Do we really need more technology to help us buy milk?
Visa’s new Intelligent Commerce initiative, unveiled last week, invites developers to plug AI “agents” directly into Visa’s payment rails so the software can not only hunt for deals but complete the transaction on the cardholder’s behalf. Visa says the platform brings the same fraud‑detection models that blocked $40 billion in fraud last year to agent‑driven purchases and envisions use cases from booking a complex trip to securing hard‑to‑get concert seats.
The idea is seductive: tell an assistant your budget and preferences, then return later to find flights, rooms, and tickets already confirmed. When the task is genuinely convoluted, or extremely time‑sensitive, delegating to code could feel like a super‑power. For merchants, an always‑on agent might convert intent to sales faster than any banner ad.
But do we need software to decide when it’s time to buy milk? Online groceries and same‑day delivery already remove most friction. Giving an algorithm real‑time access to pantry data and a payment credential risk turning a simple errand into yet another subscription we barely monitor. Skeptics also flag privacy and security: every new data stream is another target, and “autonomous spending” may amplify unauthorized transactions or algorithmic bias.
Ultimately, Intelligent Commerce is less about shopping than about attention. If AI can reclaim hours spent hunting fares or refreshing ticket queues, society may gain. Yet dedicating models to reorder milk while hunger, climate, and health crises remain under‑resourced feels misaligned. The real question isn’t whether agents can buy it for us. It’s whether that capability deserves to top the innovation backlog.
