I think how important this step is something you realize once you consider the alternative, which is trying to fix a problem, without knowing, what the problem is. It is going to result in weird workarounds instead of addressing the actual issue.
Not available in EU. The reason Siri AI and other iOS features are not available in the EU is the issue of Apple not opening up the same API for other apps. Therefore I think it might be the same case here, which would mean that third-party camera apps wouldn't be compatible.
The US isn't the UK or China and different cultures deem different things as acceptable. The UK for example is also a monarchy, which would rial up people in the US if proposed there.
Additionally the trust that the government uses these cameras as intended is apparently higher in the UK than the trust of Americans that Flock will not misuse their surveillance technology.
In the UK overall, 64% of the population support police use of facial recognition technology to some degree and only 11% were opposed to its use [1]. The survey also looks at support for different szenarios, but overall many generally did not oppose it, while in the US 47% oppose the use of flock cameras [2].
The Flock stat is interesting because 46% of Americans believe widespread use of facial recognition would be a good thing (27% unsure).
Maybe people oppose Flock because it's not going far enough! Or maybe there is a coordinated campaign against a license plate reader for some weird reason
No, it arrests several thousands of people every year for breaches of the communications act(s) - this could be for online harassment, stalking or trying to defraud people over Facebook messenger.
You can't even get many people to buy things online at all and if you can it's less profitable than retail, because you need to spend a lot of money to convince people, advertise to be seen, and account for returns. I think this is also due to the factors you mention.
One quick example: In fashion, Inditex and Shein have about the same revenue (€39.9bn and $41.8bn in 2025), but Inditex is more than three times as profitable. I don't see how there is a demand for agentic commerce that would remove even more control from the customer when shopping. Part of why we shop is for the experience. For B2B producurement platforms like Alibaba I can see the appeal though.
I recently needed to buy some hardware for a piece of furniture.
Ran Codex, it found it for 18% less than what I found in the top Google results. It did it by finding smaller shops, applying a discount code, subscribing to a newsletter for a better code after approval, and took into account the shipping (by placing it in the cart and going to checkout) all to get me the best price.
I’m guessing without it I would have spent much more time on it and paid the original price I saw.
If you use AI agents well, they can easily save you more money than they cost, and saving money is something most people are pretty excited about.
Hi Omer,
I think that is a use case where I'm sure an AI agent does well
right now, but I have 2 follow-up thoughts based on it and what
it is means that this is one of the best use case for AI online
commerce so far.
My first thought was that this is a quite limited application as
most of shopping (online & retail) is not spent comparing prices
and is instead spent on finding what product to buy in the first
place. I believe this "shopping fun" and exploration of multiple
options is not going away any time soon as those are some of the
most attractive parts of the whole experience.
I also think that the price comparison websites that exist, e.g.
geizhals.de here in Germany (includes most e-commerce shops, and
shipping information), are pretty good already and AI only being
a better version of that would be quite a sad turn of events and
with ads (and commission systems?) potentially coming to ChatGPT
in the near future the incentives to find the best price are rly
misaligned and I have doubts that people will trust results from
ChatGPT. We already saw this as Google's sponsored links evolved
to show whoever spent the most for the placement. Paid providers
without ads and commissions might fare better though.
I mean, that's cool and all, but the numbers are really going to shift when it accidentally goes off and orders that same hardware from every vendor in your local region and the top 5 online results for comparison.
It's the same problem as all other LLM solutions (that I hope OpenAI is working on!) it's non-deterministic, and there's no way for the user (or model provider) to know what the distribution of possible outcomes is. This just gets compounded when multi-call harnesses come onto play.
I‘m using mostly the browser automations for things like that now. Same for research - ChatGPT is banned from reading many pages, but Codex can read anything I can.
But isn’t it funny that Cloudflare is blocking AI on their pages, but on the other hand is researching and marketing things like „you can put a browser in a CF worker“
Their browser workers won’t get blocked. Same with all big vendors, keep out small competitors enjoy access yourself and sell it to a select few partners.
I expect a small site that undercuts the top Google results by 18% with a sign-up discount probably isn't profitable on those orders, so blocking agents would save them money - it's not like someone using agents in that way is going to have any loyalty to shopping from that site in the future.
Yeah, I mean if that's the case, then said small sites are probably headed for extinction, and agents won't have anything to work with other than whatever the top Google result is anyway.
And yours and other's agents will probably remain an insignificant and invisible customer base anyway.
My crystal ball is as good as anyone's, but if "agentic shopping" ever becomes mainstream, you can be sure that the vast majority will ask their phone (i.e. Google, i.e. Google Shopping) what the best price is anyways.
Sure, Google could be their agent, or ChatGPT, or Claude, or whatever local model the person is running. The big guys might all have the results cached so they don't have to rerun the crawl. Whatever their choice of agent, it seems pretty clear that almost everyone's going to use them, they're way too useful not to.
I do not think agents need to work continuously. They "just"
need to work on a project longer than an employee is able to
work on it for them to be commercially useful. Although this
does not consider that agents might take a shorter or longer
amount of time for the same task. Therefore, we should begin
to compare these in tasks completed during that time instead.
Not sure about that. The nature of work changes if you have some[one|thing] that can work on it continuously forever. The goal of using AI shouldn't be to do the things a person does; it should be to do the things a person would be able to do if they had (practically) unlimited time.
This is one of the inflection points around working with AI. When your thinking shifts from "AI does what the person used to do" to "AI does something different that leads to the same outcome as before, but with all that cool stuff I'd love to have the time for", then the equation changes. For example, I will never write another app that doesn't have 100% test coverage again. I stress- and soak-test everything these days. That's changing how I write code - I need to write things in ways that have deterministic harnesses for things mutable state outside of my immediate control (like random numbers or datetimes or state loaded from a save) so that I can task AI with building a fuzzer that does tens of thousands of random tests on every push to see if anything broke. I couldn't do that in the past because it was always effort that a client wouldn't get enough value from to pay me to do it. I can do those things now. It's ace.
(Everywhere I put 'I' you can replace with 'AI of the Week')
I feel like at least some of this is inspired by OpenClaw or at least driven by Peter Steinberger, as these benefits and ideas sound very similar as what he described his work in a few interviews before these features existed in ChatGPT Work.
I expect OpenClaw was a huge influence on this, and on Claude Cowork too.
OpenClaw demonstrated that there was enormous existing demand for general agent functionality, such that people would buy a whole Mac mini just to get access to this shape of tool.
I mean, it's all just tool calls and context-management in the end. Like it is pretty self-evident to have a "heartbeat" and to do specific stuff on a schedule, etc.
If you are living in Germany I can not recommend https://geizhals.de/ enough. It is "just" a price comparision website, but it features most relevant online stores for me, annd more importantly their filters are just amazing and allow you to find products extremly efficient.
Saying @dang has no effect; it does not activate a batsignal or any other mechanism of mod summoning. The only way to be sure a mod see this is to email them; see the contact link in the footer and include a link to the comment.
reply