This could be anthropic's marketing team.

This isn't the usecase that's being criticized. Here you are responsible for the fix. You will validate and ship it and if something goes wrong, you will answer for it. The AI won't answer for it.

The key word from the video is "responsibility".

Who is going to be responsible for the code? AI is definitely not responsible.

look at gold price

Sam and Dario "The society can tolerate a few deaths to AI"

If the role is eliminated, then the responsibility of the verifying and managing the docs will fall on somebody else.

AI does not take responsibility

They are probably trying to build influence. Why is a startup that is burning cash donating money?

Businesses should definitely support the open source projects that they use. I'm still astounded that professional developers seem so adverse to paying for the tools and libraries that they use to make their own money.

Is it so hard to imagine that they do it because the PSF's work is important and they want to support them? All the AI labs depend hugely on the Python ecosystem and infrastructure. Startups burning cash spend on many things that are important to them.

They are heavily focused on code. Claude Code likely generates 100 of millions lines of Python a day, make the language a little bit better with $1.5M is extremely high leverage.

And if this money improves PyPI security (part of the focus), that reduces the chance of Claude Code adding malicious packages to a code base (a well publicized case of this could be a big PR headache for Anthropic). This donation is likely much better leverage than trying to somehow add mitigation at the Claude Code level.

Care to elaborate on how $1.5M makes Python better?

The donation is earmarked for security concerns, ie. improving PyPI from a security perspective to prevent/mitigate supply chain attacks, etc. This means a more healthy Python ecosystem, which also benefits their products which are utilizing said ecosystem likely more than any other.

You’re asking how money can be used to improve software?

Yes, because lots of these comments seem to imply that more money necessarily makes it better, which is often not the case.

Of course they are. These donations usually come out of the marketing budget. And it's working, we're talking about them.

But also they rely heavily on Python and want to support the ecosystem.

really find a negative in it ey - what type of donation and from who would be acceptable to you to fund the python foundation?

This is a step to take control and move in a direction that will profit them greatly.

May or may not benefit the community.

"The society will tolerate some amount of deaths to AI vehicles"

That's the correct answer; the problem is that society may not tolerate those deaths.

Its not unlimited, the compute allocation was one of the reason for the coup at OpenAI

Pretty sure that was scientists competing for 6 month training runs of new 100B+ parameter models, not coders burning through a couple of million tokens.

KEF Q Series Speakers, Q11 Meta, Q6 Meta