cannot cheaply rotate, which for most people ends up being their messaging identities.
So I guess that leaves the in-between people who don't care about spending $180 every month but don't have any personal staff yet or even access to concierge services.
OTOH a lower-middle-class Joe like me really does have a lot of mundane social/professional errands, which existing software has handled just fine for decades. I suppose on the margins AI might free up 5 minutes here or there around calendar invites / etc, but at the cost of rolling snake eyes and wasting 30 minutes cleaning up mistakes. Even if it never made mistakes, I just don't see the "personal assistant" use case really taking off. And it's not how people use LLMs recreationally.
Really not trying to say that LLM personal assistants are "useless" for most people. But I don't think they'll be "big," for the same reason that Siri and Alexa were overhyped. It's not from lack of capability; the vision is more ho-hum than tech folks seem to realize.
Existing software is what dumped most of those errands on you in the first place.