More on Anthropic's Scion ripping off Mononoke

Following the previous post about Anthropic's Scion resembling Mononoke, I've received several questions and concerns. This is a follow-up to address the most pressing issues. I initially tried to present the situation charitably, given my knowledge at the time. The source code for Scion was clearly copied from Mononoke, and there was significant overlap in personnel.

The resemblance extends beyond just the concept of derived data; it includes the entire data model and various surrounding structures. Mononoke uses the term "Bonsai changesets," which Anthropic's Scion seems to have copied verbatim, even down to the name. The server-side API for version control queries and mutations in Scion was also an existing feature in Mononoke.

While Anthropic claims to have built their version in 5 months after spending 10 years on the original model, this is still an impressive feat. However, it's important to acknowledge the original contributors and the significant time and effort they invested in developing the Bonsai data model. Anthropic's decision to credit Sapling instead of Mononoke is seen as dishonest, as Sapling can refer to either the VCS client or the entire system.

The resemblance between Mononoke and Scion goes far beyond just "hard-won lessons." The source control team at Meta deserves recognition for their work, and it's unfortunate that Anthropic chose to omit them from their acknowledgment.