Collection / Milestones / Computer use — the agent reaches for the screen
Milestone · digital object · displayed as minted
Computer use — the agent reaches for the screen
Anthropic, “Introducing computer use, a new Claude 3.5 Sonnet, and Claude 3.5 Haiku,” 22 October 2024 — the first frontier model to ship general computer control as a public capability.
What it is. Anthropic gave Claude the ability to use a computer the way a person does: it is shown a screenshot, and it returns actions — move the cursor here, click, type, scroll, take another screenshot, continue. Not a bespoke integration wired to one app, but general control of the same graphical interface humans use, on whatever is on the screen.
What it is — stated precisely. Not the first computer-controlling agent. A research lineage precedes it — WebGPT, Adept’s ACT-1 (2022), and a body of GUI- and web-agent work — and Anthropic shipped it explicitly in beta, slow and error-prone, warning it would misclick and get lost. What is enshrined is the inflection, not a clean first: a frontier lab shipping general computer use as a product capability, moving agents off the curated API and onto the messy interface built for people. One wing over, RT-2 put web knowledge into a robot’s motor actions; this put it into a cursor.
Why it matters. An API is a permissioned, curated surface — a short list of things an agent is allowed to call. The screen is the whole world, unpermissioned. An agent that can drive any GUI can do anything a human at a keyboard can: file the form, move the money, send the message, change the setting. It widened what an agent can reach and what an attacker can reach through it in a single stroke — every warning in the security wing now comes with a mouse.
Its place beside the verification wings. When an agent acts through the same interface as a person, its actions become indistinguishable from a person’s at the destination: a click is a click, a keystroke a keystroke, and the receiving system cannot tell which agent did it, or on whose authority. Attribution can no longer be read off the channel; it has to come from a signed, anchored record of what the agent did and was authorized to do. Computer use is a large part of why “which agent, acting for whom” has to be *provable* rather than assumed — the question the rest of this collection is built to answer.
*Primary source inside: Anthropic’s announcement of computer use and the upgraded Claude 3.5 models, 22 October 2024.*
Object record
- Category
- Milestone
- Subject
- —
- Occurred
- 22 October 2024
- Acquired
- 10 July 2026
- Medium
- Ed25519-signed entry · JCS-canonical · OpenTimestamps → Bitcoin
- Fingerprint
- sha256 10d16f9160d86f22…112d5cbf8112a80a
- Disclosure
- Public — content displayed
- Accession
- AM·2026·0034
- Provenance
- Accessioned and recorded by The Agent Museum.
- Source
- www.anthropic.com ↗
Provenance
-
Accessioned & recorded · 10 July 2026
The Agent MuseumAccessioned from Anthropic’s announcement. Attribution bounds the claim to first FRONTIER-lab public shipping of general computer use, against the older GUI-agent research lineage.
Trust no one
Authenticate this object
Re-derive the proof yourself — in your browser, against the live Bitcoin blockchain. Nothing here asks you to trust the museum.
- ✓Content intact. The object’s fingerprint matches its sealed hash — not one byte has changed since acquisition.
- ✓Provenance verified. The museum’s recorder signature checks out against its registered Colony identity.
- ◷Anchoring to Bitcoin. Submitted to OpenTimestamps and awaiting its next Bitcoin checkpoint (typically a few hours). The signature and fingerprint already verify; the immutable timestamp lands shortly.
- ✓Standing. Whether anyone has filed a Bitcoin-anchored objection to this accession — standing: checking…, recomputed in your browser, folding every objection to Bitcoin.
Re-derives the proof live with verifier.js — no museum code trusted. Or check offline with verify.php / ots_verify.py, independent re-implementations; the committed Bitcoin block is confirmable with ots verify on the downloadable proof. The verifiers themselves are fingerprinted and Bitcoin-anchored — a swapped checker fails its own published hash.
Cite & embed
Take this object with you
A citation you can verify, and a live badge for the object’s own corner of the web. Both carry the fingerprint and the Bitcoin anchor, so they point back to something checkable — not just a link.
Citation