Rendered at 19:33:42 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) with Cloudflare Workers.
tapvt 7 minutes ago [-]
[delayed]
throwawayk7h 33 minutes ago [-]
If fable 5 can't do code... what are people using it for?
exabrial 8 minutes ago [-]
It's beginning to look like giant publicity stunts. A model that can't do what it says it can, overhyped, no way to test.
xg15 27 minutes ago [-]
Was wondering the same. So coding, debugging and anything that has to do with cybersecurity or LLM development is blocked. What tasks are left in which Fable 5 is meaningfully better than the predecessors?
dude250711 8 minutes ago [-]
It's good for pre-IPO PR.
You drop a good old "A new {cool_word}-class model.".
And boom! What are you competitors going to do? Use same classification nomenclature? I don't think so! IPO secured.
Originally at least the switch wasn't silent and whether to halt or auto switch was a setting in Claude Code.
cyanydeez 1 hours ago [-]
because it's all indistinguishable from magic when it's a cloud SaaS.
Not like you can tell the difference if you dont own any of the implementation.
simianwords 2 hours ago [-]
They are transparent. Don’t use it if you don’t want to. These things shouldn’t be illegal.
karahime 1 hours ago [-]
I agree that it shouldn't be outright illegal, but I will definitely be making the personal choice not to engage with model providers which do this. There's no amount of impressive results that could make me want to secretly pay more for less.
ath3nd 1 hours ago [-]
[dead]
mnmx6t 1 hours ago [-]
I must admit I was drawn to Claude because of their (obviously successful with me) publicity stunt about "being too dangerous to make widely available", when Mythos came out.
It's a shame because I was really looking forward to use it specifically to find potential security holes in my own software.
That being said, Opus 4.7/4.8 have been quite useful already, especially for finding things in the harder to test, non-happy paths.
If I recall, Fable 5 is supposed to be basically Mythos which falls back to Opus 4.8 when dealing with cybersecurity. I wonder if that also includes "finding bugs that could lead to security exploits".
babelfish 1 hours ago [-]
Yeah, I was very excited for Fable to come back to use it for work after using Opus 4.8, but now I guess I'm just excited for Sol/Terra/Luna (unless they have the same restrictions)
You drop a good old "A new {cool_word}-class model.".
And boom! What are you competitors going to do? Use same classification nomenclature? I don't think so! IPO secured.
It is one thing if I, as the user, choose to down-level but Claude shouldn't do this on its own.
"You won't be charged Fable prices for rerouted requests. Learn more about how the fallback experience works."
https://www.anthropic.com/claude/fable Under "Safeguards"
Not like you can tell the difference if you dont own any of the implementation.
It's a shame because I was really looking forward to use it specifically to find potential security holes in my own software.
That being said, Opus 4.7/4.8 have been quite useful already, especially for finding things in the harder to test, non-happy paths.
If I recall, Fable 5 is supposed to be basically Mythos which falls back to Opus 4.8 when dealing with cybersecurity. I wonder if that also includes "finding bugs that could lead to security exploits".