The article is poorly written. Blanchard was a chardet maintainer for years. Of course he had looked at it's code!

What he claimed, and what was interesting, was that Claude didn't look at the code, only the API and the test suite. The new implementation is all Claude. And the implementation is different enough to be considered original, completely different structure, design, and hey, a 48x improvement in performance! It's just API-compatible with the original. Which as per the Google Vs oracle 2021 decision is to be considered fair use.

▲

mrgoldenbrown 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

did he claim that Claude wasn't trained on the original? Or just that he didn't personally provide Claude with a copy?

	▲	amarant 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I recon the latter, how would he know what was in Claude's training data?

▲

re-thc 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> What he claimed, and what was interesting, was that Claude didn't look at the code

Who opened the PR? Who co-authored the commits? It's clearly on Github.

> Blanchard was a chardet maintainer for years. Of course he had looked at its code!

So there you have it. If he looked, he co-authored then there's that.

▲

kjksf 2 hours ago | parent [-]

If I put my signature on Picasso painting, it doesn't make me co-author of said painting.

Blanchard is very clear that he didn't write a single line of code. He isn't an author, he isn't a co-author.

Signing GitHub commit doesn't change that.

▲

re-thc an hour ago | parent [-]

> Blanchard is very clear that he didn't write a single line of code

He used Claude to write it. Difference? The fact that I write on the notepad vs printed it out = I didn't do it?

> Signing GitHub commit doesn't change that.

That's the equivalent of me saying I didn't kill anyone. The fingerprints on the knife doesn't change that.

	▲	satvikpendem an hour ago \| parent [-]
		I'll take a commit authored by someone else and then git amend the author to myself, did I write that commit then? By your logic I did apparently.