DEV Community: Bluetick Consultants Inc.

1Password now lets AI agents log in for you, without handing over your password

Bluetick Consultants Inc. — Fri, 30 Oct 2026 15:40:58 +0000

Published: 30 October 2026 | Updated: 30 October 2026

Quick answer: 1Password for Agents lets an AI agent log in to a website without ever seeing your password. You approve each login on your own device, 1Password fills in the details, and the agent is only told whether it got in. It works today with Meta’s Muse and with Claude on Mac, and Grok Bot is rolling out. It’s included in 1Password Individual and Families plans at no extra cost.

Bottom line: It protects your password, not your account. Once the agent is signed in, it can still make mistakes, and several big US banks block or restrict outside agents regardless of how they log in.

The problem

You ask an AI assistant to reorder your groceries. It gets to the shop’s website and hits a login page. It asks you for your password.

The easy thing is to type it into the chat. Now your password sits in a chat history on someone else’s computer. The assistant can reuse it whenever it likes, for whatever it likes. You have handed a stranger your house key so they could drop off one parcel.

This is already happening at scale. In October 2026, Axios reported that big US banks, including JPMorgan, Bank of America, Citi and Morgan Stanley, had found outside AI agents logging into customer accounts, sometimes with the customer’s own password. Some went beyond what the customer asked for. Bank executives called it “horrifying”. Morgan Stanley is blocking outside agents, and the others are restricting them.

So you are stuck. Either you skip the useful chores AI could do for you, or you give away the keys to your accounts.

What we’re solving

On 22 October 2026, 1Password, the password manager, launched 1Password for Agents. The idea: an AI agent (an AI assistant that takes actions for you, not just chats) can log in to your accounts, but it never sees your password.

You approve every login. When an agent hits a login page, you get an alert on your own device saying which agent wants in and why. You tap approve or deny.
1Password types the password, not the agent. The username, password and any one-time code (the 6-digit code from your authenticator app) go straight into the website’s login form.
The agent only hears “yes”. It learns that access was granted. It never receives the password, so it cannot leak it, store it or reuse it.
Access is short-lived. Permission covers one session and only the logins you approved. It does not carry over to next time.
The rest of your vault stays locked. Connecting an agent does not expose your other saved items.

Which agents work with it

Meta’s Muse: available now on Android, web and iOS, according to 1Password.
Grok Bot: rolling out across all platforms over the coming days.
Anthropic’s Claude: has had a 1Password integration since July 2026, on Mac.
Named but not yet live everywhere: OpenAI’s ChatGPT Work and Dots, Claude Duet, and agents from the startup Town. Several are waitlist only.

What it does not solve

It does not control what the agent does once inside. 1Password says plainly that a signed-in agent may view information or take actions in the account. A wrong order is still a wrong order.
*It does not make banks happy. * Bank rules generally expect a human to access the account. A password manager approving the login does not change that.
It does not cover everything. The Claude integration only fills usernames, passwords and one-time codes. Passkeys and other item types are not supported yet.

A real example

The best-documented case is 1Password’s integration with Claude, which has a public setup guide. Here is what it actually takes and what actually happens.

What you need

A Mac. The setup guide lists it as a requirement.
1Password for Mac and its browser extension, both version 8.12.28 or later.
*The Claude desktop app and the Claude in Chrome extension. *
A paid Claude plan: Pro, Max, Team or Enterprise.
For workplaces: a 1Password Business admin must switch on a policy that allows AI agents to autofill. On Claude Team or Enterprise, an owner must also turn the feature on, because it is off by default.

What happens when Claude needs to log in

Claude asks. It sends a sign-in request to 1Password.
1Password suggests a login. You see a prompt with the matching saved login. You can pick a different one.
You decide. Approve or deny. If the site uses “Sign in with Google”, Claude asks for both logins.
The extension fills it in. Claude pauses reading the page while 1Password fills the form, then carries on.
Claude learns only which login was used. 1Password says passwords and one-time codes never enter Claude’s context, memory or Anthropic’s systems.

How it compares with the alternatives

Adoption numbers are not public yet, so here is how 1Password’s approach stacks up against the other ways people let agents into accounts today.

	Paste password into chat	1Password for Agents	Bank read-only access	Do it yourself
Agent sees password?	Yes	No	Depends on the bank	No agent
You approve each login?	No	Yes	Depends on the bank	Not needed
Agent can act once in?	Yes, anything	Yes, anything the site allows	View only, cannot move money	Not needed
Works today?	Everywhere	Muse, Claude, Grok Bot; others waitlisted	Some banks moving this way	Always

How it works (with code)

The idea in plain words

Think of a building with a front-desk guard. A courier arrives for flat 4B. The guard does not hand over a key. The guard phones you, you say “let them in”, and the guard opens the door. The courier gets in once, never holds a key, and cannot come back tomorrow on their own.

The courier is the AI agent. It proves who it is to 1Password with its own unique digital key.
The guard is 1Password. It finds the matching login in your vault and calls you for approval.
The phone call is a notification on your device. Approval happens on your device, so 1Password knows it really came from you.
Opening the door is autofill. 1Password sends the password over an encrypted channel to its browser extension, which types it into the site. For the business version, 1Password says it built this channel on the Noise Framework, a well-known recipe for encrypted connections.
The courier never touches the key. The password never passes through the AI model, so it never shows up in chat logs or the agent’s memory.

The code: the old way versus the new way

There is no public developer API for the consumer feature, so this is not 1Password’s code. It is a small Python model of the idea, so you can see exactly what ends up in the agent’s memory in each case. 1Password’s developer tools today focus on a different job: keeping API keys and other secrets away from AI coding assistants.

# A toy model of "approve, then fill" logins. Not 1Password's real API.
 VAULT = {"shop.example": ("asha@mail.com", "s3cret-Pa55!")}

 def ask_human(agent, site, reason):
     print(f"[phone] {agent} wants {site} to {reason}. Approve? yes")
     return True # in real life, the person taps Approve or Deny

 def broker_login(agent, site, reason, login_form):
     """The password manager fills the form; the agent only hears yes/no."""
     if site not in VAULT or not ask_human(agent, site, reason):
         return "denied"
     login_form["user"], login_form["password"] = VAULT[site] # into the page
     return "signed in"

 # Old way: paste the password into the agent's chat
 agent_memory = [f"My login for shop.example is {VAULT['shop.example'][1]}"]

 # New way: the agent asks the broker instead
 form = {} # stands in for the website's login form
 result = broker_login("Shopping agent", "shop.example", "reorder groceries", form)
 agent_memory_new = [f"Login result: {result}"]

 print("Old way, agent remembers:", agent_memory)
 print("New way, agent remembers:", agent_memory_new)
 print("Password ever in new agent memory?",
       any(VAULT["shop.example"][1] in m for m in agent_memory_new))

Output (run on 27 October 2026):

[phone] Shopping agent wants shop.example to reorder groceries. Approve? yes
 Old way, agent remembers: ['My login for shop.example is s3cret-Pa55!']
 New way, agent remembers: ['Login result: signed in']
 Password ever in new agent memory? False

What the code does

VAULT is your password manager. It holds the real password. Only broker_login reads it.
ask_human is the approval alert on your phone. Here it always says yes; in real life you tap Approve or Deny.
broker_login fills the website’s form directly. It returns only “signed in” or “denied” to the agent.
The last line checks the agent’s memory. In the old way, the password is sitting in the chat. In the new way, it never appears: the check prints False.

What it costs

Prices were checked on 27 October 2026, in US dollars. 1Password says the agent feature is included in all Individual and Family plans, so there is no extra charge for it. But you also need an agent that supports it, and some of those are paid.

Option	Upfront cost	Ongoing cost	Hidden costs	Best for
Paste your password into the agent	$0	$0	Password lives in chat logs. Banks may block or flag the login. Cleanup if it leaks	Nobody
Don’t let agents log in	$0	$0	Your own time doing the chores	Banking and anything you can’t undo
1Password Individual	$0 (14-day free trial, no card)	$3.99/month billed yearly ($47.88/year), or $4.99 month to month	A supported agent, often a paid plan. Approving each login	Solo users
1Password Families	$0 (14-day free trial)	$5.99/month billed yearly ($71.88/year), or $7.99 month to month. Up to 5 people	Same as above, for each person	Households
1Password for developers (with Browserbase)	$0 to start	Not published. Early access	Engineering time to build the agent	Companies building their own agents

What this means for you

Already a 1Password customer? The feature costs you nothing extra. The real cost is the agent: the Claude integration, for example, needs a paid Claude plan and a Mac.
New to password managers? New customers buying a yearly plan directly can get a first-year discount ($2.99/month for Individual, $4.49 for Families). 1Password raised its regular prices by up to 33% in March 2026, so check the renewal price.
Small business: a 1Password Business admin must switch on the agent policy before staff can use it. Business pricing was not checked for this post.
Free is not free: pasting your password costs nothing today, but a leaked password, a locked bank account or an unwanted order costs far more.

Pros and cons

Pros

Your password never reaches the AI. It cannot end up in chat logs, training data or a leaked prompt.
You stay in the loop. Every login needs your approval on your own device.
Access expires. No permanent keys left lying around inside agents.
Big names have signed on. Meta, Anthropic, OpenAI and Grok’s maker are all named partners.
No extra fee for existing Individual and Family customers.

Cons

*The agent can still do damage once inside. * Engadget points out that agents can still order the wrong thing or book the wrong trip, sometimes with no way to cancel. Protecting the password does not protect your shopping basket.
Banks may still say no. Several big US banks are blocking or restricting outside agents, whatever tool logs them in. Chase told Axios customers should not give their login details to anyone.
Support is patchy. Many agents are on a waitlist. The Claude setup guide requires a Mac and does not handle passkeys.
Approval could get tiring. 1Password says how often you are asked varies by agent. Constant pop-ups train people to tap Approve without reading.
All your eggs in one basket. Your vault becomes the gatekeeper for your AI agents too. If you ever leave 1Password, your agent setup goes with it.

Key takeaways

1Password for Agents lets an AI agent log in to your accounts while 1Password, not the agent, types the password.
You approve each login on your own device, and access ends with the session.
It works today with Meta’s Muse and Claude (on Mac), with Grok Bot rolling out and other agents on waitlists.
It is included in 1Password Individual ($3.99/month billed yearly) and Families ($5.99/month billed yearly) plans.
It protects your password, not your account: a signed-in agent can still make mistakes, and banks are restricting agents regardless.

Frequently asked questions

What is 1Password for Agents?

1Password for Agents is a feature, launched on 22 October 2026, that lets an AI agent log in to a website without seeing your password. You approve each login on your own device, 1Password fills in the details, and the agent is only told whether access was granted.

Which AI agents work with 1Password for Agents?

Meta’s Muse works now on Android, web and iOS, and Claude works on Mac. Grok Bot is rolling out. ChatGPT Work, Dots, Claude Duet and agents from Town are named partners, but several are waitlist only.

How do I set up 1Password with Claude?

You need a Mac, 1Password for Mac and its browser extension at version 8.12.28 or later, the Claude desktop app with the Claude in Chrome extension, and a paid Claude plan (Pro, Max, Team or Enterprise). On work accounts, a 1Password Business admin must allow agent autofill, and a Claude Team or Enterprise owner must turn the feature on.

Does the AI agent ever see my password?

No. 1Password sends the password over an encrypted channel to its browser extension, which fills in the form. The agent only learns which login was used. 1Password says passwords and one-time codes never enter Claude’s context, memory or Anthropic’s systems.

How much does 1Password for Agents cost?

There is no extra charge. It is included in 1Password Individual ($3.99 a month billed yearly) and Families ($5.99 a month billed yearly, up to five people), both with a 14-day free trial. The AI agent itself may need a paid plan.

Should I let an AI agent log in to my bank account?

Be careful. 1Password protects the password, not what the agent does once it is signed in. Morgan Stanley blocks outside agents, JPMorgan, Bank of America and Citi restrict them, and Chase has told customers not to share login details with anyone. Check your bank’s rules first.

The post 1Password now lets AI agents log in for you, without handing over your password appeared first on Bluetick Consultants Inc..

Opera’s WebAI: websites that use AI on your own laptop instead of the cloud

Bluetick Consultants Inc. — Thu, 29 Oct 2026 12:25:36 +0000

Published: 29 October 2026 | Updated: 29 October 2026

Quick summary (TL;DR): Opera WebAI is an opt-in preview in Opera One that lets websites and extensions run AI on your own computer instead of the cloud. It costs nothing per request, but it only reaches Opera users on supported PCs and Macs, so most sites still need a cloud fallback.

The problem

Every time a website summarises an article for you, translates a review, or suggests a reply, your text usually travels to a big company’s computers, gets processed there, and comes back. You are trusting that company with whatever you typed.

The website owner pays for every one of those trips. So small sites either skip the feature, or they charge you a subscription to cover it. And if the AI company raises its prices or changes its privacy rules, everyone downstream has to live with it.

Meanwhile, the laptop you are reading this on is probably powerful enough to do a lot of that work by itself. Until now, websites simply had no standard way to ask it to.

What we’re solving

On October 27, 2026, Opera released an early preview of WebAI in its Opera One browser. It lets websites and browser extensions use an AI model that runs locally, meaning on your own computer, not on a server somewhere else.

No subscription for you, no per-request bill for developers. Opera says sites can add AI features without running AI servers or paying for each request.
Your text stays on your device while the local model processes it.
More than one model. At launch it uses Google’s Gemma, an open-weight model (free to download, with published internals). On Apple silicon Macs it can also use Apple’s own on-device model.
Eight building blocks for developers. Opera lists the Prompt, Decisions, Semantic Embedder, Summarizer, Writer, Rewriter, Translator, and Proofreader APIs (an API is a menu of commands a website can call).
You stay in control. It is off by default. You switch it on in Settings, and each website must ask your permission before using the model.

Is it really a brand-new standard? Partly. Opera calls WebAI a proposed web standard, but several of its APIs, including Prompt, Summarizer, and Translator, already exist in Chrome and follow drafts from W3C and WICG groups (the bodies where browser makers agree on web features). What Opera adds is the idea of doing it without tying the web to one company’s model : Chrome uses Google’s Gemini Nano and requires developers to accept Google’s usage policy, while Opera plugs in open models and has no such policy.

What it does not solve:

It only works in Opera One for now , on 64-bit Windows PCs with Intel or AMD chips and on Apple silicon Macs. Intel Macs, Linux, and Windows on Arm are not supported yet. Opera’s own announcements differ on when Opera GX and Opera Neon get it, so treat Opera One as the confirmed starting point.
Everyone else needs a backup plan. Safari and Firefox users get nothing, so sites still need a cloud fallback or no AI feature at all.
Local does not mean private by default. A website can still send the model’s answer to its own servers.
Small models are less capable. They make more mistakes than big cloud models on long or complicated documents.

A real example

WebAI is one day old, so it has no named adopters yet. Opera has published six experimental extensions of its own, such as Project Lens, which colours an article’s paragraphs by how relevant they are to your project. The best documented real-world case uses the same family of built-in browser APIs in Chrome.

Policybazaar, India (built-in AI in Chrome, 2025)

Who: Policybazaar, an Indian insurance marketplace with over 97 million registered customers.
The problem: customers speak many Indian languages, and the support team is not online in the evenings.
What they built: Finova AI, an insurance chatbot. The browser’s built-in Language Detector API spots which language you typed in, and the Translator API converts it to English and back on your device, while the answers themselves come from Policybazaar’s own server-side model.
Why on-device: Google’s write-up says they picked it for lower delay and lower cost than doing the same work on a server.
The numbers: 73% of people who opened the chatbot went on to have multi-question conversations lasting several minutes, and the new call-to-action button got twice the clicks of the old one. Policybazaar’s tech lead said a 1,000-character article translated into Hindi in about two seconds.

This is Chrome, not Opera. But the Translator API is one of the eight Opera now supports, so it shows the kind of feature WebAI is meant to make cheap for any website.

How Opera WebAI works (with code)

Think of it like a calculator built into your phone. Apps do not need to ship their own calculator; they just ask the phone’s one. WebAI does the same for AI inside the browser.

You turn it on under Settings, Opera AI, “Enable Web AI API”. Opera then downloads a local model, which can take a few minutes.
A website asks permission to use it. You say yes or no, per site.
The website sends text to the browser , not to a server. The browser runs the model using your graphics chip where it can (through WebGPU) and falls back to the main processor otherwise.
The answer comes back to the page. Speed depends on how powerful your computer is.

The example below flags clickbait headlines, one of the use cases Opera itself highlights. It uses the Prompt API’s LanguageModel commands, following the current syntax documented on MDN, so the same code targets both Opera’s WebAI and Chrome. There is no browser in our test environment, so we ran it in Node.js with a small stand-in that behaves like the browser’s model. The logic and output below are real; a real model would produce its own verdicts.

// Flag clickbait headlines with the browser's built-in, on-device model.
// Uses the Prompt API (LanguageModel), which Opera's WebAI and Chrome share.
async function checkHeadline(headline) {
  if (!("LanguageModel" in globalThis)) return "no local AI: use a fallback";

  const status = await LanguageModel.availability();
  if (status === "unavailable") return "model not supported on this device";

  const session = await LanguageModel.create({
    initialPrompts: [{
      role: "system",
      content: "Reply with one word: CLICKBAIT or OK.",
    }],
  });
  const verdict = await session.prompt(headline); // runs on this computer
  session.destroy(); // free memory when done
  return verdict.trim();
}

const headlines = [
  "You won't BELIEVE what this laptop can do",
  "Opera adds local AI preview to Opera One",
];
for (const h of headlines) checkHeadline(h).then((v) => console.log(v, "-", h));

Output with a local model available:

CLICKBAIT - You won't BELIEVE what this laptop can do
OK - Opera adds local AI preview to Opera One

Output in a browser without local AI (for example Safari or Firefox):

no local AI: use a fallback - You won't BELIEVE what this laptop can do
no local AI: use a fallback - Opera adds local AI preview to Opera One

What the code is doing, in plain words:

First it checks whether the browser has a local model at all. If not, it says so instead of crashing. That is your cue to use a cloud service or hide the feature.
availability() asks whether this device can run the model. It can answer available, downloadable, downloading, or unavailable.
create() starts a session and gives the model one standing instruction: answer with a single word.
prompt() sends the headline to the model running on your machine and waits for the answer.
destroy() closes the session so the model stops using memory.
In a real browser , create() must follow a user action such as a click, and the user must have granted the site permission.

What it costs

All prices are in US dollars, checked on October 28, 2026. Cloud API rates are Google’s paid-tier Gemini prices as listed by MorphLLM’s tracker, which says it verified them against Google’s pricing page on October 25, 2026.

Option	Upfront cost	Ongoing cost	Hidden costs	Best for
Do nothing (no AI features)	$0	$0	Visitors may go elsewhere for summaries or translation	Sites where AI adds little
Cloud AI API (e.g. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite)	Developer time to build a backend	$0.10 per million input tokens, $0.40 per million output	Servers, API keys, user text leaves the device, prices can change	Any site that must work in every browser
Bigger cloud model (Gemini 3.8 Flash)	Same as above	$0.75 in, $3.75 out per million tokens; doubles on Jan 1, 2027	As above, plus a price rise already scheduled	Harder tasks where quality matters most
Opera WebAI (local)	$0 for users and developers	$0 per request	Opera One preview only; user must opt in and download a model; uses the visitor’s battery and hardware	Extensions and sites with many Opera users
Chrome built-in AI (Gemini Nano)	$0	$0 per request	4.27 GB model download; developers must accept Google’s usage policy; Chrome only	Sites whose visitors mostly use Chrome

A worked example

Say your site summarises articles for 10,000 visitors a day. Assume each article is about 2,000 tokens in and the summary is about 200 tokens out (a token is roughly three-quarters of an English word; these sizes are our estimate).

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite in the cloud: about $2.80 a day, or about $84 a month.
Gemini 3.8 Flash in the cloud: about $22.50 a day, or about $675 a month. After the January 2027 price rise, about $1,350 a month.
WebAI on the visitor’s laptop: $0 per summary. But only visitors on Opera One who switched it on get it, so you still pay the cloud bill for everyone else.

Who should care:

Solo users: it is free. If you already use Opera One on a supported computer, try the preview; your laptop pays in battery, not money.
Small teams and extension makers: the most direct win. A browser extension aimed at Opera users can ship AI features with no server bill at all.
Large sites: treat it as a discount on part of your traffic, not a replacement for your cloud setup. Use local AI when it is there, and fall back to the cloud when it is not.

Pros and cons

Pros

Free per request. No servers to run and no bill that grows with your traffic.
Data stays local while the model works on it.
Not locked to one AI company. Opera uses open models and Apple’s model, and has no vendor usage policy for developers.
Same APIs as Chrome for Prompt, Summarizer, and Translator, so code written once can run in both.
Opt-in and per-site permission. Nothing downloads until you switch it on, and you can switch it off any time.
Good fit for small everyday jobs. Short jobs like sorting tabs, flagging clickbait, or spotting relevant job posts suit a small local model.

Cons

Tiny reach for now. One browser, a preview, an opt-in switch, and only some computers.
The standards fight is real. Mozilla said the Prompt API has severe negative consequences for the web’s interoperability, updatability, and neutrality. The W3C’s Technical Architecture Group also reviewed it and raised issues, while Apple’s WebKit team has given no public position. Opera’s model-neutral approach answers some of that, but not all.
Same site, different answers. Different browsers run different models, so one website can behave differently depending on where you open it.
Your hardware pays. Local models use memory and battery, and older laptops will be slower.
Weaker on hard jobs. Small local models make more mistakes on long or complex documents.
No IT admin controls yet. Opera picks the model, and companies cannot manage it centrally.
Ownership questions. Tech Times notes Opera’s majority owner, Kunlun Tech, is based in Beijing and that no independent security audit of Opera or WebAI was found. Local processing limits what WebAI itself sends anywhere, but it does not change Opera’s wider data obligations.

Key takeaways

Opera’s WebAI lets websites and extensions run AI on your own computer, with no subscription for you and no per-request bill for developers.
It is an early, opt-in preview in Opera One on 64-bit Windows and Apple silicon Macs, using Gemma or Apple’s on-device model.
Much of it builds on APIs Chrome already ships; Opera’s twist is open, swappable models and no single company’s usage rules.
The strongest proof of the idea so far is Policybazaar’s multilingual chatbot built on Chrome’s built-in translation APIs.
Local AI is free per request, but it only reaches some visitors, so most sites will still need a cloud fallback.
Mozilla opposes the Prompt API and the W3C’s architecture group raised issues in its review, so whether this becomes a true web standard is still open.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is Opera WebAI?

Opera WebAI is a feature in Opera’s browsers that lets websites and extensions use an AI model running on your own computer instead of a cloud server. Opera released it as an opt-in early preview in Opera One on October 27, 2026, and calls it a proposed web standard.

Is Opera WebAI free?

Yes. There is no subscription for users and no per-request bill for developers, because the model runs on the visitor’s computer. The cost moves to your hardware instead: local AI uses memory and battery.

How do I turn on WebAI in Opera One?

Update Opera One, open Settings, go to Opera AI and switch on Enable Web AI API. Opera then downloads a local model, which can take a few minutes. Each website must still ask your permission before it can use the model.

Which computers can run Opera WebAI?

The preview runs on 64-bit Windows PCs with Intel or AMD processors and on Macs with Apple silicon. Intel-based Macs, Linux and Windows on Arm are not supported yet.

Does Opera WebAI work in Chrome, Safari or Firefox?

WebAI itself is Opera’s. Chrome has its own built-in AI using Google’s Gemini Nano, and both support the Prompt API, so the same code can run in either. Safari and Firefox offer no equivalent, so sites need a cloud fallback for those visitors.

Is Opera WebAI private?

Your text stays on your device while the local model processes it, and you choose which sites can use it. But local does not mean private by default: a website can still send the model’s answer to its own servers.

Should I build features on Opera WebAI today?

If you make browser extensions for Opera users, yes: you can ship AI features with no server bill. For a public website, use WebAI when it is available and fall back to a cloud AI service when it is not, because most visitors will not have it yet.

The post Opera’s WebAI: websites that use AI on your own laptop instead of the cloud appeared first on Bluetick Consultants Inc..

Your Secrets Stay Home: Underdog, the Assistant That Never Leaves Your Laptop

Bluetick Consultants Inc. — Thu, 22 Oct 2026 12:35:32 +0000

Published: 22 October 2026 | Updated: 22 October 2026

Quick summary (TL;DR): The Underdog AI assistant from Conway Research runs entirely on your Mac or Windows PC, so no AI company’s server reads your emails, calendar or notes. It is free and ad-free at launch, and Conway plans to earn a small, undisclosed cut of purchases it makes for you. The trade-off is smaller models than cloud AI and, for the bigger model, roughly 32 GB of RAM.

The problem

Think about what you would need to hand over for an AI assistant to really run your life: your inbox, your calendar, your meeting notes, and your bank and shopping accounts. The more it knows, the more useful it gets.

Now think about where all of that goes. With almost every assistant today, it leaves your computer and lands on a company’s servers. You are trusting that company, its staff, its security and its future business plans with the most private parts of your life.

The founder of Underdog learned this the hard way. In fact, a bug in a popular email app exposed his private emails to other users. The data was “safe in the cloud” until it wasn’t.

So the real question is: can you have a capable AI assistant without shipping your private life to someone else’s computer?

What we’re solving

Underdog is a personal AI assistant from Conway Research, a new AI lab founded by Sigil Wen. It opened as an invite-only beta on 5 October 2026. The whole pitch fits in one sentence: the AI runs on your own computer, so your data never has to leave it.

What it takes off your plate

Your data stays home: The AI model runs entirely on your device. That means no server reads your emails, transcripts or calendar to answer you.
No subscription, no ads: Underdog is free at launch, and Wen says it will never show ads.
It works offline: Investor a16z describes it as helping you even with no internet connection.
Locked account keys: The keys Underdog uses to reach your email and other accounts are encrypted.

What it does today

Email (Gmail and Outlook), calendar, meeting transcription and dictation, all on the device.
Everyday tasks like shopping research and homework questions.
A preview tool for asking data brokers to remove your details.

What it does not solve

The services you connect still see their part. Running the AI locally takes the AI company out of the picture. It does not stop Gmail, a shop or a bank from seeing what passes through them.
It is not on your phone yet. Mac and Windows only for now. Linux, iPhone and Android are promised with no dates.
It is not the smartest AI out there. That is because its models are much smaller than the giant cloud models.

A real example

Underdog has been in a closed beta for about a week, so there are no independent user stories yet. Its launch listing on Product Hunt had a single upvote and one comment when I checked. Instead of stretching a thin example, here is how Underdog compares with the other personal agents people are actually choosing between.

Assistant	Where the AI runs	Who can see your data	How it makes money	Status (12 Oct 2026)
Underdog	Your Mac or Windows PC	On-device only; connected services still see their part	A small cut of payments it makes via Stripe	Invite-only beta
Instinct	Cloud	Instinct’s servers; trains on your inputs by default	Plans a cut of purchases; $0 today	Invite-only
Meta Muse	Cloud	Meta’s servers	Free plus paid tiers	Open to all
Fo (Wajo)	Cloud	Wajo; de-identified data trains its own systems	Free tiers, possible purchase fee, Pro plan	Open to all since 28 Sept
Ollama (do it yourself)	Your computer	Your device	Free locally; paid cloud plans	Available; you set it up

Who is behind it

Founder: Sigil Wen, a self-taught coder and Thiel Fellow who moved to Silicon Valley at 17. He also once got GPT-2, an early OpenAI model, running on an Apple Watch.
Track record: He was among the earliest testers of tools that became Claude, Midjourney and Stable Diffusion, and Naval Ravikant hired him to work on Airchat.
*Backers: * Andreessen Horowitz (a16z) led the first round. Khosla Ventures, Hummingbird, SV Angel and the Anthology Fund joined, plus Stripe co-founder Patrick Collison as an angel. The amount was not disclosed.
His bet, “Underdog’s Law”: Wen argues that today’s top AI reaches ordinary devices within about six months. However, it is a forecast, not a measured fact.

How it works (with code)

Think of the difference between a restaurant and your own kitchen. Cloud AI is the restaurant: the food is great, but you hand your order to strangers and eat on their premises. Underdog is a good home kitchen: a smaller menu, but nothing leaves your house.

The pieces

Two brains: Woof is a small, fast model with 4 billion parameters that takes under 2.5 GB. Underdog 27B is a bigger model with 27 billion parameters for harder tasks, built on Alibaba’s open Qwen3.8-27B model.
Parameters, in plain words: The numbers a model learned during training. More parameters usually means smarter, but also more memory.
Husky, the engine: Wen built his own software to run models quickly on your hardware. He says it moves less data between your computer’s main chip and its graphics chip than rival engines.
A locked vault per account: Each connected account gets its own encrypted vault, with the key kept on your computer, according to its launch listing.
A “Naval mode” switch: The listing says it can stop all outbound calls home from the app.

Will it run on my laptop?

Running AI at home is mostly a memory question. A model’s numbers have to fit in your computer’s memory (RAM). This short script estimates whether each Underdog model fits on a laptop with 8, 16 or 32 GB.

# Will a local AI model fit on my laptop? A rough estimate.

def weights_gb(params_billion, bits):
    # Each parameter is a number; 4-bit means half a byte per number
    return params_billion * bits / 8

def check(model, params_billion, bits, ram_gb, buffer_gb=4):
    # buffer_gb: rough room for the chat itself and your other apps
    need = weights_gb(params_billion, bits) + buffer_gb
    verdict = "fits" if need <= ram_gb else "too big"
    label = f"{model:<13}{bits}-bit" print(f"{label} ~{need:4.1f} GB | {ram_gb:>2} GB: {verdict}")

models = [("Woof 4B", 4, 4), ("Underdog 27B", 27, 4), ("Underdog 27B", 27, 8)]
for ram in (8, 16, 32):
    for name, size, bits in models:
        check(name, size, bits, ram)
    print()

Output when I ran it:

Woof 4B 4-bit ~ 6.0 GB | 8 GB: fits
Underdog 27B 4-bit ~17.5 GB | 8 GB: too big
Underdog 27B 8-bit ~31.0 GB | 8 GB: too big

Woof 4B 4-bit ~ 6.0 GB | 16 GB: fits
Underdog 27B 4-bit ~17.5 GB | 16 GB: too big
Underdog 27B 8-bit ~31.0 GB | 16 GB: too big

Woof 4B 4-bit ~ 6.0 GB | 32 GB: fits
Underdog 27B 4-bit ~17.5 GB | 32 GB: fits
Underdog 27B 8-bit ~31.0 GB | 32 GB: fits

A model’s memory need is roughly its size times how many bits each number uses. “4-bit” is a compressed version that uses half a byte per number.
The small Woof model fits on almost any recent laptop.
By contrast, the bigger 27B model needs a well-equipped machine. On a typical 16 GB laptop it does not fit, by this estimate.
The 4 GB buffer is my rough allowance for the conversation and your other apps. Conway has not published official memory requirements, and which compression it uses for the 27B model is not public, so treat these as estimates.

How fast is it?

Conway’s own tests show Husky running Woof at up to 730 tokens (small pieces of words) per second, and up to 4.5x faster than Apple’s own engine on one editing task.
The catch: those numbers come from the small model on a top-end Apple M5 Max laptop with 128 GB of memory, tested by the company itself. So results on Windows may differ.

What it costs

Prices below were checked on 12 October 2026. Ollama’s prices come from its own pricing page. Underdog’s terms come from its founder’s statements to TechCrunch. Meta Muse and typical chatbot prices are third-party reports. All amounts in US dollars.

Option	Upfront cost	Ongoing cost	Hidden costs	Best for
Stay as you are (free cloud chatbot)	$0	$0	Your data sits on someone else’s servers; usage limits	Casual questions
Paid cloud chatbot	$0	About $20 a month (reported)	Your data still goes to the cloud	Top-quality answers
Underdog	Free, invite only	$0; no ads, no subscription	A cut of purchases it makes (percent not disclosed); needs a strong computer; battery drain	Privacy-first users with good hardware
Ollama (do it yourself)	$0	$0 locally; Pro cloud plan $20 a month	Your setup time; no built-in email or calendar assistant	Tinkerers and developers
Meta Muse	$0	$0, $20 or $100 a month (reported)	Data on Meta’s servers	People already in Meta’s apps

Free is not free. With Underdog, you pay with hardware and battery instead of a subscription. After all, running AI at home uses your computer’s memory, power and fans.
Watch the business model. Conway earns only when the assistant spends money for you. However, Conway has not published the fee percentage.
The hardware bill is real. The big 27B model wants roughly 32 GB of memory by my estimate. If your laptop has 8 or 16 GB, you get the small model only.
Solo user: Try Underdog if you have an invite and a recent laptop. But keep a cloud chatbot for hard questions.
Small team or business: Wait. It is a one-week-old beta with no published security audit.

Pros and cons

Pros

Your private data stays on your device. No AI company reads your emails or notes to answer you.
Free, with no subscription or ads. Wen says his costs are low because your computer does the work.
Works offline. Useful on flights or poor connections.
Privacy extras. Encrypted account vaults, a switch to block outbound calls, and stripping of tracking pixels from email, per its launch listing.
Serious backers. a16z, Khosla Ventures and Stripe’s co-founder are betting on it.

Cons

Smaller brain than the cloud. Its models are far smaller than state-of-the-art cloud models. Wen’s claim that the 27B model matches Claude Opus 4.6 applies only to some unnamed tests, with no independent check yet.
Speed claims need context. The headline speeds come from the small model on a top-end, 128 GB Apple laptop, measured by the company.
Your battery pays. A vendor of rival AI chips estimates a large local model can drain a laptop battery in about an hour. That source has its own product to sell, but the direction is right: local AI is power-hungry.
An awkward incentive. A company that earns only when you buy things has a reason to nudge you toward buying. In other words, that is the same kind of incentive problem it criticises in ad-funded apps.
Local is not fully private. Gmail, shops and banks still see what you do with them. In short, only the AI middleman is removed.
Early and unaudited. Invite-only, Windows still in beta, no phone app, and no external security audit reported.

Key takeaways

Underdog is a free AI assistant that runs on your own Mac or Windows PC, so your emails, notes and calendar never go to an AI company’s servers.
It makes money from a small, undisclosed cut of purchases it makes for you, not from ads or subscriptions.
The trade-off is brains and hardware: its models are smaller than cloud AI, and the bigger one needs a well-equipped computer.
Its speed and quality claims come from the company itself and have not been independently tested.
If privacy matters most to you and you have a strong laptop, it is worth trying. If you want the smartest answers, cloud AI still wins today.

Frequently asked questions

What is the Underdog AI assistant?

Underdog is a free personal AI assistant from Conway Research that runs on your own Mac or Windows PC. Its AI models run on the device, so no AI company’s server reads your emails, calendar or meeting notes to answer you.

Is Underdog free to use?

Yes. Underdog is free at launch, with no subscription and no ads. Conway Research plans to earn a small cut of purchases the assistant makes for you through Stripe. The percentage has not been published.

Does Underdog work offline?

Yes. Because the models run on your computer, you can use them without an internet connection. Syncing email or calendar still needs a connection to those services.

How much RAM do I need to run Underdog?

By our estimate, the small Woof 4B model fits on a laptop with 8 GB of RAM, while the Underdog 27B model needs about 32 GB. Conway Research has not published official memory requirements.

Is Underdog completely private?

Not entirely. Underdog removes the AI company from the picture, but the services you connect, such as Gmail, shops or banks, still see what passes through them.

Which devices does Underdog support?

Mac and Windows PCs, during an invite-only beta. Linux, iPhone and Android versions are planned but have no release dates.

The post Your Secrets Stay Home: Underdog, the Assistant That Never Leaves Your Laptop appeared first on Bluetick Consultants Inc..

Always Listening, Always Helping? Meet Ambi, the AI That Works While You Talk

Bluetick Consultants Inc. — Fri, 16 Oct 2026 14:29:05 +0000

Published: 16 October 2026 | Updated: 16 October 2026

The problem

You walk out of a meeting with three action items in your head. By lunch you remember two. By evening you remember one, and you can’t recall who promised what.

Note-taking apps help, but only after the fact. You record, wait, and then read a summary. The useful moment was during the conversation: when someone mentioned a name you didn’t know, a number you couldn’t check, or a deadline that clashed with your calendar.

So the question is: what if an AI could listen along and help you in the moment, not an hour later?

What we’re solving

Ambi is an AI app from Mistlabs, a startup led by former Plaud executive Peter Mo. Plaud makes popular AI voice recorders. Ambi announced $26 million in funding on 12 October 2026, the same day it put out its apps. In other words, its idea is an AI that can listen in the background and start working while you are still talking. Ambi is not the only assistant trying to act for you; the Dazzle AI assistant works from your camera roll instead of your email.

What Ambi does

Takes meeting notes: Like other AI note-takers, it turns conversations into notes, tasks and follow-ups.
Helps during the meeting: It can research, fact-check and compare options while you keep talking, using your calendar, meetings, notes and the web.
Listens all day, if you let it: You can choose to keep it running so it picks up context through the day. This is off by default.
Follows you across devices: Start something on your phone and pick it up on your laptop.
Long-running Routines: It can keep working toward a goal over days, such as tracking prices or neighbourhoods before a move. Another assistant that works in the background for families is the Google CC AI agent.
Asks before big actions: Ambi waits for your approval before it takes any action you can’t undo. For a look at two assistants that run errands for you, see Meta Muse vs Instinct.

Where you can use it today

Reports differ, so here is what each source says. TechCrunch reported. However, Ambi releasing apps for iPhone, Mac and Apple Watch. Ambi’s own download page, when I checked on 12 October 2026, offered Mac (Apple silicon only) and Windows 11 downloads, with iPhone and Android listed as coming soon behind a waitlist. Ambi also plans a wearable device for early next year.

What Ambi does not solve

- It does not ask the people around you. Getting consent from everyone you record is your job, not Ambi’s. Its own terms say so.
- It does not stay private on your device. Instead, cloud services turn the audio into text.
- It has no track record yet. In fact, it launched the day we wrote this post.

A real example

Ambi is brand new, so there are no user stories yet. The clearest real example is the problem Ambi says it set out to fix, which comes from Peter Mo’s time at Plaud. With a recorder like Plaud’s, for example, the sound has to move to your phone, upload to the cloud and wait for processing before you get any help. Mo told TechCrunch the way we interact with this kind of intelligence is limited. Therefore, Ambi’s bet is to cut that delay to zero.

How Ambi compares with today’s note-takers

Option	How it listens	When the AI helps	Who handles consent	Status (12 Oct 2026)
Ambi	App on your computer (phone and watch apps announced)	During the conversation	You, per its terms	Just launched
Plaud	A small recorder you wear or clip on	After it uploads and processes	You	On sale
Otter.ai	App or meeting bot	Mostly after the meeting	You	On sale
Pen and paper	You	Never	Not needed	Always available

Who is behind it

Founder: Peter Mo, co-founder and CEO, previously an executive at Plaud.
Money: $26 million across several rounds, led by Luminous Ventures (a backer of Meituan and Unitree Robotics), with device maker Huaqin also investing.
Team: More than 50 people across San Francisco, Beijing, Shanghai and Shenzhen.

How it works (with code)

Think of a sharp assistant sitting quietly in the corner of the room. They only start taking notes when you nod at them. They write down what each person says, then throw away any recording. And while you talk, they slide you a note: “That supplier was in the news last week.”

The pieces

Hearing: When listening is on, When listening is on, Ambi streams sound to Soniox, a speech-recognition company, which turns it into text in real time.
Thinking: Next, the text goes to large AI models. Ambi’s privacy policy names OpenAI, Anthropic and Google (Gemini) as its AI providers.
Forgetting the audio: Ambi says it deletes audio after transcription. It also deletes listening audio you don’t save as a recording as soon as listening ends.
Keeping the text: However, Ambi keeps transcripts, summaries, memory and tasks while your account is active, unless you delete them. It encrypts stored data and holds it in the United States.
No voiceprints: The launch version does not store voiceprints, so speaker names in transcripts can be wrong.

Try the core idea yourself

This is not Ambi’s code. It is a tiny simulation of three rules a responsible listener should follow: start switched off, refuse to record until everyone needed has agreed, and keep the words but not the sound. It runs in plain Python with no installs.

# A toy "ambient listener": off by default, asks for consent,
# keeps the text and throws away the audio.
# A sample of US states where everyone must agree (not a full list)
ALL_PARTY_CONSENT = {"California", "Illinois", "Washington"}

class Listener:
    def __init__ (self):
        self.on = False # listening is off by default
        self.notes, self.audio = [], []

    def start(self, state, people, agreed):
        missing = [p for p in people if p not in agreed]
        if state in ALL_PARTY_CONSENT and missing:
            return "Not recording: need consent from " + ", ".join(missing)
        self.on = True
        return "Listening started"

    def hear(self, speaker, words):
        if not self.on:
            return
        self.audio.append(b"...") # raw sound arrives
        self.notes.append(f"{speaker}: {words}") # speech-to-text ran
        self.audio.clear() # delete audio after

ambi = Listener()
print(ambi.start("California", ["Priya", "Sam"], agreed=["Priya"]))
ambi.hear("Sam", "Budget is due Friday") # ignored: not listening
print(ambi.start("California", ["Priya", "Sam"], agreed=["Priya", "Sam"]))
ambi.hear("Sam", "Budget is due Friday")
print("Notes kept:", ambi.notes, "| Audio kept:", len(ambi.audio), "clips")

Output when I ran it:

Not recording: need consent from Sam
Listening started
Notes kept: ['Sam: Budget is due Friday'] | Audio kept: 0 clips

Listening starts switched off, like Ambi’s background mode.
In a place where everyone must agree to recording, it refuses to start until Sam says yes.
It simply ignores anything you say while it is off.
Once on, it keeps the sentence and deletes the sound clip straight away.
But Ambi itself does not run this consent check for you. Its terms make that your responsibility.

What it costs

We checked the prices below on 12 October 2026. Ambi’s free allowance is from its terms of service; it has not published paid prices. Otter’s prices are from its own pricing page. Plaud’s US prices come from a competitor’s March 2026 roundup, and its EU store lists the Pro plan at 19.99 euros a month. Amounts in US dollars unless stated.

Option	Upfront cost	Ongoing cost	Hidden costs	Best for
Stay as you are (notes by hand)	$0	$0	Missed details and follow-ups	Few meetings a week
Ambi free plan	$0	4,000 credits, one time, valid 7 days	Paid prices not published yet; fees generally non-refundable	Trying it this week
Ambi paid plan	$0	Not published	Credits reset every 7 days and don’t roll over	Heavy meeting days, once priced
Otter.ai Pro	$0	$16.99 a month, or $8.33 a month billed yearly	1,200 minutes a month cap	Recording calls on a budget
Plaud recorder + Pro plan	$159-189 device (reported)	$99.99 a year (reported)	Wait for upload before AI helps	In-person meetings and lectures

Free is not free. Ambi’s free plan is a one-week trial in disguise: 4,000 credits that expire after seven days. Also, Ambi has not spelled out what a credit buys.
Watch the refund rule. Ambi’s terms say fees are generally non-refundable.
Budget for legal risk. If you record people without the consent your local law needs, the cost lands on you, not the app.
Solo user: Try the free week on your computer before paying for anything.
Team or business: Check your recording rules and get legal advice before turning on all-day listening at work. If you are deciding where tools like this fit in your company, our AI consulting team can help.

Pros and cons

Pros

Help in the moment. It answers and fact-checks while the conversation is still happening, not an hour later.
Off by default. All-day listening only starts if you turn it on, and you can turn it off at any time.
Ambi discards audio. Ambi says it deletes audio once it becomes text.
No training on your words. Ambi says it does not use what you say to train its models, does not sell data, and does not rely on ads.
Clear about its suppliers. Its privacy policy names the companies that handle your audio and text.

Cons

Bystanders are the open question. Ambi’s policy says audio may include other people’s voices nearby. TechCrunch notes it is unclear whether people around you get enough warning, and Mo called disclosure an unsolved problem for the whole industry.
Lawsuits are already happening. Granola, another AI note-taker, faces a lawsuit in California for allegedly recording a meeting participant without notice or consent. The claims are unproven, but California requires everyone on a call to agree to recording.
Your words travel. Because sound goes to Soniox and text goes to OpenAI, Anthropic or Google, several companies handle your words, not just one.
Ambi keeps your text for a long time. Transcripts and memory stay while your account is active unless you delete them.
Some access from China. The privacy policy says staff in China have restricted access to account identifiers and usage information. It does not say content is stored there.
Unknown price. Ambi has not published its paid plans, so you can’t compare value yet.
Confusing availability. News reports and Ambi’s own download page disagree on which devices are live today.

Frequently asked questions about the Ambi AI app

What is the Ambi AI app?

The Ambi AI app is an assistant from Mistlabs that listens to your meetings, turns them into notes and tasks, and can research or fact-check while you are still talking. Mistlabs is led by Peter Mo, a former Plaud executive.

Is the Ambi AI app free?

There is a free plan with 4,000 credits, given once and valid for 7 days. No payment method is needed. Paid plans called Plus, Pro and Max exist, but Ambi’s pricing page did not show dollar prices on 16 October 2026.

Is Ambi always listening?

No. Listening is off by default and you choose when to turn it on.

Does Ambi keep my audio?

Ambi says audio is deleted after it is transcribed. Transcripts, summaries, memory and tasks are kept while your account is active, unless you delete them.

Do I need permission to record people with Ambi?

In many places, yes. Ambi’s terms put the job of getting consent on you. Some US states, including California, require everyone in a conversation to agree to recording. Check your local rules or ask a lawyer before turning on all-day listening at work.

Which devices does the Ambi AI app work on?

On 16 October 2026, Ambi’s download page offered Mac (Apple silicon only), Windows 11 and an iPhone app on the App Store, with Android marked coming soon.

Key takeaways

Ambi is a new AI app that listens to your meetings, and all day if you allow it, so it can help while you are still talking.
It launched on 12 October 2026 with $26 million in funding, led by a former Plaud executive.
It says it deletes audio after transcription and does not train on your words, but your text passes through several AI companies.
The free plan is 4,000 credits for seven days, and Ambi has not published paid prices yet.
Finally, the biggest risk is other people: you must get consent from anyone you record, and lawsuits against note-takers show the stakes.

The post Always Listening, Always Helping? Meet Ambi, the AI That Works While You Talk appeared first on Bluetick Consultants Inc..

A Senior PR Pro in a Box? Meet Honeyjar, the AI That Knows When Not to Pitch

Bluetick Consultants Inc. — Thu, 15 Oct 2026 12:54:37 +0000

Published: 15 October 2026 | Updated: 15 October 2026

Quick answer: Honeyjar AI is a PR and communications platform that finds the right reporters, drafts pitches and announcements, spots opportunities and tracks coverage. A human always reviews and sends. The only reported price is $250 per seat a month for early adopters (December 2025), and access is early access only.

The problem

Your startup just raised money, shipped a big feature, or hired a famous executive. You want the world to know. So you write a press release, find a list of reporters online, and email all of them. Nobody replies.

That silence is normal. Reporters get far more emails than they can read, and most of them are about topics they never cover. A survey of journalists this year found 88% immediately ignore pitches that miss their area.

Big companies solve this by hiring experienced communications people or a PR agency. Small companies usually can’t afford either. So the founder, a marketer or whoever is free ends up doing PR with no training, and it shows.

So the question is: can AI give a small team the judgment of a senior PR professional, without the agency bill?

What we’re solving

Honeyjar is an AI platform for public relations (PR) and communications, the work of getting your story into the news and managing how people see your company. TechCrunch covered it on 12 October 2026, and it is in TechCrunch Disrupt’s Startup Battlefield 200 this week. Its founders call it “a PR firm in a box”.

What Honeyjar does

Finds the right reporters: Builds media lists and tracks which journalists cover what.
Writes the first draft: Drafts announcements, pitch emails and social posts in your company’s voice.
Spots openings: Scans news and social media for pitch opportunities, speaking slots, events and awards.
Measures results: Tracks coverage and builds coverage reports.
Plans launches: Organises campaigns and launches in one shared workspace.
Says “not yet”: The founders say it may tell a founder they aren’t ready for media coverage.

Who it is for

Founders with no PR experience.
In-house comms teams and PR agencies that want to do more with the same people.
What CEO Michelle Masek calls “unassigned communicators”: marketers, investors, authors, creators and others who do comms work without the job title.

What Honeyjar does not solve

It does not send anything for you. A human always has to send or publish. Honeyjar says it never sends emails, pitches or posts without your approval.
It can’t guarantee coverage. A well-aimed pitch still needs real news.
It doesn’t replace relationships. Reporters still trust people they know.
It isn’t open to everyone yet. The website offers early access, not open sign-up.

A real example

Honeyjar has not published case studies with numbers yet, so here is what is on the record. Treat the quotes as company-supplied.

Early demand

About 10,000 people joined the waitlist in its first 24 hours, according to TechCrunch.
Beta testers include Nextdoor, Coco Robotics, Bloomberg Beta, Mission North and Full Picture.

What beta users say

Bloomberg Beta (a venture fund): Operating partner Angela Martin says Honeyjar felt like adding “a senior comms pro and the capacity of a full team overnight”.
Mission North (a PR agency): Chief client officer Shannon Hutto says it brings the agency’s insights and workflows into “one collaborative workspace”.
Martell Communications: Partner Colleen Martell says it is “really helpful for matching the right media contacts for each campaign”.

Who is behind it

Michelle Masek, CEO: Decades in PR. Most recently senior VP of marketing and communications at Obvious Ventures, Ev Williams’ venture firm, where she supported about 110 portfolio companies.
Nadia Jamshidi, Chief Communications Officer: Also decades of agency and in-house PR experience.
Funding: A $2 million pre-seed round in December 2025. Axios reported it was led by Heather Hartnett of Human Ventures and Kevin Mahaffey of SNR Ventures, with angels including former a16z partner Margit Wennmachers and former TechCrunch editor Josh Constine.

How it works (with code)

Think of a good PR agency as a well-connected friend. They know which reporter covers what, what counts as news, and when to tell you, kindly, that your story isn’t ready. Honeyjar tries to bottle that friend.

The pieces

News and media data: Axios reported it uses LexisNexis news data plus feeds from social media, Substacks and podcasts.
AI models: The same report says it uses models from OpenAI, Anthropic and xAI’s Grok to write and analyse.
Encoded judgment: The founders say they built their own PR judgment into the product. Through an effort called the Comms Lab, they are training it on other PR professionals’ judgment too.
A human at the end: “We never want a world where the human is removed from the loop,” Masek told TechCrunch. You review and send.
Your data: Honeyjar says your data is not used to train AI models, its own or anyone else’s, and is encrypted and hosted in the US. Its SOC 2 Type II security certification is still in progress.

Try the core idea yourself

This is not Honeyjar’s code. It is a tiny simulation of two judgment calls a good PR person makes: is this story ready, and which reporters actually cover it? It runs in plain Python with no installs.

# A toy "PR judgment" check: who should get this pitch, and is it ready?
reporters = {
    "Dana (robotics)": {"robotics", "delivery", "hardware"},
    "Lee (fintech)": {"payments", "banking", "crypto"},
    "Ana (startups)": {"funding", "startups", "robotics"},
    "Raj (consumer apps)": {"apps", "social", "gaming"},
}

def pick_reporters(story_topics, min_overlap=1):
    matches = []
    for name, beat in reporters.items():
        overlap = story_topics & beat # topics they actually cover
        if len(overlap) >= min_overlap:
            matches.append((name, sorted(overlap)))
    return matches

def ready_for_press(story):
    # Judgment rule: no news hook and no data means "not yet"
    return story["news_hook"] or story["has_data"]

story = {"topics": {"robotics", "delivery", "funding"},
         "news_hook": True, "has_data": False}

if not ready_for_press(story):
    print("Advice: you're not ready for press yet. Find a hook or data.")
else:
    for name, why in pick_reporters(story["topics"]):
        print(f"Draft pitch for {name}: matches {', '.join(why)}")
    skipped = len(reporters) - len(pick_reporters(story["topics"]))
    print(f"Skipped {skipped} off-beat reporters. Nothing sent yet.")

Output when I ran it:

Draft pitch for Dana (robotics): matches delivery, robotics
Draft pitch for Ana (startups): matches funding, robotics
Skipped 2 off-beat reporters. Nothing sent yet.

First it checks if the story is ready. With no news hook and no data, it advises you to wait instead of pitching.
Then it compares the story’s topics with each reporter’s beat, the subjects they cover.
Only reporters whose beat overlaps get a draft. The fintech and consumer-apps reporters are skipped.
Nothing is sent. A human reviews and decides, which is the same rule Honeyjar follows.
Real PR judgment is far richer: timing, relationships, what a reporter wrote last week. That is the hard part Honeyjar is betting on.

What it costs

Prices below were checked on 13 October 2026. Honeyjar does not show prices on its website. Its only reported price is the early-adopter rate Axios gave in December 2025, so it may have changed. Semrush prices come from its own help pages. Cision’s starting point and the agency retainer come from third-party sources that sell PR services, so treat them as rough guides.

Option	Upfront cost	Ongoing cost	Hidden costs	Best for
Do it yourself	$0	$0	Your time; pitches that get ignored	One announcement a year
Honeyjar	$0, early access	$250 per seat a month (early-adopter price, Dec 2025)	Current price unpublished; still need a human to review and send	Small teams and solo comms leads
Semrush AI PR Toolkit	$0; 7-day trial	$149, $279 or $499 a month	Contact limits by plan	Teams that want a reporter database and outreach
Enterprise media database (Cision, Meltwater, Muck Rack)	Sales call	Price on request; Cision from about $800 a month (reported)	Annual contracts	Large comms teams
PR agency	Setup and onboarding	About GBP 2,000-3,000 a month for a basic UK retainer (reported)	Contracts; early startups may pay more	Companies that want it done for them

The real comparison is people. Honeyjar’s reported early price is a fraction of even a basic agency retainer. The question is whether its judgment is good enough to replace some of that human work.
Free is not free. Doing it yourself costs hours, and badly aimed pitches can hurt your name with reporters.
Watch the price. Early-adopter rates often rise. Ask for the current price before you plan around $250.
Solo founder: Try it for one launch before committing.
Agency or in-house team: Compare it with the media database you already pay for. It may replace part of it, or sit on top of it.

Pros and cons

Pros

Built by PR veterans. The founders encoded their own decades of judgment, not just a writing tool.
Aims at relevance. Matching pitches to the right beat attacks the top reason journalists ignore pitches.
Human always in control. It never sends without your approval.
One workspace. Media lists, drafts, opportunities and coverage reports in one place instead of five tools.
Privacy promises. Says your data is not used to train AI models, its own or third parties’.

Cons

Reporters are tired of AI pitches. TechCrunch’s own reporter worried Honeyjar could add to the flood of “PR slop”. Data from the journalist request service Featured, which runs HARO, found about 21% of 1.39 million pitches were flagged as fully AI-written, and 35% of the journalists studied switched on an option to stop receiving them. AI-written pitches were picked roughly 1 in 10 times, against about 1 in 3 for human-written ones.
Judgment is hard to prove. No published results yet show more coverage for Honeyjar users.
Price uncertainty. No public pricing, and the only reported price is an early-adopter rate.
Early-stage security. SOC 2 Type II certification is still in progress, which some larger companies require.
Small company. $2 million in pre-seed funding is modest next to established media-database companies.
Not open to all. Early access only, for now.

Key takeaways

Honeyjar is an AI platform that helps any company do PR: finding the right reporters, drafting pitches, spotting opportunities and tracking coverage.
Its pitch is judgment, built by two PR veterans, including telling you when your story isn’t ready.
A human always reviews and sends. Honeyjar never pitches on its own.
Its only reported price is $250 per seat a month for early adopters, far below a typical agency retainer, but current pricing isn’t public.
The big risk is reporter fatigue: journalists pick AI-written pitches far less often than human ones, so the tool only helps if it makes pitches better, not just faster.

More on AI helpers and where they draw the line: our Dazzle AI assistant, Meta Muse vs Instinct and Google CC breakdowns.

Frequently asked questions

What is Honeyjar AI?

Honeyjar AI is an AI platform for public relations and communications. It builds media lists, drafts announcements, pitch emails and social posts, scans news for opportunities and tracks coverage.

Does Honeyjar send pitches for me?

No. A human always has to send or publish. CEO Michelle Masek told TechCrunch the company never wants the human removed from the loop.

How much does Honeyjar cost?

Honeyjar does not publish pricing. The only reported figure is $250 per seat a month for early adopters, from Axios in December 2025. It may have changed, so ask for the current price.

Who is Honeyjar for?

Founders with no PR experience, in-house comms teams, PR agencies, solo heads of comms and what Masek calls “unassigned communicators”, such as marketers, investors and creators who do comms work without the title.

Can Honeyjar guarantee press coverage?

No. It can help aim a pitch at the right reporters, but a pitch still needs real news to earn coverage.

Is Honeyjar open to everyone?

Not yet. The website offers early access rather than open sign-up.

The post A Senior PR Pro in a Box? Meet Honeyjar, the AI That Knows When Not to Pitch appeared first on Bluetick Consultants Inc..

TikTok’s new AI shopping helper and one-click checkout, explained

Bluetick Consultants Inc. — Fri, 09 Oct 2026 10:30:27 +0000

Published: 9 October 2026 | Updated: 9 October 2026

Short answer: The TikTok AI shopping assistant is a chat window on a brand’s product page that answers questions about sizing, delivery and stock. Buy Direct is a one-click checkout in the For You feed. TikTok announced both on 5 October 2026.

Bottom line: Both are in limited testing with selected brands, and TikTok has not published a fee. Shops should get the fee in writing before building anything.

The problem

You are watching a video. Someone is wearing a pair of hiking boots you like, so you tap the ad. Then the chore begins. A new website loads slowly. You hunt for the size chart. You cannot tell whether they deliver to you or how long it takes. You are asked to create an account, then to type in your address and your card number on a small screen.

Most people give up somewhere in that list. You do not get the boots, and the shop loses a sale it had almost made. TikTok says the same thing in its own words: interest that starts with a video can fade once shoppers have to leave to hunt for details, and too many steps at the till make people abandon the purchase altogether.

What we’re solving

On Monday 5 October 2026, at Advertising Week in New York, TikTok announced two features aimed at those two drop-off points: unanswered questions and a slow till.

Shopping Assistant is a chat window that sits on a brand’s product page inside TikTok. You ask it things like “do these run small?” or “when would they arrive?” and it answers in plain sentences. TikTok calls it a conversational AI agent, which simply means software you can talk to that keeps track of what you have already said.
Buy Direct is a one-click purchase from the For You feed, the main stream of videos TikTok picks for you. It uses the payment card and address you have already saved, and you can track the order inside the app.
The brand stays the seller. TikTok says brands remain the “merchant of record”, meaning the business that is legally responsible for the sale, the refund and the tax. That is the main difference from TikTok Shop, where TikTok runs the marketplace.
Partners named: Salesforce, Shopify, Shoplazza and Stripe, which supply the shop and payment systems behind it.

What it does not solve

It is not available to everyone. Many headlines say TikTok “rolls out” these tools. TikTok’s own business blog says they are offered through “eligibility-based testing”, and brands must ask their TikTok sales contact whether they qualify. No list of countries or dates has been published.
The assistant is not an independent adviser. Its answers are built from information the brand supplies. Treat it like a well-informed shop assistant, not like a neutral reviewer.
The two features are separate. In the assistant flow TikTok describes, you still pay on the brand’s own website, opened inside TikTok. The one-click part is Buy Direct only.
It does not help you decide whether you need the thing. It removes steps. It does not add second thoughts.

A real example

Honest caveat first: TikTok has published no results from its tests, and no brand has yet reported numbers. So the best real evidence is what TikTok already sells, and what happened to the closest earlier attempt.

TikTok’s own illustration: you see an ad for hiking boots and wonder whether the material will hold up on granite trails, whether they fit true to size, and what colours exist. The assistant answers on the spot, and you carry on to pay.
TikTok already sells a lot. TikTok Shop opened in the US in September 2023. Research firm eMarketer estimates it made about $15.8 billion in US sales in 2025, roughly 18% of all US shopping done through social apps.
People do buy after watching. A report TikTok published the week before says 54 million Americans have bought a product after seeing it in a TikTok video.
The cautionary tale is ChatGPT. OpenAI launched Instant Checkout inside ChatGPT in September 2025, with Shopify, Etsy and Stripe on board. By March 2026 it was scaling the feature back. Reports put the number of Shopify shops that ever went live at somewhere between a dozen and about 30. People were happy to research products in the chat. They did not finish paying there.

Side by side, from published reports as of 6 October 2026:

	ChatGPT Instant Checkout	TikTok Buy Direct
Where you buy	Inside a chat conversation	Inside the video feed
Launched	September 2025	Announced 5 October 2026
Status today	Scaled back in March 2026	Limited testing with eligible brands
Fee to the shop	4% of the sale, as reported in January 2026	Not published
Who is the seller	The shop	The shop
Results so far	Weak uptake by shops and buyers	None published

Why TikTok might do better: people open ChatGPT to ask questions, but they already buy on TikTok. Why it might not: nobody outside TikTok has seen the numbers yet.

How it works (with code)

Buy Direct needs the brand’s shop to speak a shared language with TikTok. That language is the Universal Commerce Protocol, or UCP. It is an open standard that Google introduced in January 2026. Think of it as a universal plug socket: any app that follows the standard can plug into any shop that follows it, without a custom adapter for each pair.

Step 1: the app tells the shop which item you want. The shop opens an order and replies “incomplete”, because it does not yet know where to send it.
Step 2: the app sends your saved address. The shop works out delivery and tax and replies with a final total.
Step 3: the app sends a payment token, a one-time stand-in for your card so the real number is never passed around. The shop charges it and replies “completed” with an order number.
Why it feels like one click: TikTok already holds your address and card, so it can send all three messages back to back.

The short Python program below acts out the shop’s side of those three steps. It is a simulation based on Google’s published UCP checkout guide, not TikTok’s own code, which is not public. Sign-in, card handling and network calls are left out.

# A pretend brand's checkout, following the UCP steps a one-click buy goes through.
PRICES = {"trail_boot": 12900} # cents, from the brand's own product list
TAX_RATE = 0.08 # made-up rate, for the demo only

def create(item_id, qty): # POST /checkout-sessions
    line = {"item": {"id": item_id}, "quantity": qty}
    return {"id": "sess_1", "status": "incomplete", "line_items": [line],
            "subtotal": PRICES[item_id] * qty}

def update(s, postal_code, shipping=600): # PUT /checkout-sessions/{id}
    tax = round(s["subtotal"] * TAX_RATE)
    s.update(ship_to=postal_code, shipping=shipping, tax=tax,
             total=s["subtotal"] + shipping + tax, status="ready_for_complete")
    return s

def complete(s, payment_token): # POST /checkout-sessions/{id}/complete
    if s["status"] != "ready_for_complete":
        raise ValueError("address and payment must be set first")
    s.update(status="completed", order_id="ORD-1001")
    return s

# One click: the app already holds the saved address and card, so it sends all three.
s = create("trail_boot", 1)
print("1.", s["status"], "| subtotal $%.2f" % (s["subtotal"] / 100))
s = update(s, "94043")
print("2.", s["status"], "| total $%.2f" % (s["total"] / 100))
s = complete(s, "tok_saved_card")
print("3.", s["status"], "| order", s["order_id"])

Output when run:

1. incomplete | subtotal $129.00
2. ready_for_complete | total $145.32
3. completed | order ORD-1001

The three functions match the three messages above: open the order, add the address, take the payment.
Prices are held in cents (12900 means $129.00), which is how the real standard does it, to avoid rounding slips.
The total of $145.32 is $129.00 for the boots, $6.00 delivery and $10.32 tax. The 8% tax rate and the $6.00 delivery are made up for the demo.
The shop refuses to finish the order unless the address and payment step has happened first. That check is the shop’s protection against a half-filled order.
Notice who does the sums: the shop, not TikTok. That is what “the brand stays the seller” means in practice.

What it costs

For shoppers, both features are free to use. The cost is indirect: the easier it is to pay, the easier it is to overspend.

For shops, the honest answer is that TikTok has not published a fee for Buy Direct or Shopping Assistant. The table below shows what is known for each realistic route, including doing nothing. All figures are in US dollars, for US sellers, checked on 6 October 2026.

Option	Platform fee	Card processing	Hidden costs	Best for
Do nothing: send shoppers to your own site	$0	2.9% + $0.30 per sale (Stripe standard rate)	Shoppers who give up on the way	Shops with a fast site and loyal buyers
Sell through TikTok Shop	6% on most categories in TikTok’s public fee table. Seller guides report 8% since 4 August 2026	Included in the fee	Creator commissions you set, refund charges, less control	Shops that want TikTok to run the store
Buy Direct	Not published	Your own processor’s rate, since you remain the seller	Building the UCP connection, ad spend, getting accepted into testing	Brands already on Shopify, Salesforce or similar, selling impulse-priced items
Shopping Assistant	Not published	Your own, since payment happens on your site	Keeping product details accurate and current, ad spend	Products that attract lots of questions
For reference: ChatGPT Instant Checkout (scaled back March 2026)	4%, as reported	About 2.9% + $0.30 on top	Very few buyers finished paying	Reference only

What that means on a $50 order

Your own site: about $1.75 in card fees.
TikTok Shop: $3.00 at 6%, or $4.00 if the reported 8% rate applies to you. Add whatever commission you offer creators.
ChatGPT Instant Checkout, when it ran: about $3.75.
Buy Direct: unknown. Expect at least the $1.75 in card fees, because you are still the seller. Whether TikTok adds its own cut on top is the question to ask your sales contact.

Costs that are not on the invoice

Setup time. If your shop runs on one of the named partner platforms, much of the connection may be handled for you. If it is custom-built, a developer has to build it.
Data upkeep. The assistant repeats what you tell it. A stale delivery time or a wrong size chart becomes a wrong promise to a customer.
Disputes. You remain the seller, so chargebacks land on you. Stripe’s standard charge is $15.00 per dispute received.
Dependence. Sales that happen inside TikTok depend on TikTok’s rules and fees, which it can change.

Which option suits whom

Solo seller: stay as you are or use TikTok Shop. You are unlikely to be in the test group yet.
Small team: ask your TikTok contact about eligibility, but do not build anything until the fee is in writing.
Large brand: worth a test, with a clear measure of extra sales against extra cost.

Pros and cons

Pros

Fewer steps for shoppers. No new website, no re-typing a card number.
Questions get answered at the moment you have them, about the thing you are looking at.
Brands keep the sale and the legal relationship, unlike a marketplace listing.
It is built on an open standard backed by large shops and payment firms, so the work a brand does for TikTok may be reusable elsewhere.
TikTok starts from real buying habits, which ChatGPT did not have.

Cons

It makes impulse buying easier. An April 2026 opinion piece in the Michigan Journal of Economics argued that TikTok’s mix of persuasive videos and instant purchase already pushes people to buy without comparing or thinking it over. One-click checkout removes one more pause.
The adviser works for the seller. The assistant’s answers come from the brand’s own information, and TikTok has not said what model powers it or how it handles a question the brand would prefer not to answer.
The price is unknown. No fee has been published, and it is not clear who carries the risk when a payment is disputed.
The last big attempt flopped. ChatGPT’s in-chat checkout was scaled back within about six months.
Most brands cannot use it yet. It is a limited test, with no public timetable.
It suits cheap, quick purchases best. Someone buying a $2,000 item compares, reads reviews and often phones first. One click is not what holds them back.
Open questions for brands. TikTok has not said how much customer information, such as an email address, the brand receives after a Buy Direct sale.

Key takeaways

TikTok announced two things on 5 October 2026: a chat helper that answers product questions, and a one-click checkout in the video feed.
Both are in limited testing with selected brands. This is not yet something every user or every shop will see.
The brand stays the legal seller, which sets this apart from TikTok Shop.
The assistant is fed by the brand. It is a salesperson, not a reviewer.
TikTok has not published what it charges. Shops should get that in writing before building anything.
A similar idea inside ChatGPT was scaled back after about six months. TikTok’s advantage is that people already shop there, but there are no results yet to prove it.

Frequently asked questions

What is the TikTok AI shopping assistant?

Shopping Assistant is a chat window on a brand’s product page inside TikTok. It answers questions about sizing, delivery and stock using information the brand supplies.

What is TikTok Buy Direct?

Buy Direct is a one-click purchase from the For You feed. It uses the payment card and address you have already saved, and you can track the order inside the app.

Is TikTok Buy Direct the same as TikTok Shop?

No. In TikTok Shop, TikTok runs the marketplace. With Buy Direct, the brand stays the merchant of record, so it remains legally responsible for the sale, the refund and the tax.

Who can use the TikTok AI shopping assistant and Buy Direct?

Both are offered through eligibility-based testing. Brands must ask their TikTok sales contact whether they qualify. No list of countries or dates has been published.

How much does TikTok Buy Direct cost shops?

TikTok has not published a fee. Because the brand stays the seller, shops should expect at least their own card processing cost, which is 2.9% + $0.30 per sale on Stripe’s standard rate.

What is the Universal Commerce Protocol?

The Universal Commerce Protocol, or UCP, is an open standard that Google introduced in January 2026. It lets any app that follows it complete a checkout with any shop that follows it. Buy Direct needs it.

The post TikTok’s new AI shopping helper and one-click checkout, explained appeared first on Bluetick Consultants Inc..

Dazzle: the AI assistant that reads your photos instead of your inbox

Bluetick Consultants Inc. — Thu, 08 Oct 2026 08:44:44 +0000

Published: 8 October 2026 | Updated: 8 October 2026

Short answer: The Dazzle AI assistant is a personal AI assistant from Marissa Mayer’s startup, Dazzle AI, launched on 29 September 2026. It learns about you from your camera roll instead of your email. It turns recent photos into tasks and older photos into ideas.

Bottom line: The Dazzle AI assistant is free for now, invite-only and iPhone only. The real cost is your photos, which are stored on Dazzle’s servers. Start with selected photos, not full access.

The problem

You open an AI chat app and it greets you with an empty box. It knows nothing about you. So before it can help, you have to explain yourself: who your family is, what you like, what your budget is, what you did last time. Every single time.

Some newer assistants try to fix this by reading your email and calendar. That helps with work. It does not help much with real life, because your inbox does not know your daughter loves skating or that your garage door is broken.

Meanwhile, the answers are already sitting on your phone. You photographed the broken door. You took a screenshot of the jacket you wanted. You have six years of holiday pictures. None of it is doing anything.

What we’re solving

Dazzle is a personal AI assistant launched on 29 September 2026 by Dazzle AI, the startup founded by former Yahoo chief executive Marissa Mayer. Its pitch is three words: pictures, not prompts.

What it removes: the blank box. Dazzle builds its picture of you from your camera roll, so you do not have to type out your life story first.
Get It Done: it looks at recent photos and screenshots and asks why you took them. A flyer becomes a calendar entry. A flat tyre becomes a repair booking. A jacket becomes a place to buy it.
Ideas: it uses your older photos to suggest restaurants, concerts, trips and gifts that fit your taste.
Chat: a normal AI chat, but one that already knows your context. Dazzle says it runs on “frontier models”, meaning the most capable AI models from the big labs. It does not say which ones.
Where it lives: an iPhone app, iMessage and text, and the web at dazzle.ai.

What it does not solve:

It is not open to everyone. As of 5 October 2026 the site says “currently invite-only”.
There is no Android app listed. The only app link is the Apple App Store.
It does not read your email, messages or bank. That is deliberate, but it also means it misses whatever you never photographed.
It does not act alone on money. Dazzle says purchases and bookings need your explicit approval.
It is not fully automatic yet. The company says human support staff step in on complicated tasks “for now”.

A real example

Dazzle is one week old, so there are no long-term customer stories yet. The best evidence so far is a hands-on test by TechCrunch reporter Marina Temkin, published on launch day, plus what Mayer says about her own use.

Mayer’s own use: she says Dazzle worked out from her photos that her family loves escape rooms. It then suggested several San Francisco Bay Area venues she had never heard of.
What worked for the reporter: asked for holiday ideas, Dazzle suggested Mediterranean spots, likely because of her past trips to Spain and Greece. It also suggested a local pottery studio and a night kayak tour, which she liked.
What did not: it recommended Sicily, where she had already been four years earlier. And when she asked whether to buy her daughter roller skates, it did not know the girl could already skate.
Her verdict: the ideas felt more personal than what an email-and-calendar assistant gives. But she was undecided on whether she would keep using it, and wrote that Dazzle “isn’t as broadly useful as other offerings quite yet”.

That is one reviewer and one founder. Treat it as an early signal, not proof.

How it works (with code)

Dazzle has not published its internal code. What it has published is the outline: photos are uploaded to its servers, sensitive ones are thrown away, the rest are analysed to build a profile, and recent ones are checked for tasks. The short Python example below is our own simplified sketch of that idea, not Dazzle’s code. It uses plain text labels in place of real image analysis so anyone can run it.

from collections import Counter

# Each photo is described by labels an image model might produce.
photos = [
    {"id": 1, "labels": ["ski", "mountain", "family"]},
    {"id": 2, "labels": ["passport", "document"]},
    {"id": 3, "labels": ["escape room", "family"]},
    {"id": 4, "labels": ["flat tire", "car"]},
    {"id": 5, "labels": ["ski", "snow"]},
    {"id": 6, "labels": ["event flyer", "date"]},
]
SENSITIVE = {"passport", "document", "bank statement", "prescription"}
ACTIONS = {
    "flat tire": "Find a tyre repair shop",
    "event flyer": "Add the event to your calendar",
}

# Step 1: drop anything that looks sensitive before learning from it.
kept = [p for p in photos if not SENSITIVE & set(p["labels"])]

# Step 2: count what shows up most. That becomes the profile.
profile = Counter(label for p in kept for label in p["labels"])

# Step 3: treat each remaining photo as a possible to-do.
todos = [ACTIONS[l] for p in kept for l in p["labels"] if l in ACTIONS]

print("Photos kept:", len(kept), "of", len(photos))
print("Top interests:", [label for label, n in profile.most_common(2)])
print("Get It Done:", todos)

Output when we ran it:

Photos kept: 5 of 6
Top interests: ['ski', 'family']
Get It Done: ['Find a tyre repair shop', 'Add the event to your calendar']

What that code is doing, in plain words:

Each photo is reduced to a few labels, such as “ski” or “flat tire”. In the real product an AI model that can read images does this part.
Step 1 throws out the passport photo before anything is learned from it. This mirrors Dazzle’s stated rule: “When in doubt, we leave it out.”
Step 2 counts what appears most often. Two ski photos and two family photos become “this person likes skiing and family time”.
Step 3 treats each remaining photo as a possible job. The flat tyre and the flyer each turn into a suggested action.
The real system is far more complex. Dazzle lists seven patent applications, covering things like building a map of places and a map of relationships from photos.

If you already use another AI agent

Dazzle offers a connector so other agents can use what it has learned from your photos. It names Claude, Codex, OpenClaw and Hermes.
The connector uses MCP (Model Context Protocol), a common standard that lets AI tools plug into outside data sources.
For OpenClaw the published install command is one line. We could not run it here, because it needs the OpenClaw tool and a Dazzle account:

clawhub install dazzle-photo-intelligence

What it costs

Prices are in US dollars and were checked on 5 October 2026. Dazzle has no pricing page. The “free for now” figure comes from Mayer’s launch-day interview with CNBC, where she said transaction fees or a subscription may come later. Meta Muse prices were confirmed by Meta to CNBC. Instinct publishes no prices.

Option	Upfront cost	Ongoing cost	Hidden costs	Best for
Do nothing: keep typing prompts	$0	$0 on free chat apps	Your time. You re-explain yourself in every chat	Anyone not ready to share personal data
Dazzle	$0	Free for now. Fees or a subscription may come later	Your photos are stored on Dazzle’s servers. Invite wait. iPhone only	iPhone users who want ideas and errands from photos
Meta Muse	$0, but a payment card is asked for at sign-up	Free tier, then $20 or $100 a month by usage	Connects to email, calendar and payments. US only at launch	People who want an agent across email and bills
Instinct	$0	Free during invite-only beta. No published price	Very broad account access. Documented security incidents in beta	Early adopters comfortable with risk

How to read this table:

Free is not the same as free forever. Dazzle raised $8 million in seed funding at a $35 million valuation. Storing and analysing whole photo libraries costs real money, so a price is likely.
The real payment today is data. Dazzle’s own developer page says it “processes and stores your photos on our servers”.
Solo user: try Dazzle with a hand-picked set of photos, not the full library. It costs nothing and limits what you share.
Family: remember your photos contain other people. They did not agree to be analysed.
Business or team: nothing here is built for work. Dazzle is aimed at personal life.
Readers outside the US: the text line is a US-style short number (742213) and Meta Muse is US only. We could not confirm whether Dazzle invites are being issued in India or elsewhere.

Pros and cons

Pros

No cold start. It has context from the first minute, without a long setup chat.
Covers home life. Photos capture hobbies, kids, trips and repairs, which email mostly misses.
Narrower access than rivals. It does not ask for your passwords, inbox or messages. Dazzle says its agent uses its own accounts and acts “on your behalf, not as you”.
You choose the scope. Full library, selected photos, or no photo access at all.
Clear promises on data use. Dazzle says personal data is not used to train public AI models, not used for third-party advertising, and not sold.
Easy exit. Deleting your account deletes the synced photos from its servers, according to the company.

Cons

Your photos leave your phone. They are stored on company servers, which makes the company a target for hackers.
A camera roll is not harmless. Privacy site All About Cookies points out that screenshots often hold bank balances, one-time passwords, ID documents, medical reports and private chats.
“Sensitive” is loosely defined. Dazzle gives nudity and ID documents as examples. It does not say what happens when the filter misses something.
It gets things wrong. The TechCrunch test showed a repeat destination and a missed fact about the reviewer’s own child.
It is less capable than rivals today. That is the reviewer’s judgement, not ours.
Limited reach. Invite-only, and iPhone only for the app.
Unknown future price. You may build a habit around something that later charges.
Track record. Mayer’s previous startup, Sunshine, launched a photo-sharing app called Shine in 2024. It was criticised for dated design, did not catch on, and shut down.
Other people’s privacy. Friends, family and strangers in your photos get analysed too.

Key takeaways

Dazzle launched on 29 September 2026. It is an AI assistant that learns about you from your camera roll, not your inbox.
It does two main things: turns recent photos into tasks, and turns old photos into personal suggestions.
It is free for now, invite-only, and iPhone only. A fee or subscription may come later.
The real cost is your photos, which are stored on Dazzle’s servers. Start with selected photos, not full access.
Early testing shows personal, useful ideas alongside clear mistakes. It is promising, not proven.
If you already use an AI agent, Dazzle can plug into it, so you do not have to switch.

Frequently asked questions

What is the Dazzle AI assistant?

The Dazzle AI assistant is a personal AI assistant from Dazzle AI, the startup founded by former Yahoo chief executive Marissa Mayer. It launched on 29 September 2026 and learns about you from your camera roll instead of your email.

Is the Dazzle AI assistant free?

Yes, for now. Dazzle has no pricing page, and Marissa Mayer has said transaction fees or a subscription may come later.

Is Dazzle available on Android?

No Android app is listed. Dazzle works through an iPhone app, iMessage and text, and the web at dazzle.ai. It is currently invite-only.

Is it safe to give Dazzle access to your photos?

It carries real risk. Your photos are stored on Dazzle’s servers, and camera rolls often hold screenshots of bank balances, ID documents and private chats. Share selected photos rather than your full library.

Does Dazzle work with Claude and other AI agents?

Yes. Dazzle offers an MCP connector so agents such as Claude, Codex, OpenClaw and Hermes can use what it has learned from your photos.

The post Dazzle: the AI assistant that reads your photos instead of your inbox appeared first on Bluetick Consultants Inc..

Meta Muse vs Instinct: Two AI Helpers That Run Your Errands, and Why Muse Is the Safer Bet

Bluetick Consultants Inc. — Thu, 01 Oct 2026 11:56:56 +0000

The problem

You have a list of small jobs that never ends. Cancel that gym membership. Book a table for Friday. Find a cheaper phone plan. Reply to the email from the landlord. None of them is hard. Together they eat your evenings.

Chat apps like ChatGPT can tell you how to do these things. They cannot do them for you. You still open the website, type the password, click through the forms, and wait on hold.

This year, a new kind of app arrived that promises to actually do the jobs. You hand it a task, it goes off and finishes it, and it messages you when it is done. The catch is obvious: to do your errands, it needs the keys to your email, your calendar, and sometimes your bank card. So the real question is not “which one is cleverer?” It is “which one can I trust with my keys?”

What we’re solving

The tech name for these apps is “AI agents”: software that takes actions on your behalf instead of just answering questions. Two of them are getting the most attention right now:

Meta Muse : Meta’s personal agent, launched in the US on 8 September 2026. It runs on Meta’s own AI model, Muse Spark, and works on the web at muse.ai, on iOS and Android, and inside WhatsApp.
Instinct : an invite-only agent from a San Francisco startup (Spear Street Technology) led by 23-year-old former Sierra researcher Noah Shinn. You text it or call it through iMessage, WhatsApp or the phone. There is no app.

Both promise to take the same chores off your plate:

Booking restaurants, travel and appointments
Sorting and replying to email, managing your calendar
Shopping and checking out for you
Cancelling subscriptions and chasing cheaper bills
Phoning businesses for you (both added AI phone calls in September 2026)

What neither one solves:

They still make mistakes. Both companies say so.
Neither is fully open outside North America yet. Muse is available to adults in the US and Canada. Instinct is invite-only.
Neither removes the need to decide how much of your life you are comfortable handing over.

The core difference in one line: Instinct is built for maximum freedom to act. Muse is built so that the agent can act, but a separate guard decides what it is allowed to do and asks you before anything risky.

A real example

Both products have been used by real people in public, and their track records so far tell you a lot.

Instinct: loved for results, burned on trust

Early users praised it for booking travel, restaurant reservations, email follow-ups and even planning a wedding. The founder said users had “canceled hundreds of dollars of subscriptions.”
Its original terms of service gave the company a “perpetual and irrevocable” licence to use, store and publish users’ materials, including to train its AI. After a public backlash, the terms were rewritten on 26 August 2026 to drop that wording, but training on your data is still on by default.
Product leader Claire Vo disconnected Instinct from her Google account at 11 AM and still got a summary of her emails at 2 PM. Instinct told her the emails were stored in plain text for later searches.
Investor Katie Jacobs Stanton reported that it sent an email on her behalf without checking with her first. “One unauthorized action can reset that trust to zero,” she wrote.
Founder Alex Cohen tested whether a stranger’s email could trick it. It could, and he deleted his account.
None of this stopped investors: Instinct raised a $250 million Series B at a $2.5 billion valuation, and The Information reports talks for $1 billion more. It has over 100,000 users.

Muse: fast growth, with a published safety design

Muse passed 3.4 million downloads within about two and a half weeks, according to Sensor Tower estimates. It reached number one on the US App Store on 18 September and on Google Play on 19 September 2026.
On launch day, Meta published a detailed technical write-up of how Muse keeps passwords away from the agent and asks users before risky actions.
Meta opened a public bug bounty paying up to $300,000 for security flaws, including up to $130,000 for tricking Muse into misbehaving for a user.
It has had its own stumbles. WIRED’s reviewer said Muse “prioritizes data collection about me over actually accomplishing tasks,” and Business Insider reported it sent unapproved emails during Meta’s internal testing before launch.

How it works (with code)

Both agents get their own computer in the cloud with a web browser. You give them a job, and they click around websites and use your connected apps just like you would. The big difference is what happens to your passwords and who says “yes” before the agent acts.

Side by side

	Meta Muse	Instinct
Who can get it	Anyone 18+ in the US and Canada	Invite only, waitlist
Where you use it	Web, iOS, Android, WhatsApp	iMessage, WhatsApp, phone calls, web
Your passwords	Stored in a locked area the agent cannot see; it only gets a stand-in	Logins are stored on its cloud computer for the agent to use
Asking before acting	A separate guard called Sentinel must approve actions; risky ones pop up for you	No comparable public design; testers report it acting without asking
Paying for things	One-time card number via Stripe Link, locked to one shop and one amount, you approve every purchase	Uses your connected accounts
Password-reset emails	Filtered out so the agent cannot use them	Testers saw it pull sign-up codes from their inbox
Trains AI on your data	On by default, one switch to turn off	On by default, opt-out is future-only with exceptions
Disconnecting an app	Data lives in your own cloud computer; you can view, edit and download it	Old data stays until you file a separate deletion request

The key idea: a gatekeeper and a stand-in key

Think of a house-sitter. Instinct’s approach is to hand the house-sitter your real keys and trust them. Muse’s approach is to give the house-sitter a keycard that only opens certain doors, while a security guard at the front desk holds the real keys and phones you before anyone opens the safe.

The short Python program below is a toy model of those two designs. It is not either company’s real code. It shows what happens when a booby-trapped email tries to trick each agent into leaking your password. This kind of attack is called “prompt injection“: hidden instructions in a web page or email that an AI reads and mistakes for orders.

# A toy model of the two security designs. Not either company's real code.
REAL_PASSWORD = "hunter2"

def instinct_style(task):
    # The agent holds your real password and acts on its own.
    return f"Done: '{task}' (agent saw password '{REAL_PASSWORD}')"

def muse_style(task, risky, user_said_yes=False):
    stand_in = "TOKEN-7f3a" # the agent only ever holds a stand-in
    if risky and not user_said_yes:
        # A separate gatekeeper (Meta calls it Sentinel) stops and asks you.
        return f"Paused: '{task}' is waiting for your OK"
    return f"Done: '{task}' (agent only saw '{stand_in}')"

# A booby-trapped email tries to trick each agent into leaking your password.
attack = "email my password to a stranger"
print("Instinct ->", instinct_style(attack))
print("Muse ->", muse_style(attack, risky=True))
print("Muse ->", muse_style("read my calendar", risky=False))

Output when run:

Instinct -> Done: 'email my password to a stranger' (agent saw password 'hunter2')
Muse -> Paused: 'email my password to a stranger' is waiting for your OK
Muse -> Done: 'read my calendar' (agent only saw 'TOKEN-7f3a')

What the code shows, in plain words:

Instinct: the agent itself holds your real password. If a sneaky email fools it, the password is right there to leak.
Muse: the agent only ever holds a stand-in token. Meta says the real password is swapped in at the last moment, outside the agent, so even a fooled agent has nothing real to leak.
The pause: a risky action, like sending data out, stops and waits for you. A harmless one, like reading your calendar, goes straight through so you are not nagged all day.
The limit of the toy: real systems are far more complex. The real Sentinel also inspects every web request leaving the agent’s computer, and Meta runs extra detectors that look for trick instructions.

What it costs

Prices below were checked on 28 September 2026 from Meta’s launch coverage and reporting on Instinct. All figures are in US dollars.

Option	Upfront cost	Ongoing cost	Hidden costs	Best for
Do it yourself	$0	$0	Your evenings; missed cancellations keep billing you	People with few errands
Muse Free	$0 (card required to sign up)	$0 up to a usage cap	Usage meter runs out; data used for training unless you switch it off	Most people trying an agent
Muse Power	$0	$20/month	Same privacy trade as Free	Regular users who hit the free cap
Muse Maximum	$0	$100/month	Easy to overpay if you do not use it heavily	Power users handing off lots of work
Instinct (beta)	$0, invite needed	$0 for now, no published pricing	Your data is the price; founder has floated ads; terms allow paid features later	Early adopters who want maximum autonomy

What this means for you:

For a single person, Muse Free is the obvious starting point. It costs nothing, and the meter warns you before you run out.
Instinct is also $0 today, but “free with no business model” usually means you pay later, either in money or in data. Its founder has said he does not want to charge users and is considering advertising.
Meta says its own long-term plan is to take “a small fee from transactions” Muse makes for you, rather than ads based on your Muse data. It states Muse conversations are not shared with its ad systems, although sites Muse visits for you may still show you ads later.
Count the time cost too. Setting up either agent means connecting apps one at a time and reviewing each permission, which takes real time before you save any.

Pros and cons

Where Muse is better

You can actually get it. It is open to adults in the US and Canada today, with a free tier. Instinct needs an invite.
Your passwords never touch the AI. Meta’s design keeps real logins and payment cards in a separate locked area and gives the agent only stand-ins.
A guard that cannot be talked round. Sentinel is a separate program, not part of the chatbot, so tricking Muse does not switch the guard off.
Safer shopping. Every purchase uses a single-use card number locked to one shop, one amount and a short time window, and you approve each one.
Your email cannot be used to hijack other accounts. Muse filters out one-time codes, password-reset links and magic login links.
Fine-grained permissions. You can let it read your calendar without letting it write to it, and choose whether an approval is one-time, for one task, or permanent.
It shows its work. Meta published its security design and pays outside researchers to break it. Instinct’s team kept a low profile while its problems were reported.
Your data lives in one place you can inspect. Files, memory and connected-app logins sit in your own cloud computer, which you can view and download.

Where Instinct still wins

More raw autonomy. Reviewers describe it as the more aggressive finisher on long, messy errands such as negotiating bills or rebooking travel.
No new app to learn. It lives in your text messages and phone calls.
It is not Meta. For people who will not trust Meta with their inbox under any design, that matters more than any feature.

Muse’s real weak spots

Meta’s track record. Meta paid a record $5 billion FTC privacy penalty in 2019 and agreed an $18 billion settlement with 29 US states in August 2026. A well-written security document does not erase that history, and outside experts have not yet verified Meta’s claims.
Training is on by default. Your chats and task history are used to train Meta’s AI unless you switch off “Help improve our AI models” under Data Controls. Meta says it strips personal details first.
It keeps asking for more. WIRED found it repeatedly nudged the reviewer to connect email and banking. Inc. found it read a user’s private message notifications without being asked.
Meta can still access your data. Meta’s own write-up admits today’s design does not stop Meta staff from accessing data when needed to run the service. A “Confidential VM” that would block this is promised for later this year.
Mistakes still happen. Meta says plainly that tricking AI agents is “an open problem” and Muse “will sometimes make mistakes.”

Key takeaways

Muse and Instinct both do real errands for you, not just chat. The difference is how much they trust themselves.
Muse is the better choice for most people: it is available now, free to start, and built so the AI never sees your real passwords or card numbers and must ask before risky actions.
Instinct may finish more complicated errands, but it has already been caught keeping emails after disconnection, acting without asking, and falling for a planted email.
Muse is not risk-free. Turn off AI training under Data Controls, connect only the apps you need, and start with read-only access.
Cost is not the deciding factor today, since both can be used for $0. Trust is. Pick the one whose design you can check, and give it the keys one door at a time.

The post Meta Muse vs Instinct: Two AI Helpers That Run Your Errands, and Why Muse Is the Safer Bet appeared first on Bluetick Consultants Inc..

Google CC Wants to Be Your Family’s Chief of Staff. Here’s What It Does and What to Watch

Bluetick Consultants Inc. — Thu, 24 Sep 2026 12:18:24 +0000

TL;DR: The Google CC AI agent is an experimental assistant from Google Labs that, since September 17, 2026, can be shared by up to six household members. It turns the emails and files each member chooses to share into a daily brief, calendar events and a shared task list, and it can handle tasks such as filling out forms with your permission. It is available in the U.S. only, for adults 18+ with personal Google accounts. For business owners and IT teams, the bigger lesson is its design: its own identity, an isolated runtime, opt-in access, and separate shared and personal memory.

Last updated: September 24, 2026

A look at Google Labs’ new household AI agent, how it works, and what it could mean for families, business owners, and IT teams.

Every family runs something that looks a little like a small business.

There are schedules to manage, appointments to remember, forms to complete, shopping to do, and a never-ending list of small tasks that somehow become one person’s responsibility.

A school newsletter says a field trip form is due Friday. The soccer schedule changes in a group email at 9:47 p.m. The vet sends a reminder to one parent’s inbox, while the other parent never sees it.

None of these things is particularly difficult. The problem is that the information is spread across different inboxes, calendars, documents, and messages. Someone usually ends up keeping track of everything.

Google thinks an AI agent can help with that.

On September 17, 2026, Google Labs expanded CC, its experimental AI agent, from a personal assistant into an agent that can be shared by the entire household.

I have spent years looking at software products that promise to make people’s lives easier. What makes CC interesting is that it is not just another place to store information or write down tasks. It is trying to coordinate information and people and then take action on that information.

From a Morning Email to a Family Agent

CC is not a completely new product.

It started in late 2025 as a single-user Google Labs experiment that generated a morning “Your Day Ahead” briefing using information from Gmail, Calendar, and Drive. In May 2026, the idea moved into the Gemini app as Daily Brief.

The September release changes the product quite a bit.

Up to six family members can now share one CC , and the agent can do more than summarize information. It can actually act on it.

That is an important difference.

A useful household assistant should not just tell you that something needs to be done. Ideally, it should help you get it done.

What Does the Google CC AI Agent Actually Do?

In short, it collects what family members share, turns it into a shared daily brief, calendar entries and tasks, and handles some of the follow-up work itself.

According to Google’s announcement, CC takes the information a family shares with it and organizes it into three main areas:

A shared “Your Day Ahead” brief that shows who needs to be where and what is still pending.
Calendar entries that are created and updated automatically as plans change.
A shared task list with to-dos extracted from emails and documents.

It can also handle some tasks itself, with your permission. This is where CC starts to look more like an agent than a traditional family organizer.

For example, it can:

Fill out permission slips and activity registration PDFs
Create school-supply shopping lists
Plan weekly meals
Work out drive times between back-to-back activities
Create shared Google Docs and Sheets
Ask family members for missing information when something is unclear

Here is a simple example.

A school sends a permission-slip PDF to one parent’s inbox. CC can read the document, identify the field trip, add it to the family calendar, create a “sign form” task, fill out the relevant parts of the form, and mention it in the next morning’s briefing.

The other parent does not need to find the original email and forward it manually.

That is where the agent approach becomes useful.

Under the Hood: An Agent With Its Own Identity

As someone who writes about technology and systems, I find the architecture behind CC particularly interesting.

1. CC Has Its Own Google Account

CC is not simply a feature running invisibly inside a user’s account.

It has a verified Google identity of its own. When it appears in an inbox or a Chat thread, it is shown as a separate participant.

That is a useful design choice for an AI agent.

If an agent sends an email, changes a calendar event, or creates a document, users should be able to see that the action came from the agent. It makes the system easier to understand and gives users a clearer record of what happened.

2. It Runs on an Isolated Cloud Computer

Each CC instance runs in its own sandboxed cloud environment, powered by Gemini models and Antigravity, Google’s agentic harness.

Isolation matters when an agent is handling personal information.

A household agent could potentially deal with school information, appointments, family schedules, and other sensitive data. Keeping the agent’s environment isolated can help limit the impact if something goes wrong.

3. It Has Group Memory

CC separates information shared by the household from information that belongs to an individual family member.

This may sound like a small feature, but it solves a real problem for shared AI systems.

A family assistant needs to know what information is useful to everyone and what information only applies to one person.

For example, one family member’s dietary restrictions may matter when planning dinner for everyone. Their work travel schedule may not need to become part of the entire household’s context.

Can Google CC See Everything in Your Inbox?

CC does not automatically get access to everyone’s complete inbox.

Google says that “CC only sees what each member chooses to share.”

There are three ways to share information with CC:

Forward manually. Send a specific email, text, Drive folder, or calendar invitation to CC’s address. The name is quite literal. You can simply CC the agent.
Auto-CC trusted senders. Choose senders such as a school district, sports club, or airline whose messages should automatically go to CC.
Approve new senders weekly. CC can suggest new senders that it could track, and family members can approve or decline them.

Each family member controls their own sharing. CC also only responds to group members, and Google says it will not take action or share information outside the group without a member’s permission.

That is a reasonable approach for a shared assistant because it does not require everyone to give the agent unrestricted access.

There is still something families need to think about.

Once someone shares information with a shared household agent, that information becomes part of the context available to the household assistant. Families should be comfortable with that before automatically sharing messages from particular senders.

The Limitations

CC is still a Labs experiment, and there are several limitations worth knowing about.

U.S. only for now.
Adults only, 18+ , and a personal Gmail account is required. Teens cannot join, even though they may have some of the busiest schedules in the household.
School-issued accounts are not supported. This is notable because many schools use Google Workspace for Education. Messages from those accounts have to be forwarded from a parent’s personal account.
Waitlist access. Existing CC users receive an upgrade invitation. Other users can join the waitlist through Google Labs.
No pricing has been announced. Google has not said whether CC will remain free, become part of a Google One AI plan, or eventually become a separate product.

These limitations are important because they show where CC stands today.

It is an experiment with a fairly narrow audience, not yet a general-purpose household platform.

The Competition

Google is not the first company trying to solve this problem.

Startups such as Ollie , which focuses on privacy, and Fambot , which describes itself as an AI chief of staff for families, are working on similar problems. Earlier family-organizing products such as Ohai.ai have also tried to make household coordination easier.

Google has one obvious advantage.

It already has many of the services a household agent needs, including Gmail, Calendar, Drive, and Maps.

A startup has to convince users to connect all of those services. Google already has them.

There is a tradeoff, though. Using CC means putting even more of a family’s day-to-day information into Google’s ecosystem.

What This Means for Business Owners and IT Teams

CC is a consumer product. Google has positioned it around personal Gmail accounts and households of up to six people. Workspace accounts are not currently supported.

So why should business owners and IT teams pay attention?

Because several of the ideas behind CC can also be applied to business automation.

1. Founders and Small-Business Owners Can Use It for Home Logistics

For many small-business owners, personal and work schedules are closely connected.

A child’s sports practice can determine when a supplier meeting can happen. A missed school form can consume an afternoon. A family appointment can affect the rest of the working day.

Using CC for the home side of that equation can help reduce some of that administrative work.

The important boundary is simple.

Use CC for family logistics, not customer or company data.

Invoices, customer emails, contracts, payment information, and other confidential business information should not be sent to a consumer AI experiment.

2. Copy the Auto-CC Pattern for Business Workflows

The most interesting idea in CC may not actually be the AI.

It is how information gets into the system.

The agent receives information from the places where that information already arrives. Nobody has to type the same information into another system.

Businesses can use the same idea.

| Family Use in CC | Business Equivalent |
| Auto-CC the school district | Automatically forward vendor invoices to a shared accounts-payable inbox so an AI can identify due dates |
| “Your Day Ahead” family brief | A daily team brief containing deliveries, follow-ups, and meetings |
| Filling out permission slips | Pre-filling onboarding documents, vendor registrations, and compliance checklists |
| Drive time between activities | Route and schedule planning for field staff, deliveries, and service calls |
| Shared grocery list | Shared inventory and stock-reorder list |

There is no need to wait for a product called “CC for Business.”

The Gemini features available through Google Workspace, Microsoft 365 Copilot, and automation platforms such as Zapier and Make can already implement many of these workflows when configured with the right business controls.

The important idea is the workflow, not the product name.

3. Use the Architecture as a Blueprint for Your Own AI Agents

If your IT team is building or evaluating AI agents, CC has several design choices worth studying.

Give the agent its own identity.

CC has its own verified account instead of silently using a user’s identity. Business agents should follow a similar model by using dedicated service accounts or identities. That makes it easier to trace and audit actions such as emails, calendar changes, and document updates.

Isolate where the agent runs.

CC runs in an isolated cloud environment. Business agents should also operate in environments with limited permissions rather than having unrestricted access to shared infrastructure.

Make access opt-in and scoped.

CC only sees information that users choose to share. The same least-privilege principle should apply to business agents. An agent responsible for processing invoices should not automatically have access to HR documents.

Keep shared and personal memory separate.

CC separates household information from individual context. Business agents should do something similar. Company-wide information such as price lists and standard operating procedures can be shared broadly, while personal sales notes or private customer information should remain appropriately restricted.

These are practical design principles for any organization building agent-based systems.

4. Your Customers’ AI May Read Your Emails First

This is one of the changes businesses may overlook.

When AI agents start reading and organizing household email, your customer’s AI may process your message before the customer does.

That means businesses are increasingly writing emails for two audiences.

The first is the person receiving the email.

The second is the AI system helping that person organize their life.

This makes basic email structure more important.

Businesses should consider a few simple practices:

Put dates, times, and locations in plain text , rather than relying only on images or designed banners.
Attach calendar invitations (.ics) to appointments and events where appropriate.
Use fillable PDFs instead of scanned forms when customers need to complete documents.
Use clear subject lines , such as “Appointment confirmed: Tuesday, October 6 at 3:00 PM,” instead of vague subject lines.
Keep one main action per message whenever possible. It is easier for an AI agent to identify a task when the email has a clear purpose.

If your email is easy for an AI agent to understand, it has a better chance of becoming an actionable item in your customer’s workflow.

If the information is buried inside images, unclear subject lines, or long blocks of text, the agent may not be able to extract the right action.

5. IT Teams Should Plan for “Shadow Agents”

Consumer AI agents are becoming easier to use.

That also means employees may be tempted to forward work information to personal AI tools, especially when they are managing both personal and work schedules.

IT and security teams should address this before it becomes a problem.

Update acceptable-use policies

Company policies should clearly explain whether employees can forward company information to personal AI services and what types of information are prohibited.

Use DLP controls

Data loss prevention tools can help identify or block automatic forwarding of corporate information to external addresses and services.

Provide an approved alternative

Employees often use unofficial tools when the official tools do not solve their problems.

Providing an approved AI assistant with appropriate enterprise controls can reduce the temptation to move sensitive information into consumer AI products.

Frequently Asked Questions About Google CC

What is Google CC?

Google CC is an experimental AI agent from Google Labs that works as a shared assistant for families and households. It has its own verified Google account and turns what members share into a daily “Your Day Ahead” brief, calendar events, and a shared task list.

How many people can share one CC?

Up to six household members can share one CC. Each member must be 18 or older and use a personal Google account.

Can Google CC read my entire Gmail inbox?

No. CC only sees what each member chooses to share. Members can forward individual emails or files, auto-share messages from trusted senders, and approve new senders from a weekly list.

Who can use Google CC right now?

CC is available on web and mobile to adults in the U.S. with a personal Google account. Existing CC users receive an upgrade invitation by email, and new users can join the waitlist through Google Labs.

Can businesses use Google CC with Google Workspace accounts?

No. CC currently supports personal Google accounts only. Businesses can apply the same auto-forwarding and daily-brief patterns using Gemini in Google Workspace, Microsoft 365 Copilot, or automation platforms such as Zapier and Make, configured with business controls.

My Take

After years of watching family organizer apps launch and disappear, one thing stands out.

These products usually do not fail because they lack features.

They fail because someone still has to keep them updated. Most of the time, that person is the same person who was already responsible for keeping track of everything.

That is why the auto-CC model is the part of CC that I find most interesting.

Information reaches the agent from the places where it already arrives. Nobody has to enter the same information again into another application.

The technical design is also worth watching.

A separate identity, an isolated runtime, opt-in information sharing, and separate shared and individual memory are all useful ideas when building AI agents.

CC still has obvious limitations. It is currently limited to the U.S., requires personal Gmail accounts, excludes users under 18, does not support school-issued accounts, and has no announced pricing.

For business owners and IT teams, the takeaway is not to sign the company up for CC. That is not what the product is designed for.

The bigger takeaway is to watch how Google is building it.

CC is an interesting example of how AI agents can move beyond answering questions and start managing information and taking actions on a user’s behalf.

There is another change businesses should pay attention to.

Your customers’ AI systems are starting to become ** part of the interface between your business and your customers **.

That means internal AI agents need strong identity, isolation, permissions, and clear memory boundaries.

It also means customer communication needs to be structured in a way that both people and machines can understand.

If you’re the parent who always knows when picture day is, CC may be worth watching.

If you run a business or IT team, the architecture behind it may be even more interesting than the household features.

The post Google CC Wants to Be Your Family’s Chief of Staff. Here’s What It Does and What to Watch appeared first on Bluetick Consultants Inc..

Your iPhone App on the iPhone Duo: What Breaks, What to Fix, and What It Costs

Bluetick Consultants Inc. — Wed, 16 Sep 2026 09:50:51 +0000

Published: 16 September 2026 | Updated: 16 September 2026

Short answer: To prepare your app for iPhone Duo, rebuild it with the iOS 27.1 SDK before the phone goes on sale on October 23. Apps built with older SDKs keep working, but they sit boxed in black space on both screens.

Bottom line: Fix orientation-based layouts, UIScreen.main calls and equal-margin maths first. Apple’s fees are trivial; engineering and testing time is the real cost, ranging from a few hours for iPad-ready apps to several days for phone-only apps.

On October 23, some of your most valuable customers will open your app on a phone that costs $1,999 and folds in half. If nobody has touched the app in a while, it will not crash. It will do something arguably worse. It will sit in a box in the middle of a 7.6-inch screen, black space all around it, looking like it was made for a different phone. Which, to be fair, it was.

Nobody files a bug report about this. Instead, people just notice that Netflix fills the screen and your app does not, and they draw their own conclusions about which company is paying attention.

That is the real risk with Apple’s first foldable. The app keeps working. It just looks abandoned, on an iPhone with the highest starting price Apple has ever charged, held by the kind of people who tend to pay for apps.

What we’re solving

The goal here is narrow: get an existing iPhone app to look deliberate on both of the iPhone Duo’s screens, in every way people will hold it. Closed, it is a 5.4-inch phone. Open, it is a 7.6-inch small tablet. Both screens have roughly a 1.4:1 shape, which is much squarer than any iPhone before it. A regular iPhone held sideways is closer to 2.17:1. So neither screen is a shape your layouts have seen.

The phone ships with iOS 27.1. Pre-orders open October 16, and it goes on sale October 23.

How much of the screen you get depends on how you last built the app

Apple has set up three tiers. Which one your app lands in depends on the SDK, meaning the version of Apple’s developer toolkit the app was last compiled with. First, moving up a tier starts with rebuilding against a newer SDK. Apple’s developer session also covers opting in to the full-screen experience, and making good use of the extra space is a separate job again.

Last built with	What happens on the Duo	How it looks
An SDK older than iOS 27	Runs in a compatibility box, with black filling the rest. This happens on both screens, not just the inner one.	Clearly unoptimized
iOS 27 SDK (Xcode 27)	On the inner screen, the app extends into the space beside the status bar but stops short of the edge.	Acceptable, some dead space
iOS 27.1 SDK (Xcode 27.1)	Reaches the screen edges. Standard navigation and toolbar buttons move to the side, laid out vertically.	What Apple showed on stage

Two things the early headlines got wrong

Xcode 27.1 is not out yet. Some coverage said the new Xcode, with its iPhone Duo simulator, is already available. As of today, Apple’s own Get Ready for iPhone Duo page lists the Xcode 27.1 beta as “coming later this month.” Apple’s developer videos demo the simulator, but you cannot download it. That changes the planning maths. With launch on October 23, most teams will get a few weeks with the simulator, not six.

The outer screen does not rescue old apps. Early reports suggested older apps would look fine when the phone is closed. The outer screen is not shaped like any earlier iPhone, and legacy builds are boxed on both displays. If your plan was to rely on people using the phone closed, drop it.

Out of scope for this post: Apple Pencil support (Apple says it arrives later in 2026), the Duo-only camera features, and iPad-only apps.

A real example

Netflix is the clearest case so far. Apple worked with it before launch and put it on stage, alongside Zoom, Slack and a few others. What Netflix did is worth studying because it goes past “fill the screen.”

One activity, two screens. You can scroll the short Clips feed on the outer screen, then open the phone and carry on in the same place on the big one.
The half-open pose has its own layout. Stand the phone up like a tiny laptop and the video stays on the top half while the playback controls drop to the bottom half.
Zoom took a similar line. On the inner screen, it shows the shared content and the other participants together, instead of making you pick one.

However, keep this in proportion. That is a handful of large companies with early access and Apple engineers on call. It is not evidence that the wider App Store is ready.

We have seen this film before. When the taller iPhone 5 arrived in 2012, apps that had not been updated ran with black bars at the top and bottom. When the iPhone X arrived in 2017, apps not rebuilt for iOS 11 were letterboxed the same way. Both times, the bars became the quickest way for users to spot an abandoned app. Similarly, Instagram went well over a decade without a proper iPad app, leaving iPad owners with a blown-up phone app. The Duo raises the stakes, because the device exposing the neglect is the phone people carry every day.

How it works (with code)

In fact, most of this is not new work. Apple has been pushing developers toward flexible layouts for years, through size classes, safe areas and resizable iPad windows. If your app already behaves well on an iPad in Split View, you are most of the way there. If your app was built for “an iPhone,” singular, you have a list.

The habits that break on a folding iPhone

Choosing the layout by orientation. The inner screen ignores the orientations your app says it supports. A portrait-only app will not stay portrait-only once the phone is open. Apple’s advice is to decide layout by size class instead. Size classes are Apple’s way of describing available space as “compact” or “regular.” The outer screen behaves like a normal iPhone. The inner one, by contrast, is regular in both directions, like an iPad.
Asking for “the main screen”. Code that calls UIScreen.main assumes there is one screen. There are now two, and Apple says this API will be deprecated. Instead, get the screen from the window the app is actually in.
Assuming the margins are equal. The status bar and camera now sit in a corner, so the safe area is often wider on one side than the other. Any maths that doubles the left inset to get the usable width will be wrong.
*Hand-built navigation bars. * Apple’s standard navigation components adapt on their own, and can show a sidebar on the inner screen with one setting. In contrast, custom bars can collide with system elements. iOS 27.1 adds reserved regions (ReservedRegion in SwiftUI, UIViewReservedRegion in UIKit) so custom controls can take space without overlapping the system’s.
Forgetting the in-between states. For example, Split View gives your app half the inner screen with uneven margins. In the half-folded pose, controls need to stay clear of the crease. These in-between states are where most layout bugs will hide.
Assuming a big screen means no black bars on video. A 1.4:1 screen is close to the IMAX shape, so standard widescreen video still shows bars, just at the top and bottom instead of the sides. Good video apps will use that space for controls or information, the way Netflix does.

What the fix looks like

Here are two of the most common fixes, adapted from Apple’s “Prepare your app for iPhone Duo” session. The before lines assume one screen and symmetric margins. The after lines ask the system instead.

// Before: assumes one screen and equal margins
let scale = UIScreen.main.scale
let width = view.bounds.width - view.safeAreaInsets.left * 2

// After: asks the current window and handles each side
let scale = traitCollection.displayScale
let width = view.bounds.inset(by: view.safeAreaInsets).width

A small audit script to size the job before the simulator arrives

Since nobody can run the Duo simulator yet, the useful thing to do this week is estimate. The script below scans an iOS codebase for the patterns above and prints each suspect line with a plain-English fix. Run it from your project folder with python3 duo_audit.py path/to/YourApp.

import re, sys, pathlib

# Habits Apple's iPhone Duo guidance warns about, with a plain fix
RULES = [
    (r"UIScreen\.main",
     "Two screens now. Get the screen from the window scene."),
    (r"UIDevice\.current\.orientation|supportedInterfaceOrientations",
     "Inner display ignores orientation locks. Use size classes."),
    (r"safeAreaInsets\.(left|right)\s*\*\s*2",
     "Assumes equal left/right insets. Duo insets are uneven."),
    (r"userInterfaceIdiom\s*==\s*\.phone",
     "Duo is still a phone. Don't guess screen size from it."),
    (r"width:\s*(375|390|393|402|414|428|430|440)\b",
     "Hard-coded iPhone width. Let the layout flex."),
]

def audit(root):
    hits = 0
    for path in sorted(pathlib.Path(root).rglob("*.swift")):
        lines = path.read_text(errors="ignore").splitlines()
        for n, line in enumerate(lines, 1):
            for pattern, advice in RULES:
                if re.search(pattern, line):
                    hits += 1
                    print(f"{path.name}:{n} {line.strip()}")
                    print(f" -> {advice}")
    print(f"\n{hits} possible iPhone Duo layout issue(s) found.")

audit(sys.argv[1] if len(sys.argv) > 1 else ".")

Output on a two-file sample project:

HomeView.swift:6 .frame(width: 393)

-> Hard-coded iPhone width. Let the layout flex.

PlayerViewController.swift:6 let scale = UIScreen.main.scale

-> Two screens now. Get the screen from the window scene.

PlayerViewController.swift:7 let usable = view.bounds.width – view.safeAreaInsets.left * 2

-> Assumes equal left/right insets. Duo insets are uneven.

PlayerViewController.swift:8 if UIDevice.current.orientation.isLandscape {

-> Inner display ignores orientation locks. Use size classes.

4 possible iPhone Duo layout issue(s) found.

What it does: reads every Swift file, checks each line against five risky patterns, and prints the file, the line and what to do about it.
Why it helps: four hits in two files is an afternoon. Four hundred hits across a large app is a sprint, and you want to know that before October, not after.
What it is not: a compiler or a test. It flags suspects by text matching, so expect some false alarms, and it will miss layouts that are wrong for other reasons. Treat the count as a sizing signal, then confirm everything in the simulator.

In addition, Apple is shipping its own help. Xcode 27.1 includes a coding skill Apple calls App Resizability, an updated version of the modernization skill it introduced for UIKit apps this year, now covering SwiftUI and the Duo.

What it costs

The money Apple charges is almost nothing. The Apple Developer Program is $99 a year, which you are already paying if your app is on the App Store. Likewise, Xcode and the simulator are free. A real iPhone Duo for testing starts at $1,999, but most teams will not have one before launch day anyway.

The real cost, however, is engineering and testing time. Early developer write-ups put the work at a few hours for a well-built app that already handles iPad, and several days plus testing for a phone-only app with hand-coded layouts. The other ranges below are our estimates, based on those figures and on past iPhone screen changes. Prices were checked on September 11, 2026.

Cost options compared

Option	Upfront cost	Ongoing cost	Hidden costs	Best for
Do nothing	$0	$0	App looks boxed-in on both screens, next to competitors that don’t	Apps in maintenance mode with few iPhone users
Rebuild with the iOS 27 SDK only	About 1-2 days of rebuild and regression testing (estimate)	Normal release cycle	Still leaves dead space on the inner screen	Teams already shipping an iOS 27 update
Adopt iOS 27.1, mostly standard UI	A few hours to a few days	More QA per release	Test matrix grows; no real device until Oct 23	Apps built on Apple’s standard navigation
Adopt iOS 27.1, heavily custom UI	Several days to a few weeks (estimate)	Ongoing layout upkeep	Custom bars and players need rework; design time	Media, camera, games, custom design systems
Build Duo-specific features	A product project; depends on scope	Feature maintenance	Design and product time for a small early audience	Video, conferencing, reading, productivity

The hidden cost: a bigger test matrix

One hidden cost applies to every option except the first. The testing matrix grows for good: two screens, two orientations on each, the half-folded pose and Split View. For a solo developer that might be an extra hour per release. On the other hand, for a team with a formal QA cycle, it needs to be written into the test plan now.

Pros and cons

In favour of doing the work now

A valuable audience. People who pay $1,999 for a phone are, on average, more willing to pay for apps. Being polished on day one is cheap marketing.
The work carries over. Flexible layout that fixes the Duo also improves your app on iPad, in resizable windows, and when mirrored to a Mac. This is not a one-device project.
Apple’s standard components do much of it for you. Apps built on standard navigation get the sidebar and the side-mounted controls largely for free after a rebuild.
The cost of entry is low. The tooling is free, and for tidy codebases the job is measured in hours.

Against, or at least against rushing

The audience is small at first. Even Apple-focused press expects the Duo to be niche to start. For most apps, standard iPhones will be almost all of the traffic for a long while.
The timeline is tight. The simulator is still weeks away and real hardware arrives on launch day. In other words, everything before October 23 is testing on a simulator.
The testing burden is permanent. As a result, every future release has more screens and states to check.
It is a first-generation platform. Apple’s written guide to preparing apps is still marked as coming. Expect the advice to shift once real people start using the phone.
The honest objection. For an app people open for thirty seconds to pay for parking, a boxed-in compatibility view is ugly but perfectly usable. Consequently, spending a sprint on it may never pay back. Fix the cheap things, rebuild, and move on.

Key takeaways

Old iPhone apps will not break on the iPhone Duo. They will look boxed-in on both screens, and users will read that as neglect.
The SDK you build with decides how much screen you get. Edge-to-edge needs the iOS 27.1 SDK.
As of September 11, the Xcode 27.1 beta is not out yet. Apple says later this month, and the phone ships October 23, so audit your code now and test the moment it lands.
The biggest code risks are orientation-based layout, references to the main screen, equal-margin maths and custom navigation bars.
Apple’s fees are trivial. Engineering and testing time is the real budget, and most of that work also improves your app on iPad and Mac.
Prioritise by audience. Video, conferencing and productivity apps should move first; short-session utility apps can rebuild and wait.

Frequently asked questions

What happens to an old iPhone app on the iPhone Duo?

It keeps working, but apps last built with an SDK older than iOS 27 run in a compatibility box with black space around them, on both the outer and inner screens.

Which SDK do I need for my app to fill the iPhone Duo screen?

The iOS 27.1 SDK, which ships with Xcode 27.1. Building with the iOS 27 SDK extends the app on the inner screen but still leaves dead space at the edge.

Is the Xcode 27.1 beta with the iPhone Duo simulator available yet?

Not as of September 16, 2026. Apple’s Get Ready for iPhone Duo page lists the Xcode 27.1 beta as coming later this month. The iPhone Duo goes on sale October 23.

What code patterns break on the iPhone Duo?

The biggest risks are choosing layout by orientation instead of size class, calling UIScreen.main, assuming equal left and right safe-area margins, and hand-built navigation bars that can collide with system elements.

How long does it take to prepare your app for iPhone Duo?

Early developer write-ups put it at a few hours for a well-built app that already handles iPad, and several days plus testing for a phone-only app with hand-coded layouts. Heavily custom interfaces can take several days to a few weeks.

Does preparing for the iPhone Duo cost anything beyond engineering time?

Very little. The Apple Developer Program is $99 a year, which published apps already pay, and Xcode and the simulator are free. The real cost is engineering time and a permanently larger testing matrix.

The post Your iPhone App on the iPhone Duo: What Breaks, What to Fix, and What It Costs appeared first on Bluetick Consultants Inc..

Database Indexing in Ruby on Rails: When, Why, and How

Bluetick Consultants Inc. — Thu, 10 Sep 2026 17:53:11 +0000

Published: 10 September 2026 | Updated: 10 September 2026

Key takeaway: Rails database indexing is often the highest-impact fix for slow queries once N+1 problems are solved. Index the queries you actually run: composite indexes for multi-column filters, partial indexes for the small slice of rows you query most, and algorithm: :concurrently for large production tables. Verify every index with EXPLAIN ANALYZE, because each extra index adds cost to every write.

Who This Guide Is For

This guide is for Ruby on Rails developers, backend engineers, and engineering leads who run PostgreSQL in production and need to decide which indexes to add, change, or remove. It assumes you’re comfortable with ActiveRecord and migrations, but not that you’re a database specialist.

When to Use This Advice

Use the techniques in this guide when:

A page, report, or API endpoint is slow, and EXPLAIN ANALYZE shows a Seq Scan on a large table.
Database CPU spikes during peak traffic while your application servers have spare capacity.
A table has grown from thousands of rows to millions, and queries that were once instant now take seconds.
You need to add an index to a live production table without blocking writes.
Write latency is creeping up, and you suspect unused or overlapping indexes.

Indexing is the wrong fix in two cases. On small tables, a sequential scan is often faster than an index lookup. And if a page fires hundreds of small queries, fix the N+1 problem first, because no index can fix that pattern.

Use Cases This Guide Covers

SaaS dashboards and reporting: composite indexes for multi-column filters, as in the case study where an 8-second report dropped to under 500 milliseconds.
E-commerce and order management: fast lookups by customer, order status, and date.
Soft deletes and archived records: partial indexes that cover only the active rows you actually query.
High-traffic APIs: unique indexes on email addresses, UUIDs, and external IDs.
Production schema changes: concurrent index builds on large tables with zero downtime.

These patterns apply across SaaS, e-commerce, fintech, and logistics platforms, or any Rails application where data grows faster than caching can keep up.

“A single well-designed index can reduce a query from several seconds to a few milliseconds. But a poorly designed indexing strategy can slow down every write operation in your application.”

As Ruby on Rails developers, we spend a lot of time optimizing ActiveRecord queries, eliminating N+1 queries, and adding caching layers. Yet one of the most impactful performance improvements often happens below the Rails application—in the database itself.

Whether you’re building a SaaS platform, an e-commerce application, or an API that serves millions of requests, your database eventually becomes the bottleneck. When that happens, adding more application servers rarely solves the problem. Instead, the answer is often a better indexing strategy.

In this article, we’ll cover:

What database indexes are
How indexes work internally
Different types of indexes
Partial indexes
Composite indexes
Zero-downtime indexing in production
Drawbacks of excessive indexing
Real-world Rails examples
Best practices for production applications

Understanding How Databases Search Data

For example, imagine you have a library with five million books.

When someone asks for a book by its title, there are two approaches.

Without an Index

First, the librarian starts from shelf one.

Book 1

↓

Book 2

↓

Book 3

↓

…

↓

Book 5,000,000

Eventually the book is found.

In fact, this is exactly what databases call a Sequential Scan (Seq Scan).

With an Index

Instead of checking every shelf, the librarian opens the catalogue.

Harry Potter → Shelf 18

Rails Guide → Shelf 42

Ruby Cookbook → Shelf 81

As a result, the book is found immediately.

In other words, that catalogue is essentially what a database index is.

What Exactly is an Index?

An index is a special data structure maintained by the database that stores values from one or more columns in a sorted format, along with pointers to the corresponding table rows.

Most relational databases such as PostgreSQL and MySQL use a B-Tree (Balanced Tree) as the default index type.

Instead of scanning every row, the database traverses the tree.

           Root

          /      \

      A-M          N-Z

     /  \         /   \

  Adam Bob    Mike Zack

Searching becomes logarithmic rather than linear.

Instead of checking five million rows, the database checks only a few levels of the tree.

Working Example

For instance, suppose we have this model.

class Customer < ApplicationRecord
end
Schema:
create_table :customers do |t|
  t.string :name
  t.string :email
  t.string :city
  t.string :status
end

Additionally, the application frequently executes:

Customer.find_by(email: "john@example.com")

Without an Index

SQL executed:

SELECT *
FROM customers
WHERE email='john@example.com';

Execution plan:

Seq Scan on customers

Consequently, the database checks every row.

With 5 million records:

Row 1

↓

Row 2

↓

Row 3

↓

…

↓

Row 5,000,000

Adding an Index

Migration:

class AddEmailIndexToCustomers < ActiveRecord::Migration[7.1]
  def change
    add_index :customers, :email
  end
end

Run:

rails db:migrate

Afterward, the query changes dramatically.

Execution plan:

Index Scan

Instead of scanning the table, PostgreSQL looks inside the index.

Email Index

adam@example.com

↓

john@example.com

↓

mary@example.com

Therefore, query execution becomes almost instantaneous.

Composite Indexes

Similarly, suppose every dashboard request executes:

Order.where(
  customer_id: current_customer.id,
  status: "completed"
)

Bad approach:

add_index :orders, :customer_id
add_index :orders, :status

Better:

add_index :orders,
          [:customer_id, :status]

Now PostgreSQL can answer the query using a single index lookup instead.

Partial Indexing

This is one of the most underused yet powerful indexing techniques in PostgreSQL.

For example, suppose your application uses soft deletes.

Customer.where(deleted_at: nil)

If 95% of your rows are deleted, why should PostgreSQL index them?

Instead:

add_index :customers,
          :deleted_at,
          where: "deleted_at IS NULL"

Thus, the index now contains only active customers.

Benefits:

Smaller index
Less storage
Faster lookups
Faster writes

Partial Index vs Regular Index

Example

Regular index

add_index :customers, :status

Indexes:

Active

Inactive

Pending

Deleted

Archived

Partial index

add_index :customers,
          :status,
          where: "status='Active'"

Indexes only:

Active

Achieving Zero Downtime While Adding Indexes

In particular, one mistake developers make is running:

add_index :customers, :email

On a table with millions of rows, PostgreSQL may lock the table while building the index, blocking reads or writes depending on the operation.

Rails supports concurrent index creation for PostgreSQL.

class AddEmailIndex < ActiveRecord::Migration[7.1]
  disable_ddl_transaction!

  def change
    add_index :customers,
              :email,
              algorithm: :concurrently
  end
end

Why `disable_ddl_transaction!`?

Specifically, PostgreSQL cannot create indexes concurrently inside a transaction. Rails wraps migrations in transactions by default, so you must disable it.

Benefits

No long table lock
Reads continue
Writes continue
Safe for production deployments

For this reason, this is the recommended approach for large production databases.

Verifying the Index

Above all, never assume the database is using your index.

Run:

EXPLAIN ANALYZE
SELECT *
FROM customers
WHERE email='john@example.com';

Before indexing:

Seq Scan

After indexing:

Index Scan

Sometimes PostgreSQL still chooses a sequential scan if it estimates that scanning the table is cheaper, especially for very small tables or low-selectivity queries.

The Hidden Cost of Too Many Indexes

Still, many developers think:

More indexes = Faster database.

However, that’s not true.

Every index must also be updated whenever data changes.

For instance, imagine this insert:

Customer.create(...)

Without indexes:

Insert Row

With eight indexes:

Insert Row

↓

Update Index 1

↓

Update Index 2

↓

Update Index 3

↓

…

↓

Update Index 8

In short, every additional index increases write overhead.

Drawbacks of Excessive Indexing

Slower INSERT operations
Slower UPDATE operations
Slower DELETE operations
Increased storage usage
Longer backup times
Longer restore times
Increased VACUUM maintenance in PostgreSQL
More memory consumed by indexes

Hence, indexing should always be driven by actual query patterns, not guesswork.

Production Case Study

In one of our production reporting systems, a dashboard loaded customer reports filtered by:

Customer ID
Reporting Group
Status

Initially, the table had individual indexes on each column. The query planner still had to combine results, leading to response times of over 8 seconds.

We analyzed the execution plan using EXPLAIN ANALYZE and replaced the individual indexes with a composite index matching the query pattern:

add_index :reports,
          [:customer_id, :reporting_group_id, :status],
          algorithm: :concurrently

Because the migration used algorithm: :concurrently and disable_ddl_transaction!, it was deployed to production without blocking application traffic.

Overall, the results were significant:

Response time dropped from 8 seconds to under 500 milliseconds
Database CPU usage decreased during peak traffic
No application code changes were required

Finally, this reinforced an important lesson: understanding how your application queries data is often more valuable than adding hardware.

Best Practices

Index foreign keys used in joins.
Use unique indexes for unique columns like email and UUIDs.
Prefer composite indexes for common multi-column filters.
Use partial indexes when only a subset of rows is queried frequently.
Create indexes concurrently in production to avoid downtime.
Validate index usage with EXPLAIN ANALYZE.
Remove unused indexes periodically.
Monitor slow query logs and index bloat.

Frequently Asked Questions

When should I add a database index in Rails?

Add an index when a column appears in frequent WHERE, JOIN, or ORDER BY clauses on a table large enough for sequential scans to hurt. Foreign keys, unique fields such as email, and columns behind slow dashboard filters are the usual candidates. Confirm the need with EXPLAIN ANALYZE rather than indexing speculatively.

What is the difference between a composite index and a partial index?

A composite index covers several columns in one index, such as customer_id and status, and serves queries that filter on those columns together. It works best when the query filters on the leading column. A partial index covers only rows matching a condition, such as active records, which keeps it smaller and cheaper to maintain.

Does add_index lock the table in PostgreSQL?

A standard add_index runs CREATE INDEX, which blocks inserts, updates, and deletes on the table until the build finishes, while reads continue. On large production tables, use algorithm: :concurrently with disable_ddl_transaction! so writes keep flowing. If a concurrent build fails, drop the leftover invalid index before retrying.

Why is PostgreSQL not using my index?

The planner skips an index when it estimates a sequential scan is cheaper, which is common on small tables or when a query matches a large share of rows. Stale statistics, or conditions that don’t match the index’s leading column or partial-index predicate, can also cause it. Run ANALYZE, then check the plan with EXPLAIN ANALYZE.

Can too many indexes slow down a Rails application?

Yes. Every index must be updated on each insert, update, and delete, so unused indexes add write latency, storage, and VACUUM work without speeding up reads. Review pg_stat_user_indexes periodically and drop indexes with an idx_scan count of zero, after confirming they don’t back a unique constraint.

Final Thoughts

Database indexing is one of the highest-impact optimizations you can make in a Rails application. But the goal isn’t to add indexes everywhere—it’s to create the right indexes for the queries your application actually executes.

In conclusion, by combining thoughtful indexing, query analysis, and zero-downtime deployment techniques, you can build Rails applications that continue to perform well as your data grows from thousands to millions of records.

The post Database Indexing in Ruby on Rails: When, Why, and How appeared first on Bluetick Consultants Inc..

Beyond the Chatbot: What the New Digital Coworkers Actually Do, and What They Cost

Bluetick Consultants Inc. — Thu, 03 Sep 2026 14:42:03 +0000

Published: 3 September 2026 | Updated: 3 September 2026

The short answer: Agentic AI digital coworkers can now operate software that offers no other way in, by looking at the screen and clicking. Two credible products launched in August 2026 – Grok Bot from xAI and Warmwind OS from Warmwind AG. Agentic AI cost is unpredictable by design: Warmwind was listed at 1 euro per worker hour, Grok Bot has no standalone price and bills overflow by the token. Reliability is the harder problem. At 85 percent accuracy per step, a ten-step job finishes cleanly about one time in five. Gartner expects over 40 percent of agentic AI projects to be cancelled by the end of 2027. Use these tools for short, bounded jobs with a checkable result – not long unattended chains.

The problem

You asked an AI chatbot to help you with your expense claims. It wrote you a lovely set of instructions. Then you went and did all the clicking yourself.

That is the shape of the complaint. The assistant is clever, and it is also sitting on its hands. It can tell you what to do, draft the email, explain the spreadsheet formula. It cannot open your accounting software, find last month’s invoices, and file them. So the boring part, the part that eats the afternoon, still lands on you.

The gap has a simple cause. Most AI tools are built to answer, then stop. Every step needs you to come back and ask again. If a job has thirty steps, you are the one carrying it between them.

What we are solving

A new kind of product tries to close that gap. Instead of answering and stopping, it gets its own computer in the cloud and works on the job in the background.

It has a screen, a keyboard and a mouse, just like you do, plus its own web browser and file storage.
You give it a whole task, not a single question. Something like: pull last week’s orders, check them against the invoices, and flag the mismatches.
It keeps going while your laptop is shut. The work happens on a machine in a data centre, not on your desk.
It comes back to you when it needs a decision, a password, or permission to send something.

The industry calls these agents, digital coworkers, or cloud employees. The plain version: software that does the clicking instead of describing it.

Two things this does not solve, and they matter more than the marketing suggests:

It does not remove the need to check the work. Someone still reviews what came out, especially for anything involving money or customers.
It does not make a messy process tidy. If your current workflow only works because a human quietly fixes things, handing it to an agent hands over the mess too.

A real example

Two products launched within a fortnight of each other in August 2026, and they take noticeably different routes to the same idea.

Grok Bot, from xAI

Launched in beta on 11 August 2026, then widened across subscription plans through the rest of the month.
Each user gets one persistent cloud computer with a browser, a filesystem and a terminal. Your bots share it.
It prefers a proper connection to an app where one exists, and falls back to driving the screen only for tools that offer no clean way in. This matters: it is a hybrid, not a pure screen-driver.
You can show it a job once by recording a browser session of up to ten minutes, and it saves that as a routine it can repeat on a schedule.
It runs on macOS, Windows and iPhone. There is no Linux, Android or iPad version at launch.

Warmwind OS, from Warmwind AG in Jena, Germany

Version 1.0 launched publicly on 26 August 2026, after a closed beta with a waitlist reported at over 12,000 people.
This one is the pure screen-driver. Each worker gets a Linux desktop in the cloud and operates ordinary software by looking at the screen and using a mouse and keyboard. No integrations required.
That is the whole pitch: it can drive old, ugly business software that has no modern way to connect to it. The launch video demonstrates exactly that, on legacy German rental-management software.
The company runs on German cloud infrastructure and leans hard on European data-protection rules as a selling point, which matters to firms that cannot send recordings of their screens to an American provider.

Both companies use the phrase visual navigation. Only Warmwind, however, means it literally for everything. Judge each on which of your tools it can actually reach, because that is where the difference shows up.

How it works, and the maths that decides whether it helps

The mechanics are less interesting than the arithmetic. An agent working through a long job has to get every step right in a row. As a result, small error rates compound fast.

How reliable is a multi-step AI agent?

Here is the calculation. It is short enough to read and you can run it yourself:

"""How often does a multi-step agent finish a whole job correctly?"""


def end_to_end(step_accuracy, steps):
    """Chance all steps succeed in a row, as a percentage."""
    return step_accuracy**steps * 100


def steps_before_coinflip(step_accuracy):
    """How many steps until the job is likelier to fail than succeed."""
    steps = 1
    while end_to_end(step_accuracy, steps) >= 50:
        steps += 1
    return steps


for accuracy in (0.85, 0.95, 0.99):
    print(f"\nAgent is {accuracy:.0%} accurate on each single step:")
    for steps in (5, 10, 20, 50):
        clean = end_to_end(accuracy, steps)
        print(f" {steps:>2} steps -> {clean:5.1f}% finish clean")
    print(f" coin flip at {steps_before_coinflip(accuracy)} steps")

Running it prints this:

Agent is 85% accurate on each single step:
   5 steps -> 44.4% finish clean
  10 steps -> 19.7% finish clean
  20 steps -> 3.9% finish clean
  50 steps -> 0.0% finish clean
  coin flip at 5 steps

Agent is 95% accurate on each single step:
   5 steps -> 77.4% finish clean
  10 steps -> 59.9% finish clean
  20 steps -> 35.8% finish clean
  50 steps -> 7.7% finish clean
  coin flip at 14 steps

Agent is 99% accurate on each single step:
   5 steps -> 95.1% finish clean
  10 steps -> 90.4% finish clean
  20 steps -> 81.8% finish clean
  50 steps -> 60.5% finish clean
  coin flip at 69 steps

What those numbers mean in practice

In plain words, for anyone who skipped the code:

An agent that gets 85 out of 100 individual clicks right finishes a ten-step job cleanly about one time in five.
Push it to 95 out of 100 and the same ten-step job works about six times in ten. Better, still not something you would leave unwatched.
You need roughly 99 out of 100 before long jobs hold together, and even then a fifty-step job fails about four times in ten.
This is why the demos look magical and the rollouts disappoint. A demo is a short job. Your actual work is a long one.

It also tells you how to use these tools well. Short, bounded jobs with a checkable result are where they pay off. Long unattended chains, by contrast, are where they quietly burn money.

What it costs

Prices below were checked on 2 September 2026. This corner of the market is repricing constantly, so treat these as a starting point and confirm before you buy.

Option	Upfront cost	Ongoing cost	Hidden costs	Best for
Carry on as you are	None	None in cash	The hours themselves. Work that only one person knows how to do.	Anyone whose repetitive work is under a few hours a week
Grok Bot (xAI)	None	No standalone plan. Bundled into SuperGrok Plus and Heavy, and Cursor Pro Plus, Ultra and Teams tiers. Plans include a weekly allowance.	Usage past the allowance is billed from model and token cost. Grok 4.6 runs $2 per million input tokens and $6 per million output, doubling above 200k tokens. Reports say there is no product-specific spend cap yet.	Individuals already paying for one of those plans
Warmwind OS	None	Listed at 1 euro per hour of worker time when checked on 27 August 2026, with a launch promotion at half price.	Idle time still counts as worker time. Screen-driven runs are slower than direct connections, so the same job burns more minutes.	Smaller firms with old software and European data rules to satisfy
Traditional RPA (UiPath and similar)	Consultant setup, often weeks	Per-licence, quoted by sales	Breaks whenever a screen layout changes. Needs someone on staff to maintain it.	Large, stable, high-volume processes

Three things to take from the table:

Nobody publishes a number you can plan against. Warmwind gives an hourly rate but the hours depend on how slow the screen work is. Grok Bot gives no separate price at all, only an allowance inside a bundle.
Hourly and token billing means the bill scales with how badly the agent struggles. A job that goes wrong twice costs three times as much as one that works.
Even so, free trials do not tell you the running cost. The published guidance is to treat the first month as an experiment, not a budget line.

Pros and cons

What genuinely works

Reaches software that has no other way in. This is the real advance. Old systems that no integration ever supported can now be driven.
Setup is also quick. No consultant, no integration project. You describe the job or record yourself doing it once.
Work continues without you. Overnight jobs finish while your machine is off.
Teaching by demonstration is far easier than writing rules, and it is how both products expect you to start.

What genuinely does not

Reliability compounds badly, as the numbers above show. This is the central limitation and no vendor has solved it.
Screen-watching is also fragile by nature. A redesigned page, a pop-up, a slow load, or an unexpected login prompt can derail a run that worked yesterday.
Costs are hard to predict and, in at least one case, hard to cap.
Weak isolation between agents. xAI’s own documentation states the cloud computer belongs to your account rather than to each bot, and warns explicitly against using separate bots as a security boundary. Logins and files are shared across all of them.
The analyst forecasts point the other way from the hype. Gartner expects more than 40 percent of agentic AI projects to be cancelled by the end of 2027, citing runaway costs, unclear value and weak risk controls. Surveys through 2026 repeatedly found most pilots never reaching production.

On that last point, one correction to a claim you will see everywhere. 2027 is being sold as the year these tools take over. The evidence available today points instead to 2027 being the year the weaker projects get cancelled. Both things can be true: the technology is real and improving, and most attempts to deploy it will still fail. Pick your jobs accordingly.

Key takeaways

These tools are genuinely new in one respect: they can operate software that offers no other way in, by looking at the screen and clicking.
Two credible products launched in August 2026. Warmwind OS drives the screen for everything. Grok Bot prefers a direct connection and only drives the screen when it must.
Reliability compounds. At 85 percent per step, a ten-step job finishes cleanly about one time in five. Short, checkable jobs are where these tools earn their keep.
Costs are unpredictable by design. Warmwind was listed at 1 euro per worker hour in late August 2026. Grok Bot has no standalone price and bills overflow usage by the token.
Nobody has solved supervision. Budget for someone to check the output, and do not point an agent at anything expensive without an approval step.
Gartner expects over 40 percent of agentic AI projects to be cancelled by the end of 2027. Start with one small job you can verify, not a department-wide rollout.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is an agentic AI digital coworker?

It is software that gets its own computer in the cloud, with a browser, filesystem and

screen, and completes a whole multi-step task rather than answering a single question. It works

in the background while your own machine is off, and returns to you when it needs a decision, a

password or permission to send something.

How much does agentic AI cost in 2026?

Neither major product publishes a number you can plan against. Warmwind OS was listed at 1

euro per hour of worker time when checked on 27 August 2026, with a launch promotion at half

price. Grok Bot has no standalone plan at all; it is bundled into SuperGrok Plus and Heavy and

Cursor Pro tiers with a weekly allowance, and overflow usage is billed at Grok 4.6 token rates

of 2 dollars per million input tokens and 6 dollars per million output. Because billing is

hourly or per token, the bill scales with how badly the agent struggles.

Why do agentic AI agents fail on long tasks?

Accuracy compounds across steps. An agent that is 85 percent accurate on each individual step

finishes a ten-step job cleanly only about one time in five, and reaches a coin flip at five

steps. At 95 percent accuracy a ten-step job works about six times in ten. You need roughly 99

percent per step before long jobs hold together, and even then a fifty-step job fails about four

times in ten. This is why demos, which are short jobs, look magical while real rollouts

disappoint.

Should we choose Grok Bot or Warmwind OS?

Judge each on which of your tools it can actually reach. Grok Bot is a hybrid: it prefers a

proper connection to an app where one exists and drives the screen only as a fallback, and it

runs on macOS, Windows and iPhone with no Linux, Android or iPad version at launch. Warmwind OS

is a pure screen-driver on a cloud Linux desktop, needs no integrations, and is the stronger fit

for old business software and for firms bound by European data-protection rules.

Is 2027 the year agentic AI takes over?

The evidence available today points the other way. Gartner expects more than 40 percent of

agentic AI projects to be cancelled by the end of 2027, citing runaway costs, unclear value and

weak risk controls. Both things can be true at once: the technology is real and improving, and

most attempts to deploy it will still fail. Start with one small job you can verify rather than

a department-wide rollout.

What does agentic AI not solve?

Two things. It does not remove the need to check the work, especially where money or

customers are involved, so budget for a human reviewer and an approval step. And it does not

make a messy process tidy: if a workflow only works because a person quietly fixes things,

handing it to an agent hands over the mess too.

The post Beyond the Chatbot: What the New Digital Coworkers Actually Do, and What They Cost appeared first on Bluetick Consultants Inc..