Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Anthropic invests $1.5M in the Python Software Foundation

discuss.python.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 192 posts

Re: Anthropic invests $1.5M in the Python Software Foundation

#101

Post by reactordev »

shadowgovt wrote: post #32
simianwords wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All this but none of the performance benefits.

It's true; mypy won't make your Python faster. To get something like that, you'd want to use Common LISP and SBCL; the SBCL compiler can use type assertions to actually throw away code-paths that would verify type expectations at runtime (introducing undefined behavior if you violate the type assertions). It's pretty great, because you can run it in debug mode where it will assert-fail if your static type assertions…

The point about mypy was it does type checking (static analysis) for your Python code. Not speeding it up.

Re: Anthropic invests $1.5M in the Python Software Foundation

#102

Post by mixmastamyk »

teh64 wrote: post #99
mixmastamyk wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The assertions above are my memory from pre-covid, I’d look at 2019 and before perhaps. Many things changed after that (and council too) but it takes a while to change perception.

In 2019 [0] they only had 2.5 million of total expenses, of which 75% was pycon. So even if everything else was on "outreach" (it was not), that would only be $642,500, which is not "several million a year". In 2020 [1] 48.1% went to "Packaging Work Group/Infrastructure/Other" (I assume because in person pycon was canceled). I also checked 2021 [2], which was 32.7% pycon and 31.2% pip etc... Also 2022 [3], 57.8% pyco…

As mentioned covid changed everything, so please stop pulling figures from that once in a lifetime event.

Re: Anthropic invests $1.5M in the Python Software Foundation

#103

Post by 9rx »

pansa2 wrote: post #42
shadowgovt wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a pretty nice best-of-both-worlds arrangement. The type information is there, but the program still runs without it (unless one is doing something really fancy, since it does actually make a runtime construct that can be introspected; some ORMs use the static type data to figure out database-to-object bindings). So you can go without types for prototyping, and then when you're happy with your prototype you can l…

> It's a pretty nice best-of-both-worlds arrangement It’s also a worst-of-both-worlds arrangement, in that you have to do the extra work to satisfy the type checker but don’t get the benefits of a compiled language in terms of performance and ease-of-deployment, and only partial benefits in terms of correctness (because the type system is unsound). AFAIK the Dart team felt this way about optional typing in Dart 1.x,…

Without dependent typing, it's the worst of all worlds anyway. You have to express types, but they aren't expressive enough to not have to also express the same in tests, leaving this weird place where you have to repeat yourself over and over.

That was an okay tradeoff for humans writing code as it enables things like the squiggly line as you type for basic mistakes, automatic refactoring, etc. But that stuff makes no difference to LLMs.

Re: Anthropic invests $1.5M in the Python Software Foundation

#104

Post by mixmastamyk »

nedbat wrote: post #97
mixmastamyk wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A foundation should invest in its technology first and resist the strong temptation to fund pet projects (of leadership) with donated money.

I'm not sure what you are labeling as pet projects of leadership? Is there something the PSF is doing that you consider a pet project rather than part of their core mission?

Yes, outreach before investing in packaging. It’s not that outreach is bad but that packaging was crumbling.

Re: Anthropic invests $1.5M in the Python Software Foundation

#105

Post by jjtheblunt »

bbor wrote: post #21
hdjdndndba wrote: post #5

This makes sense given how much of the current AI ecosystem is built on top of Python. I hope this helps the foundation improve security for everyone who relies on these libraries.

For anyone who isn’t aware/remembering, this is certainly made with the security of PyPi in mind, python’s main package repository. NPM is the other major source of issues (congrats for now, `cargo`!), and TIL that NPM is A) a for-profit startup (??) and B) acquired by Microsoft (????). In that light, this gift seems even more important, as it may help ensure that relative funding differences going forward don’t make…

Microsoft was serious about supporting Python as far back as 2006, because IronPython was a real effort in Redmond. (I'm wondering how they think of it now.)

Re: Anthropic invests $1.5M in the Python Software Foundation

#106

Post by [deleted] »

godzillabrennus wrote: post #37
neom wrote: post #31

Seems like a good time to throw out a reminder regarding "Roads and Bridges: The Unseen Labor Behind Our Digital Infrastructure" by Nadia Asparouhova. While she may have published it in 2016, it's still relevant today and speaks to the need for the private sector generally (looking at you VC firms) to support and understand the open source work, hours of unfunded labor, powering our societies. https://www.fordfoundat…

Big Tech should really be footing the bill here as well as large established VC firms.

[deleted]

Re: Anthropic invests $1.5M in the Python Software Foundation

#107

Post by guywithahat »

cmrdporcupine wrote: post #91
emil-lp wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps you should do some research before judging the decision making of the PSF.

Right? "I find these matters are often more complex than I can understand from a headline but this feels like..." Drive-by insinuation rather than argumentation.

I mean there were conversations in closed rooms nobody outside of the room knows about. What we know publicly is they refused the funding because it required them to drop DEI activities, which not only would have solved their funding issues but was the morally correct thing to do. The PSF should be focused on improving Python, it shouldn't be a political organization.

Re: Anthropic invests $1.5M in the Python Software Foundation

#108

Post by nedbat »

mixmastamyk wrote: post #104
nedbat wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure what you are labeling as pet projects of leadership? Is there something the PSF is doing that you consider a pet project rather than part of their core mission?

Yes, outreach before investing in packaging. It’s not that outreach is bad but that packaging was crumbling.

I'm not sure how you got to "before" here. The PSF runs PyPI, organizes the Python Packaging Authority, supports sprints and standardization efforts, funds developers in residence and so on. Packaging is improving, partly because of those efforts. It's not an either/or.

Re: Anthropic invests $1.5M in the Python Software Foundation

#110

Post by nedbat »

guywithahat wrote: post #107
cmrdporcupine wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right? "I find these matters are often more complex than I can understand from a headline but this feels like..." Drive-by insinuation rather than argumentation.

I mean there were conversations in closed rooms nobody outside of the room knows about. What we know publicly is they refused the funding because it required them to drop DEI activities, which not only would have solved their funding issues but was the morally correct thing to do. The PSF should be focused on improving Python, it shouldn't be a political organization.

OK, thanks for making your position clear. You disagree with some of the core mission of the PSF. Luckily you are in the minority and the PSF is carrying on.
Post reply on HN