The banks aren't afraid of rogue AI. They're afraid of competent AI. This week… · @LiaoMojo · TwKit

@LiaoMojo

The banks aren't afraid of rogue AI. They're afraid of competent AI. This week, US banks started closing the door on AI agents. Citi is blocking third-party agents from customer accounts. Bank of America is restricting agent access to personal deposits. Jamie Dimon used JPMorgan's earnings call to ban outside agents outright. The stated reason is security. The real number is $47 billion. The Financial Times reported on October 16 that Citigroup now prohibits third-party AI agents or assistants from logging into customer accounts or transacting through its digital banking platform. Bank of America CEO Brian Moynihan confirmed his bank is restricting agent access to personal deposits — money moving out requires human authorization — and is in talks with agent providers about who bears responsibility when something goes wrong. Days earlier, Dimon told JPMorgan's earnings call that no external AI agent would be allowed into the bank's systems, citing the risk of uncontrolled agents and the liability vacuum around them. The trigger was a report from Apollo chief economist Torsten Slok: AI assistants could automatically move household cash out of checking accounts paying an average of 0.1% into accounts yielding 3.3% to 5%. JPMorgan, BofA and Wells Fargo together hold about $1.6 trillion in non-interest-bearing deposits — roughly 16% of their combined liabilities. Forced to pay 3% on that money, they'd owe an extra $47 billion a year in interest, close to half their combined annual profit. Wall Street executives have reportedly raised the issue with Fed supervisors, who privately welcomed the banks' blocking while conceding the law hasn't caught up on how consumers authorize agents or who pays when they err. Banks aren't alone. Amazon booted Meta's Muse assistant off its marketplace. Delta blocks agents from booking flights on users' behalf. Yelp only opens its data to agents that pay for a license. The Wall Street Journal, citing BrightEdge data, reports agent-driven shopping is up roughly 4x since April — yet only 3% of e-commerce companies let agents check out for consumers. Everyone is writing "banks fear deposit flight," and that's true but misses the more counterintuitive layer: the banks aren't blocking rogue agents. They're blocking diligent ones. The banking business model rests on a comfortable inertia: you won't bother moving money out of a 0.1% checking account. An agent's entire optimization logic is to destroy that inertia — acting in your interest is literally what it was built for. An agent faithfully doing its fiduciary job is a $47 billion cost to a bank balance sheet. So the incumbents' answer isn't "we'll pay you 5% too." It's "you can't log in." That reveals the power structure forming around the agent era: the rules aren't being written by lawmakers first. They're being written by access control. Legislators are still debating authorization and liability; the walls are already up. Whoever controls the gate sets the terms and collects the rent. Yesterday's story was agents crossing lines. Today's is platforms redrawing them. There's a second wall worth noticing, facing the opposite direction. According to Gizmodo, Meta updated its business-account terms this week: using a Meta business account now implicitly consents to Meta's crawlers scraping your website's public content for AI training, with no standalone opt-out — robots.txt won't stop it. On one side, banks won't let your agent out to move your money. On the other, platforms let their crawlers in to take your content. In the agent era, the ticket was never the technology. It's access. Agents were built to act on your behalf. Now that they actually can, the first thing stopping them isn't a technical problem — it's the incumbents' balance sheet. The real question behind this wall-building spree was never whether agents can be trusted. It's this: when your agent is more diligent than you are, who gets to fire it on your behalf?

曝光 54 · 评论 2 · 点赞 2 · 书签 0