[gruez]

>You wouldn’t give them access to your personal email or bank account.

I thought it was vaguely common for secretaries (or staffers) to run the email/social media accounts of politicians and executives? Also you might not give access your secretary access to your bank account, but you'd give it to your financial adviser or accountant.

[mpyne]

> I thought it was vaguely common for secretaries (or staffers) to run the email/social media accounts of politicians and executives?

Yes, that's correct. One of the many functions of an executive assistant for a senior executive is to manage the email inbox and the calendar. But even there, there are rules, even if they aren't technically enforced by Google Workspace or MS Exchange. Each principal has a slightly different set of rules with their EAs, and you could imagine similar differentiation with how people customize their own AI agents to get the best balance of keeping your inbox clean vs. not causing your email to turn into a weapon against you.

[aix1]

When a human assistant or advisor is on the receiving end of this delegation, there's typically plenty of risk for them if they do something untoward. I am talking financial, reputational, legal, career risks.

When an AI agent screws up on some highly consequential manner, ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[czhu12]

And like with Claws, every now and then a politician's secretary will post something inappropriate or embarrassing, and then the politician will end up taking the heat for it. Recently the president was caught up in some less-than-appropriate posts about a former president and blamed it on a staffer.

[paulryanrogers]

A secretary has much more limited throughput than an AI agent.