It's interesting to see the market movements from the big players.
This announcement is all about Claude extending its reach beyond single-player workflows and into multi-player workflows.
On the flip side, Slack just announced MCP support for the Slackbot AI chat capability embedded within Slack. It is, for now, exclusively single-player.
Single-player is the "safe place" (relatively speaking). The context, permissions, and standards (MCP/MCP UI apps) all work reasonably well for it, but get super complex or break down entirely when thrown into a multi-player shared context. I suspect Slack is doing what they are doing with an eye towards multi-player, but it's hard to say how that will manifest.
For a real life example of this challenge: I work in scheduling (for Reclaim.ai) and you can ask our chat to find time to meet with a coworker and we go find time and help explain why certain times won't work. For example, it might say: "I couldn't do 11am tomorrow because you've got a job interview scheduled on your personal calendar". This is safe and fine to do in a private context.
But... imagine if one were to ask our service (or Claude) to find time with someone and it replied to the thread for everyone to see: "The soonest I could find is 12pm tomorrow. Reggie is available at 11am, but Lightbody has a job interview so it won't work". WHOOPS.
I think the other comments in this thread have the right idea of it: for this to really work safely, the permissions model needs to be nailed down, and it may mean that you end up with multiple identities of "Claude Tag" (or whatever agent you engage with in a public forum), and the context it gets is only the context that particular identity is entitled to, just like any other employee. But then that gets tedious because now I've got even MORE "people" to keep track of and know who to engage with, which is half the problem getting work done in large enterprises.
Will be interesting to see how this evolves. I'll have my popcorn out :)
You can turn on a feature that will not auto-add invites to your calendar if sent from "unknown senders". The downside (significant IMO) is that "unknown senders" is based on Google Address Book + Other Contacts (aka people you email with). So if you're texting with someone, using a Calendly-style link, or pretty much any other non-email method of communication to schedule the meeting, it can easily be lost. It will still end up in your inbox, but you will have to accept the invite there for it to appear anywhere in Google Calendar.
I haven't really felt like 1Password's product materially strayed from the original mission. If anything, I'm even more delighted with the team functionality, shared vaults, quick keyboard access in 1Password 8, etc.
I wouldn't put them in the Dropbox bucket.
Also, I think the value Tailscale provides is fairly unique and far from obviously a platform feature like file storage and perhaps even password management.
We love Tailscale. Everyone employee has it, and we use it to provide access to dev, staging, and prod environments as well.
Fun little thing we did with it: nobody can access the prod network without requesting access via a Slack bot (powered by https://indent.com/). So somebody requests access, another authorized person approves it, and the Tailscale ACLs are updated for X minutes and then reset.
Access to secure environments is super low friction but more secure (with fantastic audit trails) than ever.
Reclaim.ai (https://reclaim.ai) is an intelligent operating system for the calendar, helping to automate and defend the schedules of busy product leaders, engineers, managers and their teams. Thousands of busy professionals rely on Reclaim every day to manage their calendars.
We offer full health, dental, and vision benefits to all employees as well as a competitive salary, a generous equity package, and a 401k program. Flexible hours, remote-first, awesome (and scrappy) team.
Reclaim is backed by some of the top venture firms in the US, and you’ll be on the ground floor of a fast-growing company with a big mission.
Oh, to be clear... I don't think my setup is ideal. I just don't think I could justify the additional purchase of your product today... maybe in a few years.
But if you decided to change up your business model and offer the service such that I could run it in my iPad + C2, I am pretty sure you'd have me as a monthly subscriber. The programs you offer are much more inline with what I'm looking for.
Congratulations on the success you've had so far. Good luck!
I'm really glad to see this product. I'm also more tech than fitness, but I try to get in a quick row or treadmill run every day.
In my case, I purchased a Concept 2 a couple years ago, not because I'm a rowing enthusiast but because "best rowing machine" seemed to point to it and it cost less than my treadmill =P
I found a mount online for the Concept 2 that can attach my iPad and the last few weeks I've been using Apple Fitness+, but the select is really limited. Also, like all Apple Fitness+ programs, there is currently no feedback between what I'm doing and what the program is asking/pushing me to do, which is disappointing.
I probably won't purchase your product in the near future, given that I have a semi-working solution today. But I will encourage other folks to check it out if they are in the market for a rowing machine. And if you decide to go pursue a strictly software/services solution, I absolutely would run your programs on my iPad while I row on my Concept 2 :)
My point is: context and privacy is HARD in multi-player modes.