Hello Betamax,
Even Mark Zuckerberg, an insanely competitive person, wants his AI agent to teach him how to win an MMA fight. On a recent podcast, the CEO of Meta revealed that he uses Muse – the company’s AI agent – to analyze footage from cameras in his gym and offer advice between rounds.
His biggest complaint? Muse takes 30 seconds to respond, eating up half his break.
Alexandr Wang, Meta’s chief AI officer, has a different priority with Muse: getting it to source obscure teas from Taiwan and Japan.
Meanwhile, former WSJ journalist Joanna Stern used Muse to book a massage appointment. She has been using the agent to perform what she calls “life-admin jobs” such as track flights and cancel subscriptions.
Meta’s slouchy, cutesy AI agent hasn’t reached Southeast Asia, so I haven’t tested it myself. But as fears grow over AI agents becoming harder to control, there’s something ironic about tech companies packaging them as adorable little companions.
According to Meta’s design team, a customizable avatar feels more natural to chat with than a corporate logo. And it isn’t the only player giving AI agents a cute makeover.
OpenAI’s Dots lets users customize their agent’s eyes, glasses, and accessories. Meanwhile, Town’s AI assistants include a bespectacled bear and a lobster.
 Image credit: Made by Ulla/Tech in Asia with the help of AI But do users realize how much authority they’re handing over to these cute little creatures? In an essay, digital safety analyst Allison McSorley argues that Muse’s cute appearance makes users less wary of sharing personal information. She calls it a “cuddly Trojan horse.”
And there’s more to Muse than its adorable exterior. Independent testing suggests that its underlying model, Muse Wonder, shows improvements on complex tasks such as writing code and turning large collections of source files into spreadsheets and presentations.
That said, being good at complex tasks doesn’t mean an agent will respect permission boundaries. Take prompt injection: malicious instructions hidden in an email or webpage could trick an agent into forwarding private information.
Meta says its safeguards include isolating the agent, keeping credentials out of its reach, and using a separate system called Sentinel to approve or block actions.
But those safeguards may not always align with what users believe they have authorized.
A report from The Guardian showed how an unknown buyer went to a tech reviewer’s home after an exchange with Muse.
The reviewer had selected “Allow Always” for Muse to handle his Facebook Marketplace messages, assuming it would still seek approval before accepting offers. Instead, the permission allowed Muse to keep replying using information he previously provided, including his home address.
Following the incident, Meta has promised clearer permissions for Muse. But if a tech-savvy reviewer can misunderstand what he’s authorizing an agent to do, what hope does the average user have?
One workaround is to limit what agents can access. For instance, Stern gave Muse a burner email address for reservations and confirmations, keeping her personal inbox off-limits. Even with these restrictions, Muse was able to book a massage appointment for Stern.
My verdict? Giving AI agents a cute face might make us more willing to hand over control. After all, who doesn’t love cute things? But knowing exactly what we’ve handed over – and being able to draw the line – is what makes an agent worthy of our trust.
Meanwhile, here are some of our recent AI coverage worth checking out:
Glenn Kaonang, journalist
Catch up on past issues of the newsletter here.
|
