There's a real gap identified (execution permission instead of output guardrails). The timing concern is valid (we're scaling agent framework way faster than security infrastructure — see Clawdbot-Moltbot). The default-deny + time-boxed permissions + audit logs is a solid model, easy to discuss at high-level with security teams in an org. The "Auth0 for AI Agents" framing is clear and positions it well.

Actually, the audit log piece is really huge. Having a complete execution trace with authorization decisions is invaluable for incident response. That alone might justify adoption even if the blocking mechanism is imperfect.

My concerns and questions:

- Where exactly does this sit? If it's between the agent and tool calls, that's relatively straightforward. If it needs to intercept arbitrary code execution or API calls, that's significantly harder.

- Adding another authorization layer means more setup, more policy configuration, more potential points of failure. Adoption challenge.

- Who defines what's "allowed"? In what format? How granular? Actually expressing "this agent can do X in context Y at time Z" in a way that's both powerful and usable, that's the whole ballgame (IMHO). I have in mind how complex AWS IAM policies got, and those are for relatively static systems. AI agents are dynamic, context-dependent, and probabilistic.

- By the time Reg sees a request to execute, the LLM has already decided. What happens when you block it? Does the agent gracefully handle denials and retry with different approaches?

I'd be interested in seeing real-world policy examples from your design partners. That'll tell you whether you've found the right abstraction layer.

Congratulations for just framing the idea and getting this far. Being very concerned about the current free-wheeling AI expansion with minimal security, I strongly believe this is going in the right direction and would like to know where this leads.

Points: 1

# Comments: 1

Because it's fairly easy to do so for the opposite statement. e.g. https://assassination.globalinitiative.net/monitor/

edit: typo

K.A. is great and I still use with my kid, but M.A. is more condensed and to the point for my needs. I was properly guided through the first program choices according to my profile, and the diagnostic exam you start with was perfect to highlight what I actually need to work on given my limited time.

Explanations and courses are super condensed, with the right amount of example and pedagogy that clicks for me.

It is a powerful medium of self-expression and social identity yes, deeply rooted in human history where costumes and attire have always signified cultural, social, and economic status.

Drawing from tribal psychology, it fulfills an innate human desire for belonging and individuality, enabling people to communicate their affiliation, status, and personal values through their choice of clothing.

It has always been and will always be part of humanity, even if its industrialization in Capitalistic societies like ours have hidden this fact.

OP's POV is just a bit narrow, that's all.

You're talking about an industry that generates approximately $1.5 trillion globally, employing more than 60 million people globally, from multi-disciplinary skills in fashion design, illustration, web development, e-commerce, AI, digital marketing.

As a secular Jew in Western Europe, I've distanced myself from my religious community due to its insistence on tying my identity to Israel. Where I live, it's less taboo to critique Israel than in the U.S., but still tricky.

Advocates of Israel's right-wing politics have blurred the line between criticizing Israel and anti-Semitism, an endeavor helped by actual anti-Semites. I've grown up with these supporters, but can't quite call them a "lobby" due to their loose organization and lesser influence here compared to the U.S.

Speaking out brings risks: being labeled a leftist extremist, clashing with fellow Jews, or unwittingly aiding anti-Semites. And that's if you are Jew.

This creates a pervasive, cautious silence that I imagine is even more stifling in countries with highly organized pro-Israel lobbying.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33622852

Points: 84

# Comments: 96

Well, that's is a bit like saying "it might be time to write your whenever you mean you're" just because Google Docs' autocorrect feature kept messing up the two when you wrote English.

How would it look like in an email to a client?

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32218161

Points: 18

# Comments: 1

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30014238

Points: 3

# Comments: 0