Hacker News Reader

Comment by ayaniv | Hacker News Reader

If you're willing to give Claude or any other AI tool access to your email and files, the least you should do is put guardrails around consequential actions.

Reading a contract is one thing. Applying your signature and preparing to send it should absolutely require explicit human approval.

View on HN

And guardrails can be as simple as not giving it direct access to applications that can perform read/write (like a full-blown email client, or access to the GMail UI), and instead creating a small tool to fetch the content as needed without being able to perform actions.

The danger is relying on too much convenience, giving too much power to a non-deterministic tool will inevitably create issues...

I've had humans do the exact same thing. When I pointed out that this was fraud they were all surprised.

You gave these humsns access to your email?

No, I've had someone scan a document I had signed before, clip out the signature and place it under a document I had never seen. 'For my convenience' ...

But then again, you probably already knew the answer to the question you posed.

I'd say that's quite different. The guilty party didn't require your trust.

In this case it's not fraud though, since the person running the software is the same person whose signature ended in the document.

> the least you should do is put guardrails around consequential actions.

How on earth would you?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com