What are your thoughts on using agents to write and handle your emails?

Support the model assuming no write action without human confirmation and no possibility of out of band action or data exfiltration.

It's hard not to be jealous.

What he did is incredible, he grabbed attention of the tech community like no other...however good or bad he was at it and making it secure.

He was curious and experimental and got lucky!

Opus 4.5 is shredded! I hope this doesn't cause anyone to get a little nervous.

Great insights Namanyay!

I feel the same way about needing to build platforms that enable companies to build on top. That's why i'm building adventureflow.ai to enable energy companies to build their agentic workflows directly on top of my platform.

The expectations have completely changed now, customers expect more software for less, because it is 5-10x cheaper now or faster to build and there's no changing that. Tools like Opus 4.5 have completely disrupted the software marketplace!

I disagree. I think that DHH proved that is not the case with the AWS bill. They saved millions by getting off of it. As software is now 10x cheaper to create, it's going to really wipe enterprise value away from the incumbents. There's going to be companies in the middle where they are fed up with their bills and they innovate in house and get ahead building solutions that are even closer to what they want. Thankfully, this is good for the software market and gives jobs to all those who were laid off at the big tech companies. At least, that's my hope.

This is interesting! What would you recommend first?

You would hope so, but it doesn't seem so in today's job market. Have you seen how many applicants are on open SWE job postings these days?

Anecdotely, I’m in the interview pool at my mid size company. Our offer to application ratio is 0.4% with over 7000 applications. We are a fully remote company.

I have personally referred 6 people who I know are qualified. Only two got interviews and no offers.

Hell my offer to referral ratio was 50% at AWS. The job market really sucks right now

I think you are right. My intuition makes me think they are wanting to prevent you from getting too much of your own information where you can be independent. They want to keep you dependent.

These are my first degree connections. I don't see what's wrong with getting a list of my own connections.

What's wrong is that you're trying to violate their email privacy settings. The 5% of emails you did get are from the contacts who shared their email with you and enabled the "Allow connection to export emails" setting; the other 95% did not choose to let you export their email address, as is their right since it belongs to them.

It's on their contact page and they are a first degree connection. I can view it by going to their page.

But that's a different setting. Consent for Linkedin to show you my email does not imply consent for my email to be exported into a third party list.

Again, I think you'd benefit from researching the Cambridge Analytica scandal to understand what's going on here. There was a time when social media worked according to the intuition you're describing, where you should be able to export from the platform any information you can see on the platform, and it led to results that the public and regulators really did not like. Companies like Cambridge Analytica were able to build detailed profiles on Person X, without Person X's consent or knowledge, simply because Person Y who happened to be friends with them agreed to share data with a Facebook quiz. So now that's not how things are done.

I understand the problem with building a caricature of other people, but when it comes to your own contact email list on a platform, you should be able to access that. Essentially, not being able to download that is away for them to prevent you from de-platforming. I argue, that they aren't truly trying to safeguard against automation, that's a disguise for trying to prevent you from de-platforming because then they can't monetize as well if you become independent and use your own direct outreach for your customer list. I'd hope they would have the best intentions, but this process has lead me to believe otherwise.

Did you confirm with each of your contacts that they want to be on your direct outreach list? If not, why should you be able to de-platform with their emails?

I don’t think this is about ignoring consent. It’s about who controls relationships. These are mutual, first-degree connections, and the emails are intentionally visible to me.

LinkedIn isn’t protecting people from misuse here; it’s preventing portability. If the concern were outreach consent, that could be handled with clearer user controls. Blocking access entirely keeps relationships dependent on the platform, which conveniently aligns with their business incentives.

Again, there's a very clear user control. On the email visibility settings page, there's a toggle named "Allow connection to export emails". The 5% of contacts who had an email in your data dump are the 5% of people who've chosen to let you export their email by enabling this toggle.

Originally I was the one who put all the email addresses into linkedin to begin with (in fact back when I started using linkedin, you needed their valid address to link up with them). So it's my own contact info list, or was. Since I couldn't get the info back out, I ultimately deleted my linkedin account.

I think this is the point that most people miss in the first place!

LinkedIn harvested peoples contacts under the guise that they were going to help you find connections, but instead they spammed your entire contact list through their outlook plugin and now when you try to get your lists and contacts out they make it extremely painful.