Timnit Gebru (she/her).21h ago

This "careful" "AI Safety" company that just accidentally leaked its entire source code to the world is the one that African governments are entering into agreements with to include in infrastructures from health care to god knows what.

These are the products people have to use to make sure that they don't get dinged in their performance reviews for "not using AI."

These are the products teachers have to use in schools so that "students aren't left behind."

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/apr/01/anthropic-claudes-code-leaks-ai

Claude’s code: Anthropic leaks source code for AI software engineering tool

Nearly 2,000 internal files were briefly leaked after ‘human error’, raising fresh security questions at the AI company

The Guardian
Show threadTimnit Gebru (she/her).21h ago

I appreciated this article by @mttaggart
infosec.exchange.

I get the temptation especially in this world we're all living in where you have to produce something super fast all the time.

But my question is, what are people's arguments for how functioning software can be created with these tools?

What about new architectures, new ways of thinking, new programming languages, etc? Who will create those?

https://taggart-tech.com/reckoning/

I used AI. It worked. I hated it.

I used Claude Code to build a tool I needed. It worked great, but I was miserable. I need to reckon with what it means.

Show threadTimnit Gebru (she/her).21h ago

I'm not even talking about the data stealing, exploitation, environmental pillaging, pollution, environmental racism etc.

I'm talking about the way people use the tools. Like what do advocates of using these tools say will happen to software engineering in the future? That it just won't need to exist because everyone will be able to create software using these tools?

Show threadTimnit Gebru (she/her).21h ago
That it will just take a different form, which is fine?
Show threadMx. Aria Stewart20h ago

@timnitGebru Yes. To a large degree, I think it's fine.

And the old forms will still be there in a lot of cases and contexts. And, if we build the future well, we won't put hard barriers to digging in and finding out what's going on. If we build it poorly and let platform rentiership win, that's a big problem loomng.

Show threadOzzelot 13h ago
@aredridel
Show me one case in mass-market computing history where building the future went well for the commoner.
@timnitGebru
Show threadMx. Aria Stewart11h ago
@ozzelot the personal computer, the pc revolution, arguably the iPhone and cell phone both.
Show threadOzzelot 10h ago
@aredridel
All of those are by and large corporate controlled. I can for example only install an alternative OS at the mercy of my motherboard (and CPU - thanks, AMD PSP and Intel ME) vendor.
Cellphones, whilst allowing for communication across arbitrary distances, still depend on networks operated by cartel-like structures and usable for consumer surveillance by unsavory authoritarian entities. Not much good in that.
Show threadPavel Machek10h ago
@ozzelot @aredridel PCs are way more open than phones. ME and PSP and similar are new inventions, and you can practical computers predating that, and MISTer is completely open. You also have qemu etc.
Show threadOzzelot 9h ago
@pavel
I know, and I do keep such puters around. But does my uncle? Do schools which make massive deals with Microsoft and Google? Once again, computing done in good and pleasing ways exists despite market needs.
@aredridel
Show threadPavel Machek
@ozzelot @aredridel Well, poisoning kids with Microsoft sw is huge problem. Nonfree firmware is a problem, too, but not in same ballpark.
1:56pmWeb
Show threadMx. Aria Stewart9h ago
@pavel ... Poisoning?