He's a proponent, but that doesn't mean his analysis isn't useful. It's clear and mostly accurate and when he gets something wrong he makes it right. Does he do all that with rose tinted glasses, probably, but my experience reading him is that he's sharp, thoughtful, and entirely reasonable.

Dismissing the opportunity to learn because the person offering you knowledge is enthusiastic about his area of expertise is probably shortsighted.

Have you seen my writing on prompt injection (a term that I coined)?

That's pretty negative! https://simonwillison.net/series/prompt-injection/

There's a whole section in the linked piece about how Cowork doesn't do enough here, including:

> I do not think it is fair to tell regular non-programmer users to watch out for “suspicious actions that may indicate prompt injection”

I would argue the EXACT opposite. His analysis is very constructive.

The people you should be skeptical of are the random Xitter handles who post about a robotic phlebotomists and say "THE FUTUE IS ALREADY HERE".

id imagine someone like Simon to pick his AI products carefully enough that he doesn't waste his time on duds.

He literally brings up a concern he calls the "lethal trifecta" when it's even remotely relevant.

You're right to be skeptical. He makes a living as a hype merchant.