7 ms·
Anthropic invests $1.5M in the Python Software Foundation
https://pyfound.blogspot.com/2025/12/anthropic-invests-in-python.html https://pyfound.blogspot.com/2025/12/anthropic-invests-in-py...
- simianwords 9mo agoJust recently I heard that typed languages are best for agentic programming
- reactordev 9mo agoSo add mypy to your pre-commit
- simianwords 9mo agoAll this but none of the performance benefits.
- deleted 9mo ago[deleted]
- shadowgovt 9mo agoIt'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 are violated, or in optimized mode where those checks (and the code to support multiple types in a variable) go away and instead the program just blows up like a C program with a bad cast does.
- reactordev 9mo agoThe point about mypy was it does type checking (static analysis) for your Python code. Not speeding it up.
- Qem 9mo ago> mypy won't make your Python faster Mypyc will do. See https://blog.glyph.im/2022/04/you-should-compile-your-python-and-heres-why.html https://blog.glyph.im/2022/04/you-should-compile-your-python...
- __MatrixMan__ 9mo agoIf your code is talking to an LLM, the performance difference between rust and python represents < 0.1% of the time you spend waiting for computers to do stuff. It's just not an important difference.
- simianwords 9mo agoThis is clearly not what I'm speaking about - there are only a few applications that talk to an LLM.
- reactordev 9mo agoToday…
- __MatrixMan__ 9mo agoThe article is about Anthropic's contribution to Python. Pretty much all of their code talks to an LLM. And just a few comments earlier you said: > Just recently I heard that typed languages are best for agentic programming Are we not talking about using python (or some alternative) to constrain the behavior of agents?
- simianwords 9mo agoI was more thinking of python used as general purpose backend language. We can use LLM's to vibecode such languages.
- skeledrew 9mo agoI'd say most of us who prefer Python (a pretty significant number given it's the most popular language out there) don't care that much about performance, as today's machines are pretty fast and the main bottlenecks aren't in the language itself anyway. What we care about is usability/friendliness so we ourselves can iterate quickly.
- alex_suzuki 9mo agoOr ty: https://astral.sh/blog/ty https://astral.sh/blog/ty
- reactordev 9mo agoDamn… ok, I’ll try it
- danielbln 9mo agoTypes are best, period. Whether they are native or hints doesn't really matter for the agent, what matters is the interface contract they provide.
- simianwords 9mo agoI don’t get this argument because if we put the effort to get it typed, we don’t get one of the best benefits - performance.
- maleldil 9mo agoBut that's not the argument here. Python type hints allow checking correctness statically, which is what matters for agents.
- simianwords 9mo agoYes then you might as well use some other language that uses types but also gets you performance. I agree the ecosystem is missing but hey we have LLMs now
- solumunus 9mo agoPerformance isn’t the only important metric. There are other pros to weigh. For many apps a language might be performant enough, and bring other pros that make it more appealing than more performant alternatives.
- maleldil 9mo agoI don't understand why you keep bringing up performance. If you're considering using Python, as many projects are, performance is obviously not a concern. Python is a good language. Its ecosystem is rich, and I find it very productive. I want to use it, but I also want as much static analysis as possible, so I use ruff and pyright.
- wincy 9mo agoThat’s what makes types easier for me, too, so that makes sense.
- lambdaone 9mo agoPython is a typed language. Perhaps you were trying to say something different?
- simianwords 9mo agoIs it static or dynamic? Whatever rust is that python isn’t.
- lambdaone 9mo agoPython type hints are static - at the moment, they are advisory only, but there is an obvious route forward to making Python an (optionally) fully statically typed language by using static type checking on programs before execution.
- __MatrixMan__ 9mo agoRust is static. Python is optionally static.
- pantsforbirds 9mo agoThey clearly meant a statically typed language. Yes Python is Strongly Typed, but I think we all knew what they meant.
- exceptione 9mo agoFor any programming really, but I think Python got big due to a) the huge influx of beginners into IT, b) lots of intro material available in Python and c) having a simple way to run your script and get feedback (same as PHP) I say that as someone urging people to look beyond Python when they master the basics of programming.
- shadowgovt 9mo agoPython has a terseness that is hard to rival. I think that was a major selling point: its constructs and use of whitespace mean that a valid Python program looks pretty close to the pseudo-code one might write to reason out the problem before writing it in another language.
- exceptione 9mo agoI doubt that this is the selling point. Imho it is nothing special compared to Haskell, F# and the likes.
- shadowgovt 9mo agoPython doesn't require you to understand monads to write useful Python. To be clear: Haskell is great, but its entire vibe (lazy evaluation, pure functions) is entirely different from what Python's about. Someone who knows C++ or Java has a much bigger gap to jump to pick up Haskell than to pick up Python.
- exceptione 9mo ago> Someone who knows C++ or Java has a much bigger gap to jump to pick up Haskell than to pick up Python. True, they are all imperative c-style languages. > Python doesn't require you to understand monads to write useful Python. If that is the concern I would recommend anyone interested to dabble with F#. Part of its design philosophy is to keep the complexity out wrt type systems. It offers a vast vetted library¹, better dependency management², it is truly multi-paradigm (imperative, functional and oop), vastly better performance, and it is strongly typed without requiring type annotations³. I know I am not going to sell it to monogamous devs, but those that are open minded should give it a try. ___ ¹ This is something people will start to appreciate once they get serious about the risk of supply chain attacks. ² Python developers feel they are doing fine with pip or uv, at least in my experience, but then I find they haven't dealt with package mgmt in alternative languages. ³ Types in python are a hack, bolting on something afterwards will not reach what is possible with a language that has been designed with types as core element.
- pansa2 9mo agoAFAICT Python basically is a [statically-]typed language nowadays. Most people are using MyPy or an alternative typechecker, and the community frowns on those who aren’t.
- shadowgovt 9mo agoIt'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 let mypy beat you up until the types are sound. There is a small nonzero cost to using the types at runtime (since they do create metadata that doesn't get dropped like in most languages with a static compilation step, like C++ or TypeScript). I can name an absolute handful of languages I've used that have that flexibility. Common LISP comes to mind. But in general you get one or the other option.
- pansa2 9mo ago> 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, which is why they changed to sound static typing for Dart 2.
- 9rx 9mo agoWithout 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.
- desireco42 9mo agoWhy is this getting downvoted... it is true. Also it is true that dynamic languages (like Ruby ;) and Python) are more efficient with tokens, like significantly then types like C, C++ or such. But Javascript and Typescript are using twice the tokens of Ruby for example and Clojure is even more efficient, obviosly I would add.
- minimaxir 9mo agoIt's not incorrect, but in the context of the given Hacker News submission it reads as "why fund Python at all?"
- oefrha 9mo agoJust recently I heard that they can donate to “typed languages” too, a donation to one language does’t preclude other donations, and given their cash injections they have a few $1.5m’s to spare.
- dude250711 9mo agoFor vibe code, since it's not important whether the output works, JavaScript is even better.
- senko 9mo agoSource: https://pyfound.blogspot.com/2025/12/anthropic-invests-in-python.html https://pyfound.blogspot.com/2025/12/anthropic-invests-in-py...
- dang 9mo agoLink added above. Thanks!
- hdjdndndba 9mo agoThis 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.
- bbor 9mo agoFor 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 PyPi an outsized target! (Also makes me wonder if they still have a Microsoft employee running the PSF… always thought that was odd.) AFAIU the actual PSF development team is pretty small and focused on CPython (aka language internals), so I’m curious how $750,000/year changes that in the short term… EDIT: there’s a link below with a ton more info. This gift augments existing gifts from Amazon, Google, Microsoft, and Citi, and they soft-commit to a cause: Planned projects include creating new tools for automated proactive review of all packages uploaded to PyPI, improving on the current process of reactive-only review. We intend to create a new dataset of known malware that will allow us to design these novel tools, relying on capability analysis.
- simonw 9mo ago> (Also makes me wonder if they still have a Microsoft employee running the PSF… always thought that was odd.) You might be confusing the Python Steering Council - responsible for leadership of Python language development - with the PSF non-profit there. The PSF is lead by a full-time executive director who has no other affiliation, plus an elected board of unpaid volunteer directors (I'm one of them). Microsoft employees occasionally get voted into the board, but there is a rule to make sure a single company doesn't have more than 2 representatives on the board at any one time, The board also elects a chair/president - previously that was Dawn Wages who worked at Microsoft for part of that time (until March 2025 - Dawn was chair up to October), today it's Jannis Leidel from Anaconda. Meanwhile the Python steering council is entirely separate from the PSF leadership, with their own election mechanism voted on by Python core contributors. They have five members, none of whom currently work for Microsoft (but there have been Microsoft employees in the past.)
- deleted 9mo ago[deleted]
- zoobab 9mo agoI did not know you could make donations with a string attached ("improve security")...
- epistasis 9mo agoThe vast majority of donations to, say, universities are made with a specific purpose, and that happens with a lot of non-profits too. The recipient doesn't have to accept the donation, of course, but if they do they track exactly how it was spent.
- frankwiles 9mo agoIt's super common with non-profits. Obviously they would prefer no strings attached but some light strings are usually not a problem for most non-profits.
- bbor 9mo agoAnd they come in a variety of bindingness. I didn’t notice any details in this link which makes me think this is mostly a handshake deal, but it wouldn’t be at all unusual for there to be some auditing mechanisms on a quarterly/yearly cycle. For example, Wikimedia just recently claimed that they can’t chase some political project that critics wanted them to because most of their funds are earmarked-for/invested-in specific projects. So it does happen with US-based tech non-profits to at least some extent.
- jobs_throwaway 9mo agoOf course you can. The vast majority of donations of this magnitude come with strings attached, be it how the money is spent, access to leadership/events, etc
- ssutch3 9mo agoYes, and at least the strings they attached are productive palatable unlike some other organizations: https://pyfound.blogspot.com/2025/10/NSF-funding-statement.html https://pyfound.blogspot.com/2025/10/NSF-funding-statement.h...
- htrp 9mo agoLooking at you Deepmind and OpenAI
- surajrmal 9mo agoGoogle sponsors the python foundation as per this page: https://www.python.org/psf/sponsors/ https://www.python.org/psf/sponsors/
- godelski 9mo agoKinda crazy that the top level "Visionary Sponsor" is a donation level of $160k. There's also 0 sponsors at the $100k level. I was also surprised to see Netflix at $5k and Jane Street at $17k. Maybe they should give more but there's a lot of names absent and that says more
- neom 9mo agoSeems 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.fordfoundation.org/learning/library/research-reports/roads-and-bridges-the-unseen-labor-behind-our-digital-infrastructure/ https://www.fordfoundation.org/learning/library/research-rep...
- godzillabrennus 9mo agoBig Tech should really be footing the bill here as well as large established VC firms.
- ajross 9mo agoTo a large extent they do and always have. It's not as broad or fair as it should be[1], but for almost any economically important project all the major contributors and maintainers are on the payroll of one of the big tech interests or a foundation funded by them. The hippies writing that software may not be compensated at the level you'd expect given the value they provide, but they'll never go hungry. [1] LLVM and Linux get more cash than they can spend. GNU stuff is comparatively impoverished because everyone assumes they'd do it for free anyway. Stuff that ships on a Canonical desktop or RHEL default install gets lots of cash but community favorites like KDE need to make their own way, etc... Also just to be clear: node is filled with povertyware and you should be extremely careful what you grab from npm.
- Foxboron 9mo ago> but for almost any economically important project all the major contributors and maintainers are on the payroll of one of the big tech interests or a foundation funded by them. "almost" is the load bearing word here, and/or a weasel word. Define what an "economically important project" is. > Also just to be clear: node is filled with povertyware and you should be extremely careful what you grab from npm. Is "povertyware" what we call software written by people and released for free now?
- deleted 9mo ago[deleted]
- twoquestions 9mo agoGlad to see Anthropic continuing to invest in the longevity and quality of their open-source dependencies! If you missed it, they bought Bun a while back, which is what Claude Code is built in: https://bun.sh/blog/bun-joins-anthropic https://bun.sh/blog/bun-joins-anthropic
- geodel 9mo agoWow. Just came to know from your comment. Not sure if it was covered here on HN. I totally missed it.
- NSPG911 9mo agoIt happened quite a while back, most of us knew what direction this was going (Claude Code uses Bun, OpenCode uses Bun, they need Bun to work the best for Claude Code)
- huflungdung 9mo ago[dead]
- qaq 9mo agoStill crazy how little investment goes to Python given how critical it is to the ecosystem.
- mixmastamyk 9mo agoPoor management has played a role. They refused to invest in packaging to the extent that a separate company (astral) had to do it for them. Bugs closed for years with the excuse “we’re only volunteers.” Meanwhile, “outreach” was funded for several million a year. Not confidence inspiring. Maybe would have improved if the funds had been spent more appropriately. Similar story with Mozilla.
- embedding-shape 9mo agoI don't know much about the Linux Foundation if I'm being honest, even though I've been a 24/7 Linux user for decades, but they seemingly don't have the same image in the ecosystem, at least not close to how people see Mozilla today. Why is that? Is there lessons to be learned from the Linux Foundation how to actually effectively and responsibly manage that sort of money, in those types of projects?
- mixmastamyk 9mo agoA foundation should invest in its technology first and resist the strong temptation to fund pet projects (of leadership) with donated money.
- nedbat 9mo agoI'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?
- mixmastamyk 9mo agoYes, outreach before investing in packaging. It’s not that outreach is bad but that packaging was crumbling.
- hamandcheese 9mo agoI must be the only one in here who thinks $1.5M is a small sum compared to Anthropic's size and the amount of value they have gotten out of Python. Good press is cheaper than I thought.
- defraudbah 9mo agothat was my first thought too, $1.5M is peanuts for Anthropic, however $1.5M is better than nothing, so it worth some PR too. Good they do, I think we have to encourage companies to do it, shaming will not help.
- tomComb 9mo agoYou are right, it is. But it would be a mistake for us to use this opportunity to attack them for it. We should applaud their donation today, and at another time assess the meager contributions of many companies that should be shamed.
- DrBazza 9mo agoEvery single financial institution on Wall Street, the City of London, Amsterdam, Tokyo, Dubai and so on, uses Python. Very few contribute. I've worked at a few that use the 'mold' linker to dramatically reduce their build times. Again, very few contribute. In this particular case, I managed to get one former employer to make a donation. But the list goes on. Short arms, deep pockets, as the saying goes.
- tyre 9mo agoIt’s interesting to see everyone advocate for open source software with permissive licenses, then get mad when companies use them. If python wants to require money for updates or for customers over $X in revenue, they can! If companies don’t want to donate, they don’t have to just as python contributors don’t have to if they’re annoyed at how it’s used.
- blibble 9mo ago
- guywithahat 9mo ago[flagged]
- emil-lp 9mo agoPerhaps you should do some research before judging the decision making of the PSF.
- deleted 9mo ago[deleted]
- cmrdporcupine 9mo agoRight? "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.
- guywithahat 9mo agoI 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.
- nedbat 9mo agoOK, 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.
- DaSHacka 9mo agoIs he in the minority though? Remind me again who won the popular vote two years ago. Turns out many people aren't big on racial discrimination "but hip and cool B-) this time". When the core principle of an organization is at conflict with the concept of hiring any ethnicity with no specific preference, you have a racist organization.
- Fokamul 9mo agoIt's easy to donate, since it's not their money. They are not profitable. Just Nvidia's money, they're paying themselves for new GPUs and datacenters.
- returnInfinity 9mo agoThey are probably trying to build influence. Why is a startup that is burning cash donating money?
- jedberg 9mo agoOf course they are. These donations usually come out of the marketing budget. And it's working, we're talking about them. But also they rely heavily on Python and want to support the ecosystem.
- nedbat 9mo agoIs it so hard to imagine that they do it because the PSF's work is important and they want to support them? All the AI labs depend hugely on the Python ecosystem and infrastructure. Startups burning cash spend on many things that are important to them.
- red2awn 9mo agoThey are heavily focused on code. Claude Code likely generates 100 of millions lines of Python a day, make the language a little bit better with $1.5M is extremely high leverage.
- johnisgood 9mo agoCare to elaborate on how $1.5M makes Python better?
- adeelk93 9mo agoYou’re asking how money can be used to improve software?
- johnisgood 9mo agoYes, because lots of these comments seem to imply that more money necessarily makes it better, which is often not the case.
- 9mo ago
- heliumtera 9mo agoIt's certainly better than absolute nothing!
- mac-attack 9mo agoMaybe I'm the only one realizing it's exactly the same amount they were due to receive from the US Govt until the Trump administration said they were too woke.
- globular-toast 9mo ago"Over two years". Does that mean the foundation has to do what they want it to do or else the tap stops?
- skeledrew 9mo agoWell the funds are earmarked for security matters, so it should be spent regarding that.
- ath3nd 9mo ago[dead]
- nikanj 9mo agoInternal forecasts indicate Anthropic’s annualized revenue run-rate could be between about $20 billion and $26 billion in 2026. Let's shoot for the middle, $23 billion According to multiple articles, Anthropic expects to reduce its cash burn to around one-third of revenue in 2026. This implies total spending is roughly revenue + cash burn ≈ $23 billion + $7.7 billion ≈ $30.7 billion When you divide the total spending to the length of the whole year, $1.5 million would sustain Anthropic for roughly 0.43 hours, or about 26 minutes.
- nedbat 9mo agoIt does seem small at Anthropic scale. But instead of faulting them for contributing "so little", maybe we can point to the thousands of large companies that are doing nothing.
- edff 9mo ago[dead]