Original Summary

Solo founder, 22, $0 revenue. I'm building a guardrail for AI agents: before an agent sends an email, deletes something or merges code, it has to ask first. Yesterday I sent 90 cold emails. Most went to developers who had publicly reported an AI agent doing something it shouldn't, in bug reports on GitHub. Three people replied. One of them was a security engineer, and her reply was brutal. Her first point: it's ironic that a product about compliance found her email in a bug report and used it for a cold email. She was right. Nobody cares how good your copy is if the address came from somewhere that feels like digging. I removed her from everything that same day, and I changed how I prospect. I still use public reports to find who has the problem. But I only reach people through channels they publish for that. Her second point: a check that runs on a remote server adds network latency, so it can't hold for real-time agents. That one is half right. Latency is real if your agent trades or talks on the phone. But for most agents, one model call already takes a second or two, and Microsoft's own agent platform calls an external security check before every tool, with a one-second budget. The real fix is running the check closer to the agent, which is on my list. The part that stung: she found the latency numbers in my own docs. I had published every internal benchmark in the name of transparency. Without context, a busy reader only remembers the worst number. I cleaned the docs the same night. What I took away: - Where you got the address matters more than what you write. - The angriest reply was the most useful one I got all day. - Don't publish raw internals in public docs. Write what helps the customer, keep the rest internal. What's the most brutal feedback you got from a cold email, and did it change anything?   submitted by   /u/Timely_Flamingo3351 [link]   [comments]

  • 情报分类：商业与市场研究
  • 分类依据：内容涉及商业、投资或市场动态
  • 信息来源：Reddit · SaaS
  • 发布时间：2026/10/13 13:48:06