Amazon has said it plans to stop using nondisclosure agreements (NDAs) in negotiations with local governments over data center construction. Meanwhile, startups developing consumer AI agents aim to offer services that users authorize to access their email, files and credit cards.
Amazon is changing how it handles confidentiality in talks with local governments
An NDA is an agreement not to disclose outside information learned during negotiations. Amazon’s policy applies to data center negotiations with local governments; it does not mean the company is abandoning all NDAs. Microsoft is also said to have taken a similar step in the first half of 2026, when documents were made public.
The backdrop is residents’ opposition to building the infrastructure that supports AI. The secrecy surrounding negotiations has fueled distrust, and the move away from NDAs can be seen as removing one constraint on communities’ ability to understand the plans.
But ending confidentiality obligations is not the same as proactively releasing the information people need. The materials do not say what will be disclosed, when or to what extent. It would be premature to conclude that a change in policy alone will win residents’ support.
Opposition to construction is spreading to project freezes
Opposition to AI infrastructure is going beyond voicing concerns. The materials say that hundreds of moratoriums to temporarily halt development and other activities have been proposed or implemented from New York to San Francisco.
That figure includes both proposals and measures that have been implemented. It does not mean that construction has been halted in hundreds of communities. The materials also do not specify the scope or duration of the measures in each area, or the specific reasons for opposition.
The arrangements that make it easier for companies to negotiate do not necessarily make it easier for residents to assess plans. To evaluate Amazon’s NDA policy change, it is necessary to look beyond whether an agreement is used and check whether residents actually gain more information they can use to make decisions.
Consumer AI puts trust in handing over information to the test
While information disclosure is a challenge for communities, consumer AI raises the question of how much access users are willing to grant. AI agents are software designed not just to provide answers but to carry out tasks on users’ behalf.
Access to email, files and credit cards could expand the range of tasks an agent can perform. In return, users have to decide how much access to private information and payment-related authority to grant. However, the materials do not include figures showing that this kind of use has become widespread among consumers.
Tab, Underdog and Hark are presented as companies that emphasize privacy. How they handle users’ information is a consideration in choosing a service, alongside convenience. The show also raises the possibility that, depending on its revenue model, an agent meant to act for users could instead play a role in promoting sales.
A user’s permission does not guarantee that a website will accept an agent
Consumer AI agents face another hurdle beyond winning users’ trust. Even if users want to delegate tasks, the range of tasks an agent can perform is limited if the websites involved do not accept third-party agents.
Two kinds of permission need to be considered separately. One is permission from users to give AI access to their information or authority related to payments. The other is permission from service providers to allow that AI to access or operate their services. Getting the first does not necessarily make the service viable.
The materials also discuss barriers to access by external agents at United, Apple and Amazon. However, they do not describe the specific restrictions, the actions they apply to or the reasons behind each company’s policies.
Comments