Frequency vs. convenience will determine how big of a deal this is in practice.

Cars have plenty of horror stories associated with them, but convenience keeps most people happily driving everyday without a second thought.

Google can quarantine your life with an account ban, but plenty of people still use gmail for everything despite the stories.

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.

▲

soiltype 6 hours ago | parent | next [-]

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.

▲

lijok 5 hours ago | parent [-]

People love their cars, what are you talking about

▲

ehnto 4 hours ago | parent [-]

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.

	▲	jakeydus 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I am this person. I love the convenience of a car. I hate car ownership.

▲

yencabulator 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

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

▲

Workaccount2 6 hours ago | parent [-]

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.

▲

yencabulator 6 hours ago | parent [-]

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

▲

TeMPOraL 3 hours ago | parent [-]

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.

	▲	yencabulator an hour ago \| parent [-]
		I see you've given up. I haven't. LLM inside deterministic guardrails is a pretty good combo.