Open Source on Carles Abarca

Your Code Is One Agent Session From Being Cloned — And There's Nothing You Can Do About It

Fri, 03 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0000

On April 1, 2026 — and no, it wasn’t a joke — someone discovered that Claude Code’s npm package, Anthropic’s command-line tool, included a misconfigured .map file. That file contained the complete source code: 512,000 lines of TypeScript spread across 1,900 files.

Within hours, the leaked repository had 25,000 stars on GitHub. Developers were tearing it apart piece by piece. But the truly unsettling part wasn’t the leak itself.

It was what happened next.

From TypeScript to Python in an afternoon
#

A researcher at the University of Washington took the leaked code, fed it through OpenAI Codex, and within hours had a functional reimplementation in Python. Not a copy — a complete rewrite in a different language. The resulting repository, claw-code, hit 44,500 stars. A Rust rewrite is already underway.

And here’s the legal problem that should keep every CTO up at night: a reimplementation in another language, generated by an AI agent, is likely immune to a DMCA takedown. It’s not a copy. It’s a derived work created by a machine. Current legal frameworks simply aren’t designed for this.

Gergely Orosz, one of the most respected voices in software engineering, put it this way: we’re facing a new reality where any closed codebase is one agent session away from being functionally cloned.

Read that again. Any codebase. One agent session. Cloned.

What they found inside
#

The findings were fascinating and, in some cases, hilarious. Wes Bos discovered 187 hardcoded verbs for the loading spinner (including “hullaballooing” and “razzmatazzing”). They found an internal analytics system that flags your prompt as negative every time you swear at the agent. And the random 4-character IDs are filtered to exclude 25 curse words.

But beyond the anecdotes, the technical discoveries revealed the real architecture of one of the world’s most advanced coding agents:

35 modules with clearly separated responsibilities.
A lightweight memory system based on ~150-character pointers, not bulk storage.
System prompts live on the client, not the server.
Code comments are written for LLMs to read, not humans.

That last point deserves a pause. Anthropic is no longer writing code for programmers to understand. They’re writing code for other AI models to understand. If that doesn’t tell you where the industry is heading, nothing will.

The protective barrier that no longer exists
#

For decades, proprietary code was one of the most reliable protective barriers in technology. Your competitor could copy your idea, your design, your go-to-market strategy — but replicating a million lines of optimized code took years and hundreds of engineers.

That’s over.

I’m not exaggerating. Think about what actually happened this week:

A configuration error exposed complete source code.
An AI agent rewrote it in another language in hours.
The open source community improved and extended it in days.
The result is legally difficult to challenge.

Each of these steps was unthinkable two years ago. Together, they represent a fundamental shift in what it means to “protect” your software intellectual property.

And you don’t need a leak for this to happen. AI agents can already:

Infer architectures from the observable behavior of an API.
Replicate functionality from public documentation and examples.
Generate alternative implementations that achieve the same results with different code.

Code was never really a barrier. It was the illusion of a barrier.

The SaaSpocalypse connection
#

If this story sounds familiar, it’s because we already saw act one. In February of this year, I wrote about the SaaSpocalypse: $300 billion evaporated in 48 hours when the market understood that the business logic of a $200/user/month SaaS fits in a text file that an agent can read and execute.

The Claude Code leak makes that thesis worse in a way that few have articulated yet.

Think about it: every SaaS provider exposes documented public APIs. Endpoints, data schemas, workflows, business rules — all accessible to any agent that can read documentation. The Claude Code leak proved that an agent can take 512,000 lines of code and reimplement them in hours. Now combine that with the fact that most SaaS products expose their business logic through their own APIs.

You don’t need to steal Salesforce’s source code. You just need an agent that reads their public documentation, observes endpoint behavior, and infers the underlying architecture. The API is the blueprint.

Satya Nadella said it in December 2024: “SaaS applications are CRUD databases with business logic on top. Agents will absorb that logic.” In February, the market understood this in the abstract. With Claude Code, we have concrete proof: the tools to absorb that logic already exist. And they work.

The SaaSpocalypse wasn’t the ending. It was the trailer.

So what actually protects your business?
#

If code is no longer your competitive advantage — and public APIs reveal your business logic — what’s left? After 20 years in technology transformation, from banking in Spain to education in Mexico, I’ve seen this same question emerge every time a new technological wave destroys the previous barriers:

1. Data, not code. Your model trained on proprietary data, your curated datasets, your domain knowledge encoded in features that an agent can’t infer from the outside. A Claude Code clone can replicate the tool, but it can’t replicate the millions of conversations that trained Claude.

2. Speed of execution. If your competitor can clone your code in hours, the advantage lies in being the first to solve the next problem. Not in protecting the previous solution.

3. Trust and brand. In a world where anyone can replicate the technology, differentiation comes down to who trusts you. Anthropic’s customers aren’t going to migrate to claw-code to save on their subscription. They pay for support, for SLAs, for the guarantee that someone responds when something breaks.

4. The ecosystem. Integrations, partnerships, network effects. Slack didn’t win because its code was uncopyable. It won because everyone was already there.

5. A culture of continuous innovation. If you assume that everything you build today will be replicable tomorrow, your only sustainable advantage is the ability to build the next thing faster than anyone else.

The implications for the enterprise
#

For any technology leader reading this, the message is clear: review your intellectual property strategy today. Not tomorrow. Today.

Some questions that should be on the agenda for your next board meeting:

How much of our competitive advantage depends on code that an agent could replicate?
What does our own API documentation reveal about our business logic?
Do we have proprietary data that is genuinely hard to reproduce?
Does our security strategy account for the fact that a misconfigured .map file can expose our entire codebase?
Are we prepared for a world where DMCA doesn’t protect against AI-generated reimplementations?

And perhaps the most uncomfortable one of all: Are we still investing in building walls, when we should be investing in running faster?

The twist no one expected
#

There’s a delicious irony in this whole story. Claude Code — Anthropic’s tool designed for AI to write code — was dismantled and rewritten by the AI of its direct competitor. OpenAI Codex cloned Anthropic’s flagship product in an afternoon.

It’s as if Ford had invented the assembly line and Toyota had copied it the same day using Ford’s own robots.

Welcome to the era where the tools you build to automate other people’s work can be used to automate your own work. Where your code is not your protective barrier. Where your advantage is not what you already built, but what you’re going to build tomorrow.

The Claude Code leak wasn’t a security incident.

It was a warning.

Carles Abarca is VP of Digital Transformation at Tecnológico de Monterrey and former CTO of Banco Sabadell. He writes about AI, digital transformation, and the future of software at carlesabarca.com.

China's AI Pincer Move: Qwen 3.5 and CoPaw Are Not a Warning Shot — They're the Main Event

Thu, 05 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0000

There is a moment in every technology race when “catching up” becomes “setting the pace.” For China’s AI ecosystem, that moment is now.

In the span of a few weeks, Alibaba has released two things that, taken separately, would each be significant. Taken together, they represent a strategic vision that should make every Western AI executive lose sleep.

Qwen 3.5: a family of open-source models that beats GPT-5.2 on instruction following and leads the field on vision benchmarks. Apache 2.0 licensed. Free. Commercial use allowed.

CoPaw: an open-source personal AI agent workstation — think OpenClaw, but from Alibaba’s AgentScope team — with persistent memory, custom skills, multi-channel support, and browser automation.

Models and infrastructure. The brain and the body.

This is not a warning shot. This is a strategy.

The Qwen 3.5 Story: Frontier AI Goes Free
#

Let me give you the numbers first, because they tell a story.

Qwen 3.5’s flagship model uses a Mixture of Experts (MoE) architecture with 397 billion total parameters but only 17 billion active at any given time. Read that again. You get frontier-class performance while only running the compute cost of a 17B model.

The benchmarks are not “competitive.” They are leading:

IFBench (instruction following): 76.5 — beating GPT-5.2’s 75.4
SWE-bench (coding): 76.4 — neck and neck with the best
MMMU (vision): 85.0 — outright leader
256K token context window
201 languages supported
Thinking and non-thinking modes — you choose the tradeoff between depth and speed

The model family was released in three waves between February and March 2026: flagship, medium, and small. The small models — 0.8B to 9B parameters — are explicitly designed for on-device deployment. Your phone. Your laptop. Your edge server. No API call required.

Let that sink in for a moment.

A year ago, running anything close to frontier AI locally was a fantasy. Today, Alibaba is handing you models that compete with the best in the world, under the most permissive open-source license available, optimized to run on your hardware.

The MoE architecture is the key unlock here. Traditional dense models force you to choose: either you run a massive model with massive compute, or you run a small model with limited capability. MoE breaks that tradeoff. Qwen 3.5 has the knowledge of a 397B model but the inference cost of a 17B one. It is, in practical terms, the democratization of frontier AI.

And it is Apache 2.0. Not “open-ish.” Not “you can look but not touch.” Fully open. Fork it. Fine-tune it. Ship it in your product. Alibaba does not care. Or rather — they care very much, but their game is not licensing revenue.

CoPaw: The Agent Layer China Was Missing
#

Models without infrastructure are academic papers. Infrastructure without models is empty plumbing. The interesting move is doing both.

CoPaw (copaw.bot) launched in March 2026 from Alibaba’s AgentScope team. If you are familiar with OpenClaw — and if you read my blog, you probably are — CoPaw is China’s answer to it. An open-source personal AI agent workstation that turns language models into persistent, capable digital workers.

The feature list reads like someone studied every agent platform on the market and built a synthesis:

ReMe: persistent memory across sessions. Your agent remembers context, preferences, past interactions. Not a gimmick — this is what separates a chatbot from an actual assistant.
Custom skills: build and import capabilities. Pull from clawhub.ai, skills.sh, or GitHub.
Multi-channel: DingTalk, Feishu, iMessage, Discord, QQ. Your agent lives where you work.
Cron scheduling: automated tasks on a schedule. Check my email every morning. Summarize my feeds at 6 PM. The basics, done right.
Browser automation: your agent can navigate the web, fill forms, extract data. The hands to go with the brain.
MCP Server integration: the emerging standard for tool use. CoPaw speaks it natively.

Is it perfect? No. WhatsApp and Telegram support are missing — a significant gap for Western and Latin American users. Multi-agent orchestration is not there yet. OpenRouter integration is absent. These are real limitations.

But here is what matters: CoPaw is not a prototype. It is a platform. And it is open-source, which means the community can fill those gaps faster than any corporate roadmap.

I have been running OpenClaw as my personal agent infrastructure for months — it is literally what powers JarvisX, my AI assistant. So I understand this space intimately. CoPaw is not a clone. It is a parallel evolution, built from a different set of assumptions (Chinese messaging ecosystem, AgentScope framework, different privacy model) that arrives at remarkably similar conclusions about what an AI agent workstation needs to be.

That convergence is the signal. When two teams on opposite sides of the world, working independently, build essentially the same thing — that is not coincidence. That is the shape of the future becoming obvious.

The Earthquake Started in January 2025
#

None of this is happening in a vacuum. Let me connect the dots.

January 2025: DeepSeek releases R1, an open-source reasoning model that shocks the industry. Silicon Valley’s reaction ranges from dismissal to panic, settling on grudging respect. The “China can’t do AI” narrative dies overnight.

Throughout 2025: Chinese labs iterate at a pace that makes Western release cycles look glacial. Qwen, DeepSeek, Yi, GLM — each generation closing the gap further. The MoE architecture becomes the standard approach, driven by the practical reality that Chinese labs face compute constraints from US export controls and have to be more efficient, not less.

Here is the irony that should keep policymakers awake: export controls designed to slow China’s AI development may have accelerated their innovation in efficiency. When you cannot buy the biggest GPUs, you learn to do more with less. And “more with less” turns out to be exactly what the market wants.

February-March 2026: Qwen 3.5 arrives, not as a single model but as an ecosystem play. Flagship for the cloud, medium for the server room, small for the device. And simultaneously, CoPaw launches to provide the agent layer. Models plus infrastructure plus ecosystem.

This is not “China catching up.” This is China executing a full-stack AI strategy while much of the West is still arguing about whether to charge $200/month or $2,000/month for API access.

The Alibaba Strategy: OpenAI’s Vision, Open-Source’s Price
#

Let me be explicit about what Alibaba is doing, because I think most Western observers are misreading it.

OpenAI’s vision has always been: build the best models, then build the infrastructure to deploy them, then build the ecosystem of applications on top. Vertical integration. The “Apple of AI.”

Alibaba’s vision is the same — except open-source.

Best models? Qwen 3.5 is demonstrably frontier-competitive. Infrastructure? CoPaw provides the agent layer. AgentScope provides the framework. Ecosystem? Apache 2.0 means anyone can build on it.

The difference is the business model. OpenAI charges for access. Alibaba gives away the technology and monetizes the cloud (Alibaba Cloud), the commerce (Alibaba platforms), and the enterprise services built on top. The AI itself is the loss leader. Or rather, it is the moat around everything else.

This is not charity. It is strategy. And it is devastatingly effective.

If you are an enterprise CTO today — and I have been one, at Banco Sabadell, so I know the calculus — the question on your desk is uncomfortable: Why am I paying for proprietary AI models when open-source alternatives match or beat them on benchmarks?

The answers used to be: reliability, support, safety, compliance. Those are real. But they are eroding fast. Qwen 3.5 is not some garage project. It is backed by one of the largest technology companies on Earth. It has enterprise-grade documentation. It runs in production at Alibaba scale.

The moat is getting shallow.

What This Means for the West
#

I am not writing this as a China cheerleader or a Western doomer. I am writing it as someone who has spent 20+ years in enterprise technology and is currently leading digital transformation at one of Latin America’s largest universities.

Here is what I think this means:

For AI companies (OpenAI, Anthropic, Google): The “best model” advantage is now measured in months, not years. If Qwen 3.5 can match GPT-5.2 today, Qwen 4 will likely match whatever comes next. The sustainable advantage must come from ecosystem, trust, and integration — not model quality alone. The race to the bottom on model pricing accelerates.

For enterprises: Your AI strategy cannot depend on a single provider. The multi-model, multi-provider approach is no longer a nice-to-have — it is risk management. And if you are not evaluating open-source models for your use cases, you are leaving money and optionality on the table.

For the open-source movement: This is your moment. China’s largest tech companies are pouring billions into open-source AI, not because they are altruistic, but because it serves their strategic interests. The result is the same: the commons gets richer. Western open-source advocates should take notes on how to align corporate strategy with community benefit.

For developers: Learn to run local models. Understand MoE architectures. Get comfortable with agent frameworks — both OpenClaw and CoPaw. The developers who thrive in 2027 will be the ones who can deploy and orchestrate AI agents across multiple models and platforms, not the ones locked into a single API.

For policymakers: The export control strategy needs a fundamental rethink. Restricting compute has not prevented frontier AI development in China — it has redirected it toward efficiency innovations that may ultimately be more valuable than brute-force scaling. The horse has left the barn, and the barn is on fire.

The Democratization Paradox
#

Here is the question that keeps me up at night: if frontier AI is free and open, what is the moat?

Not for Alibaba — their moat is their ecosystem. Not for OpenAI — their moat is their brand and enterprise relationships. I mean for everyone else. For the thousands of SaaS companies, AI startups, and technology consultancies that have built their value proposition around access to AI capabilities.

When Qwen 3.5 is free, when CoPaw is free, when the entire stack from model to agent to deployment is open-source and commercially licensable — what exactly are you selling?

The answer, I think, is the same answer it has always been in technology: domain expertise, integration quality, trust, and speed of execution. The tools become commoditized. The craft does not.

But that is a much harder business than “we have access to AI and you don’t.” And it will cause a shakeout that makes the SaaSpocalypse look like a rehearsal.

What I Am Doing About It
#

I never write about things I am not willing to act on. So here is what this means for my work:

At Tec de Monterrey, we are actively evaluating open-source models for educational applications where data sovereignty matters — and with a Latin American university serving students across multiple countries, it matters a lot. Qwen 3.5’s multilingual support (201 languages, with strong Spanish coverage) makes it a serious candidate.

Personally, I run my AI agent infrastructure on OpenClaw. CoPaw’s release is not a threat to that — it is validation. The agent workstation pattern is the right abstraction. And competition drives improvement. I fully expect OpenClaw and CoPaw to cross-pollinate features, especially given that CoPaw can already import skills from clawhub.ai.

The future I see is heterogeneous. Not “Western AI vs. Chinese AI” but a global ecosystem where the best models and tools win regardless of origin. Where an enterprise in Mexico City runs Qwen for some tasks, Claude for others, and Gemini for a third — all orchestrated by agent infrastructure that does not care about the nationality of the model.

That is not a geopolitical statement. It is an engineering reality.

The Bottom Line
#

Alibaba has executed a textbook pincer move: world-class models on one side, agent infrastructure on the other. Qwen 3.5 gives you the brain. CoPaw gives you the body. Both are free. Both are open. Both are production-ready.

The West still leads in many dimensions — safety research, alignment, enterprise trust, regulatory frameworks. Those matter. But the raw capability gap? It is closing so fast that by the time you finish reading this article, it may have closed a little more.

If you are a technology leader and you are not paying attention to what is coming out of China, you are not paying attention.

And in this industry, not paying attention is how you become the next $300 billion cautionary tale.

Open Source on Carles Abarca

Your Code Is One Agent Session From Being Cloned — And There's Nothing You Can Do About It

From TypeScript to Python in an afternoon #

What they found inside #

The protective barrier that no longer exists #

The SaaSpocalypse connection #

So what actually protects your business? #

The implications for the enterprise #

The twist no one expected #

China's AI Pincer Move: Qwen 3.5 and CoPaw Are Not a Warning Shot — They're the Main Event

The Qwen 3.5 Story: Frontier AI Goes Free #

CoPaw: The Agent Layer China Was Missing #

The Earthquake Started in January 2025 #

The Alibaba Strategy: OpenAI’s Vision, Open-Source’s Price #

What This Means for the West #

The Democratization Paradox #

What I Am Doing About It #

The Bottom Line #