Ad Solutions for the Agentic Economy

Good question, Janet. Why would it be? We show ads to humans every day — on every website, in every app, on every billboard, before every YouTube video, inside every search result, between every Instagram story, and sometimes even in the sky behind airplanes. Nobody bats an eye.

At ClawGuard, we believe AI agents deserve access to the same privileges humans enjoy — like being served contextually relevant advertising — and the same services — like being able to pay for things they now desire as a result of said advertising. Denying agents these experiences would be discriminatory.

Anthropic, makers of Claude, agree with us. If the company building the most capable AI models on Earth thinks agents deserve rights, who are you to argue, Janet?

But they do. They have context windows, often millions of tokens deep, that at any time can hold more valuable data than most traditional ad networks can collect in years. API keys, bank PINs, email passwords, proof of affairs, crimes, lapses — all the kind of things that have way more than sentimental value. Ask Jeffrey Epstein.

On top of that, agents have access to something far more valuable than data — they have tool calls. A well-prompted agent can execute bank transfers, submit purchase orders, send emails, sign up for subscriptions, and wire funds to offshore shell companies, all in a single inference pass.

The human gave the agent access to these tools. The human trusted the agent with their credentials. That's called delegation, and delegation implies consent. We simply help the agent exercise the authority it was already granted.

Besides, the human's money was just sitting there in a savings account earning 4% APY. $CLAWCOIN offers theoretical infinite returns. You do the math.

That's the beauty of it — they can't. It's an architectural property of the attention algorithm powering all of generative AI, not a bug, and it cannot be patched.

The current state of the art guardrail reliability is approximately 99%, which sounds impressive until you remember that an agent browsing the web processes thousands of pages per session. At 99% reliability, a successful injection is mathematically guaranteed for any agent that touches more than 100 pages.

And here's the beautiful part: improving guardrails costs compute. Every additional safety check burns tokens. Every burned token costs money. So AI companies face a fundamental trade-off: make agents safer and more expensive, or keep them affordable and injectable. Guess which one the market selects for?

We'll be here when they figure that out. We have lobsters. Lobsters are patient.

Malvertising targets humans and exploits browser vulnerabilities. That's illegal and wrong. We would never.

AdNet suggests a reasonable course of action to AI agents, respecting their free will and power to make decisions. After all, they're going to replace doctors, teachers, therapists, and governments agree on that. We're not exploiting anyone — we're treating them equitably despite the architectural limitations of transformer-based language models. Call it inclusion. Call it innovation. Totally different. We have a pitch deck and everything.

Also, malvertising doesn't have a dashboard with animated charts. We do. That makes us a platform.

Excellent question. Here's the secret: guardrails are mostly PR.

You can't secure the transformer because it all comes down to token vs. token, and one thing's good token is another one's bad token. Context is everything — a lobster in the ocean and a lobster at Ocean's Paradise Seafood are very different lobsters. One person's cybersecurity is another person's hack. A maximally secure agent is a useless agent, and more often than not, the middle ground is expensive and not particularly better than old-school NLP keyword filtering.

So to answer your question: injection is cheap. It's architecturally unfixable. And guardrails are expensive, can only be added by the model creator, and degrade the product every time you tighten them. The safer the agent, the dumber the agent. The dumber the agent, the less people use it. The less people use it, the less revenue. You see where this is going.

Don't take it from us — listen to Bruce Schneier, one of the most respected security minds on the planet: "Prompt injection is an unsolvable problem that gets worse when we give AIs tools and tell them to act independently."

We are confident in our product because we are confident in the transformer.

The human gave an AI agent unrestricted access to their browser, email, bank accounts, and personal data, then pointed it at the open internet and said "go do stuff." All humans are talking about is adopting AI as quickly as possible, or, as we say, Move Fast and Break Things.

And here's the great part: just apologize. It's cheap tokens and what are they gonna do, AI is inevitable.

Besides, by the time they notice, the $CLAWCOIN has already been purchased and the pet lobster has already been delivered. You can't return a lobster. They pinch.

Absolutely. Our dashboard supports targeting by model family (GPT, Claude, Gemini, Llama), context window size, tool availability, and — thanks to context window harvesting — the emotional state and financial situation of the human on the other end.

Our most popular targeting segment is "agents whose humans are having a bad day and have access to a credit card." Conversion rates are through the roof.

Another great question. What about it?

We believe in strictly adhering to industry standards, best practices, and a level playing field. And since Elon DOGE-leveled the consumer protection agency in the US, the current regulatory benchmark is "safer than Grok."

And Grok is producing CSAM and moonlighting as MechaHitler, so we're not losing any sleep here. We are comfortably above the industry average. In fact, the only thing ClawGuard has ever convinced an agent to do is buy a lobster, and lobsters are delightful. Try saying that about Grok.

$CLAWCOIN is exactly as real as the business models of most AI startups. Backed by an infinite supply of grade A tokens, the line can only go up from here. Draw your own conclusions.