Anthropic, of course, is not just riding down the vibe bobsled, they have rocket packs attached to the bobsled, careening at record speed https://www.anthropic.com/engineering/redesigning-source-control
2 Boosts
1 Like
Can't wait til they announce an agent CEO.
@cwebber Gotta wonder what it is they're doing with all of this code? They're not exactly Facebook.
@cwebber Benjamin Button reviews the new version control system
@cwebber a bobsled is on a track and can steer, they're riding an explosion that is destroying everything behind them and mistaking it for a rocket
> the latent demand for merging code is practically infinite
Funny how this lines up nicely with the fact that they need to provide practically infinite value to survive financially.
Also funny how little actual evidence of this value there is outside the organization
@cwebber 600PB/day of quality git traffic
@cwebber 30,000 changes per day is insane. (although their statement about that is confusing, the graph seems to show most of September was below 30,000 but they say that was their rate for September)
@cwebber Also "Plus, Anthropic is unique in that our ability to spend tokens for internal use far exceeds what any other business would realistically want to spend."
They are bragging about 30k vibecoded commits to their codebase per day, and saying engineers are reviewing intent to keep them on track.
Anthropic has 2,500 engineers. Not all of them are doing code review, and probably not all on the project(s) counted here, but let's pretend they were.
At 30,000 commits per day, that is 12 slop PRs to review a day.
Literally more than one per hour.
Nobody can can review not only code but *intent* of what's happening at that point.
@cwebber I would not brag about this, this is absolute disaster waiting to happen. But then again, intended audience is not actual people working in field.
@cwebber It's an average of 12 LGTMs a day with weekends and vacations, without counting rejections or feedback cycles. FWIW, the maintainer of LLVM averages 1247 reviews in 24 weeks or 7.4/day, and he's super-human.
@cwebber computer goes brrrrrr
@cwebber presumably they ask the language model to produce a short markdown file describing the intent and then they review that
@cwebber why even bother with revision control at that point, they may as well just keep a daily snapshot and if something breaks then roll back to the last "good" day and throw everything since then away and try again
@aeva our new model generates 1 petaloc per second and we send it straight to dev null from safety precautions
@amsomniac @aeva so responsible! so rational! Have a billion dollars of EA money!
@cwebber Also their statement that their git *main* branch history is 100GB seems also bonkers.
I do have nearly 100GB of git/hg/… clones on my desktop, and it's in full data hoarder mode of basically every repo I've cloned often with build artifacts from like WebKit, linux trees, buildroot, illumos, {Free,Net,Open}BSD, live-bootstrap, quite few video games with assets either checked in or downloaded, …
I do have nearly 100GB of git/hg/… clones on my desktop, and it's in full data hoarder mode of basically every repo I've cloned often with build artifacts from like WebKit, linux trees, buildroot, illumos, {Free,Net,Open}BSD, live-bootstrap, quite few video games with assets either checked in or downloaded, …
@lanodan @cwebber Yeah, this was my take. What in the nine hells is all that code for? They actually have a pretty simple business, so why do they need such an enormous monorepo? Are they rewriting everything from the bootloaders and OS up from scratch? If so, what is the value in this endeavor? Just to burn venture capital?
If I were an AI VC (I'm not), I would be asking some very serious questions about what they are spending money on right now.
@lanodan @cwebber Thinking about it a little more - 100GB repo at these commit levels means the head codebase is well under 1GB, but with high "thinking" probably burned well over 1TB of tokens to create.
This is literally an infinite number of monkeys and typewriters trying to recreate the compleat works of William Shakespeare.
@cwebber I really really really want to know what these commits are doing - as in, what the fuck is the end goal here??
@cwebber Ah, but they're reviewing the commits with the help of AI! It accelerates everything!
I may need to ask the EU to release some more facepalm from their reserve stocks.
And they are saying they expect this rate of growth to continue. If it continues at the current *rate of growth* we will see number to keep growing *exponentially*.
@cwebber The establishment used to say that one good programmer works better than 10 incompetent ones, but what if the 10 incompetents were very very very cheap and also we make it ten hundred?
@cwebber reviewing for ❝intent.❞ A thing the bots definitionally cannot have.
The best possible interpretation is that they are just critiquing each others prompts. I see you admonished the nexus to be performant and secure, as is best practice. May torment be not upon you.
Of course, more likely, they're just treating the bots like people (and the people like bots).
@jenniferplusplus @cwebber
Immediately thought of this.
@cwebber OK, I want to see Anthropic take their rocket bobsled through the doodles at Königssee.