I appreciate their input, and yours, and I intend this feedback respectfully… But come on… Is a little outrage completely inappropriate?

This technically justifies GDPR fine. A software leaking and processing PII without permission for this specific use case. But I would not hold my breath.

that's basically everything AI does though

But that is not an excuse

Maybe it's somewhat appropriate? But in any event it's unlikely that any one individual who posts here is the person[1] who's responsible, so we may as well be outraged at "Anthropic" but assume good faith on the part of the random commenters from Anthropic.

When I'm talking to customer service people after a particularly egregious ordeal, I tend to edit myself and replace "you" (plus "you bastards", "you idiots", etc. ;) ) with <Company Name> for this same reason.

[1] and yes it seems very realistic that Claude himself may be the jackass responsible.

> Claude himself

itself

claudeself?

No, I agree, but it hinges on what you call "a little".

If you take into account that most people underestimate their own provocations by (say) 10x and overestimate those of others by (say) another 10x, that compounds to quite a skew. This can, and often does, plunge discussion into failure modes like internet rage fests and even mob dynamics.

It's therefore best to temper one's indignation with some kind of alloy (as you did in your comment here) and not go full uninhibited.

Yes, I was looking for some confirmation as it wasn't initially clear whether the plugin was an Anthropic one or a third party's (I found very little about it online, and didn't want to take Gemini's word for it). Usually people say "[company] developer here" or have it in their profile.

Yep, she’s the Claude function hooks lead, as far as I’m aware! https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code/issues/91870