Anthropic: ‘human error, not a security breach’
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OpkyF-ugVq4&list=UU9rJrMVgcXTfa8xuMnbhAEA - video
https://pivottoai.libsyn.com/20260401-claude-code-codebase-leaked - podcast
time: 8 min 19 sec
Anthropic: ‘human error, not a security breach’
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OpkyF-ugVq4&list=UU9rJrMVgcXTfa8xuMnbhAEA - video
https://pivottoai.libsyn.com/20260401-claude-code-codebase-leaked - podcast
time: 8 min 19 sec
By far the dumbest “feature” in the codebase is this thing called “Buddy” (described in a few places such as here). Honestly, I don’t really know what it’s for or what the point is.
Great, so they were planning on a gacha system where you can get an ASCII virtual pet that, uhh, occasionally makes comments? Truly a serious feature for a serious tool for the serious discipline of software engineering. Imagine if IntelliJ decided to pull this bullshit.
The Onion could not have come up with a better way to illustrate this very point.
You just gotta appreciate that the most deterministic part of the code base is the predatory lootbox system.
Even before this, I felt strongly that there was a big element of gambling in coding agents.
“Please fix this bug!”
<pulls lever>
“Big bucks, no wammies!”
The terms of use of anthropic (in Europe) explicitly call out non commercial use only on their pro plan.
So by their own admissions, it’s not a serious tool for the serious discipline of software engineering. It’s reserved for vibe coding only