If if was in cash, the money will go back into donations, charities, invest it in more startups ad the majority to fund for research.

While I do agree, no-one here made the initial claim on their valuation and especially suggesting that "Serving Opus 4.8" alone was worth a trillion+ valuation.

> Open weight models are going to catch up to Opus 4.8 and at that point the model is a pure commodity.

Good. We should all hope that happens.

This sort of attention is exactly what they would to showcase the powerful capabilities of their latest models.

* Free marketing before the IPO, demonstrating how already powerful their frontier models are.

* Governments to intervene in the rollout of these frontier models and blocking their access to whoever they want.

* A strong reason to apply these further restrictions onto releasing powerful open weight models to the public. (which is entirely a business threat to them.)

Given that they accepted funding from the Gulf states [0] despite it conflicting with their own "principles", I think we are well beyond the point of what they write / say vs to what they are actually doing.

This drama just tells us that the government declared them as the winner that has the most powerful model.

[0] https://www.datacenterdynamics.com/en/news/anthropic-to-seek...

> As we have stated publicly, we believe the government should have the ability to block unsafe deployments, as part of a statutory process that is transparent, fair, clear, and grounded in technical facts. This action does not adhere to those principles.

They ultimately got what they wanted.

There is something called the Streisand effect and they are about to unintentionally get a bunch of more token gamblers into their casino.

We'll see if this backfires hard, but then again constant doomsaying will get yourself under scrutiny and self exclusion (due to the 30+ day retention clause) and this is exactly what Anthropic wants for free marketing.

This is the same Microsoft that is now rewriting the TypeScript type checker, parser and its developer tools in Go after realizing that the bottleneck was...the performance of TypeScript itself, which is a basic compiled vs interpreted difference.

> And this was before AI was writing code in earnest; when LLM-induced brainrot really sets in, civilization is in for a world of fresh hurt: lots more generated code, almost all of it garbage.

Some folks using LLMs wouldn't realize why it makes zero sense to use TS / JS for building performant and optimal applications. This is why people were experiencing significant rendering bugs in terminal apps (they are not designed for that) and slow starts with Claude Code, which was completely vibe coded with Ink.

If you don't understand the basic fundamentals of what you are working on with LLMs and bugs are creeping up left and right, then you are just sinking in your own comprehension debt.

You could have ignored this post, but here you are commenting about it and posting schadenfreude over it.

It's okay to be a bit jealous of the employees who took that risk and made a fortune.

The envy here is astronomical.

Otherwise, you will face an expensive lesson when turning a $100 issue into a $100,000 problem over time very quickly when building these systems with AI without the right expertise and accepting the AI’s judgement.

If they can't explain their own code then it is by default a bad pull request.

At the end of the day, everyone's time is being wasted on tokens and on the increasing cognitive complexity of AI generated code.

They just showed that they CAN do this right in front of you. Local open weight models are a necessity.

Thanks for playing. (You got played)

I don't know about that. If a non-engineer is able to replicate your "serious" project from scratch as a "pet project" then perhaps it is not serious in the first place?

> So what they are missing is a platform to easily deploy and maintain their projects, much like a "normal" developer would.Right now it's quite tedious to set up this scaffolding, but it's absolutely possible with AGENTS.md, skills and rigid hollistic tests. Once done, non-technical people can continue developing independently without hiring any software engineers by simply telling claude/codex what they want.

You should already know that maintenance is never free. The big question is are they making money out of it to justify that maintenance?

Maybe it has replaced people that build useless pet projects that make no money, especially internal tools such as dashboards. But again once an incident arrives is when you need someone to untangle that vibe coded mess as it grows in complexity.

Unlike GitHub which something goes down every week. (unless you have $$$ for Enterprise)

It is only now being inspected by researchers and attackers who have found sandbox escapes [0] (chrome 0day), out-of-bounds [1] / use-after-free [2] and many other [3] flaws [4] in WebAssembly which I also agree that it is not enough for sandboxing at all.

[0] https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-11645

[1] https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2009901

[2] https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2013741

[3] https://www.miggo.io/vulnerability-database/cve/CVE-2026-269...

[4] https://github.com/bytecodealliance/wasm-micro-runtime/secur...