Having Claude directly in the browser is convenient, but extensions live in a very sensitive part of the stack. Once an AI tool runs as a browser extension, the questions quickly shift from “how useful is this?” to “what data can it see, and under what permissions?” I’d be interested in a clear breakdown of what page content is accessible, how prompts and responses are handled, and whether anything is persisted beyond the current session. Convenience is great, but in the browser context, transparency and least-privilege matter even more.

I'm not sure I see the appeal of AI in the browser. I've tried a couple and don't really get what I would use it for.

The AI integration I think would be useful would be in the OS. I have tons of files that are poorly organized, some duplicates, some songs in various bit rates, duplicate images of various file sizes, some before and some after editing. AI, organize these for me.

I know there are deduplicators and I've spend hours doing that in the past but it would be really nice to just say "organize these" and let it work on them.

Of course that's ignoring all the downsides that could come from this!

At the risk of sounding too paranoid, I fear dilution of responsibility, an increase in the amount of errors and hallucinations everywhere and the reality slowly becoming a Willy’s Chocolate Experience[1] sequel.

Personally I’m not planning to use AI in my browser, at least not in its current error prone and opaque form.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Willy%27s_Chocolate_Experience

Being a person who is skeptical of MCP connectors, I love the new extension for two reasons.

1. It’s happening on my machine, in the browser I would use to access my accounts, not a middleman that is given access to my accounts.

2. Scheduling! This is a god send to be able to get a digest of everything I need to know for the day.

Pop open my apps that I would start my day with anyways and summarize all the shit I have going on from yesterday, today, and tomorrow. No risk of prompt injection in my own data. Beauty.

My personal benchmark for ChatGPT Atlas and Claude for Chrome is how fast they can run through a list of 100+ Hertz CDP codes scraped from the internet, and narrow down the best offers for a mid-sized SUV rental in my destination.

Atlas has problem where it just gives up and quits after a few minutes, but Claude doesn't seem to have a time limit and will work through a batch of CDP codes successfully.

Serious question for people who are concerned about security here.

Do you believe that AI browser automation like this will lead to more, or less overall information exfiltration (including phishing).

I work at Anthropic so maybe I'm biased, but it's not clear to me that this is worse than the status quo

Excited to give this one a try.

I've been using the previous Claude+Chrome integration and had not found many uses for it. Even when they updated Haiku it was still quite slow for some copy and paste between forms tasks.

Integrating with Claude Code feels like it might work better for glue between a bunch of weird tasks. As an example, copying content into/out of Jupyter/Marimo notebooks, being able to go from some results in the terminal into a viz tool, etc.

I definitely want this for QA. And luckily I haven't quite finished spending this Sunday setting up Claude Code in a container...

Instead I'm just going to give Claude a separate laptop. Not quite air-gapped, but only need-to-know data, and dedicated credentials for Claude.

Sounds to me like insufficient, because I see no use for it and am worried about privacy. A thought-experiment only. A lot of paradigms will need to change in computing and the internet before we can agentically "browse" the web in full potential.

Ironically, one good use for that would be to "exfiltrate" entire AI chats from Gemini/AI Studio as Markdown. Doing this by hand is tiresome and Google is obviously not too eager to make it easier (walled garden).