Alex Komoroske
@komorama.bsky.social
Generalist fascinated by complex adaptive systems. Co-founder and CEO of Common Tools.
https://komoroske.com
https://komoroske.com
www.anthropic.com/news/claude-...
11.2% attack success rate is multiple orders of magnitude too high for AI browsers to be safe enough for mass market usage.
11.2% attack success rate is multiple orders of magnitude too high for AI browsers to be safe enough for mass market usage.
August 26, 2025 at 9:01 PM
www.anthropic.com/news/claude-...
11.2% attack success rate is multiple orders of magnitude too high for AI browsers to be safe enough for mass market usage.
11.2% attack success rate is multiple orders of magnitude too high for AI browsers to be safe enough for mass market usage.
LLMs make infinite software feasible.
But if each particle of software is distributed as an origin/app, then the friction of orchestration dominates the value of the software.
Infinite software in the same origin paradigm doesn't fix aggregation, and might even accelerate it.
But if each particle of software is distributed as an origin/app, then the friction of orchestration dominates the value of the software.
Infinite software in the same origin paradigm doesn't fix aggregation, and might even accelerate it.
June 6, 2025 at 7:09 PM
LLMs make infinite software feasible.
But if each particle of software is distributed as an origin/app, then the friction of orchestration dominates the value of the software.
Infinite software in the same origin paradigm doesn't fix aggregation, and might even accelerate it.
But if each particle of software is distributed as an origin/app, then the friction of orchestration dominates the value of the software.
Infinite software in the same origin paradigm doesn't fix aggregation, and might even accelerate it.
The user has to do less orchestration if they stay within one origin, so they do. Over time the origins with more data tend to get bigger and sprout more use cases, a form of data gravity.
This leads to hyper aggregation. That tendency is intrinsic to the same origin paradigm.
This leads to hyper aggregation. That tendency is intrinsic to the same origin paradigm.
June 6, 2025 at 7:09 PM
The user has to do less orchestration if they stay within one origin, so they do. Over time the origins with more data tend to get bigger and sprout more use cases, a form of data gravity.
This leads to hyper aggregation. That tendency is intrinsic to the same origin paradigm.
This leads to hyper aggregation. That tendency is intrinsic to the same origin paradigm.
The same origin paradigm is the laws of physics of how data flows in the web and apps.
When data moves across an origin/app boundary it has significant friction. That friction requires the users to orchestrate the data flow themselves, e.g. copy/paste or just keeping track of it in their head
When data moves across an origin/app boundary it has significant friction. That friction requires the users to orchestrate the data flow themselves, e.g. copy/paste or just keeping track of it in their head
June 6, 2025 at 7:09 PM
The same origin paradigm is the laws of physics of how data flows in the web and apps.
When data moves across an origin/app boundary it has significant friction. That friction requires the users to orchestrate the data flow themselves, e.g. copy/paste or just keeping track of it in their head
When data moves across an origin/app boundary it has significant friction. That friction requires the users to orchestrate the data flow themselves, e.g. copy/paste or just keeping track of it in their head
Infinite software won't counter the hyper-aggregation problem if the software is distributed within the same origin paradigm.
June 6, 2025 at 7:09 PM
Infinite software won't counter the hyper-aggregation problem if the software is distributed within the same origin paradigm.