Photo credit: www.theverge.com

Revolutionizing Cheating: The Rise of Cluely, the AI Assistant

For years, technology advocates have advocated for the mantra of “working smarter, not harder.” Two enterprising 21-year-olds from Columbia University are taking this to a controversial level with their new AI tool, Cluely, which they tout as an opportunity to “cheat on everything,” having raised a staggering $5.3 million for the venture.

Cluely’s online manifesto is straightforward: “We want to cheat on everything.” This isn’t just another standard chatbot; the creators describe their product as an “undetectable AI-powered assistant,” designed for use during virtual meetings, sales calls, and other scenarios. The tool claims to enhance user performance by discreetly providing information based on the content displayed on the user’s screen and audio cues. In essence, Cluely aims to ensure that users appear more knowledgeable and capable without their listeners ever suspecting a thing.

Chungin “Roy” Lee, one of the co-founders, articulates the potential of Cluely during a recent video conversation. He draws a vivid picture of a salesperson equipped with this tool: “Imagine you’re trying to sell something, and this tool knows every single detail about them, their professional lives, about you, and about your company. It’s as if you’ve done 10 hours of research, and suddenly, you have answers to every question they pose, every objection they raise.” Lee calls this approach “true AI maximalism,” where AI is leveraged to its fullest potential.

Lee gained significant attention for previously using a similar tool, Interview Coder, which he developed to facilitate programmers in utilizing AI during job interviews. This venture got him suspended from Columbia University, leading both Lee and co-founder Neel Shamugan to drop out amidst the controversy surrounding the tool. Rather than facing the music of disciplinary action, they opted to pursue their entrepreneurial aspirations full-time.

Recently, Cluely expanded its reach with a promotional ad that raised eyebrows. In a quirky twist, Lee uses the tool to impersonate a 30-year-old senior software engineer on a date, the display providing him with real-time analysis of his date’s speech and suggesting contextual responses to keep the conversation flowing smoothly. The portrayal has shades of a contemporary Cyrano de Bergerac, as Cluely assists in managing his dating deception.

Curiosity about the product led me to connect with Lee for a firsthand experience of Cluely in action. However, what unfolded during our Zoom interaction was a far cry from the seamless functionality presented in their promotional material.

The initial moments of my call were marred by technical difficulties, arranged audio samples not translating into the quick insight I had envisioned. The AI struggled with context recognition, and my attempts to prompt it using the keyboard grew increasingly obvious and cumbersome. Delays in generating responses turned a potentially engaging dialogue into an awkward experience.

These issues were not lost on Lee, who reflects that Cluely is still in its nascent development stages, indicating that the recent ad served more as a vision statement than a product launch. The promise of AI remains strong; however, challenges with its practical application often undermine the grand ideas presented by tech innovators.

While making sense of Cluely proved frustrating, I recalled Lee’s enthusiasm for its potential. He asserts that AI is superior to a traditional search engine: “AI will just give you better answers than Google does.” Yet, one must ponder—what happens if the AI’s performance is lackluster or its responses are too generic?

During my attempts to utilize Cluely with colleagues, the experience was similarly lackluster. My queries often led to delayed or overly formal responses, leaving conversations feeling disconnected. In a more casual interaction with my editor, the AI-generated output felt irrelevant and tardy. In both settings, I wrestled with integrating the tool into genuine communication, realizing the challenge of effectively “cheating” in a moment that relied on authentic engagement.

Moreover, Cluely’s own guidelines suggest transparency with those involved, trivializing the act of deception that the product encourages. Getting consent from meeting participants felt defeating to the overall objective of “cheating.” In one instance, persistent audio issues left my team asking me to mute myself, shattering any illusion of competence that Cluely aimed to bolster.

Lee envisions a future where AI seamlessly enhances our day-to-day interactions, suggesting that the tool symbolizes a broader shift toward significant advancements in our capabilities. However, the reality is that current technology requires effort to integrate into our workflows, sometimes leading to less efficient outcomes than simply engaging without assistance. As I navigated my experiences with Cluely, I couldn’t help but feel that the pursuit of an easier path might ultimately add to one’s burdens instead of alleviating them.

In this burgeoning era of technological wonder, it remains to be seen how Cluely and similar tools will evolve—and whether they will fulfill their promise of making our lives simpler or merely complicate them further.

Source
www.theverge.com