I can't help but feel there is a funny pattern going on.
A lot of companies want to embrace AI, agents, etc. so they make their platforms easier to use by AI, implementing whatever the latest craze is.
I imagine we're going to see a lot more APIs open up (agentic finances?), a lot of granular access controls, etc.
Where was all of this when regular users had been asking for it for _years_?
Empowering users in general is a good thing, so, in a way, it's a good thing that OpenClaw and things of this nature are exposing all the issues with access controls and API interactions that many of our services have.
Now we just need a reason for AI agents to need "dark mode" on websites...
I don't care about the AI implications but having someone put money into a flawless conversion of html into markdown will certainly improve terminal based web browsing :)
This seems useful beyond agents.
It will save tons of traffic for scripts, text browsers, low-bandwidth connections,etc
markdown is incredibly compact and easy to parse.
>We already see some of the most popular coding agents today – like Claude Code and OpenCode – send these accept headers with their requests for content.
This text/markdown scheme feels like it's begging for adversarial shenanigans since it lets you serve different content to agents than humans, by design.
> it lets you serve different content to agents than humans
You could always do that. The only difference is CloudFlare can now do this on-the-fly, automatically translating HTML to Markdown. My understanding is that you don't have control over the conversion.
It seems hard to tell what to think of a company that is simultaneously trying to poison the content that it sends to agents [1] and also doing things like this.
I understand their arguments for it - and completely disagree - so I can't help but think that anyone who is on the pro-AI side of things would do well to steer clear of them if possible.