Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Claude Fable 5

anthropic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 1001 posts

Re: Claude Fable 5

#271

Post by daft_pink »

eggbrain wrote: post #24

For those of us on subscription plans: * From today through June 22, Fable 5 is included on Pro, Max, Team, and seat-based Enterprise plans at no extra cost. * On June 23, we’ll remove Fable 5 from those plans. Using it after that will require usage credits. If capacity allows, we’ll extend the included window. * After this point—when sufficient capacity allows us to do so—we aim to restore Fable 5 as a standard part…

I’m just about ready to cancel my small business 5 user plan with max licenses, because although cowork is really great. I just find OpenAI/Codex to be a lot better most of the time.

Re: Claude Fable 5

#272

Post by nu11ptr »

JanSt wrote: post #221

I just asked Fable to do a task that has nothing to do with cybersecurity or is dangerous at all but the defense kicked in and it switched to Opus... :(

Not only that, but asking it to do a security vulnerability assessment of your own project is a very valid and important thing, and there is no way for it to know what is yours vs someone else's, so we just lose this capability?

Re: Claude Fable 5

#273

Post by arkwin »

Just wanted to comment here: I have been using Opus 4.6, 4.7, and 4.8 just fine to look for Linux kernel vulnerabilities (I'm in the cyber verification program), and it's been fine. I switched to Claude Fable 5, and now I'm getting policy violations.

What's the point of being in the cyber verification program at this point? It looks like I cannot use Fable 5 for vulnerability research.

Re: Claude Fable 5

#274

Post by jansan »

yandie wrote: post #47

I've been running Opus 4.8 for agentic coding and I don't see it being significantly better than Sonnet 4.5 (not that I can tell). I find that pairing Google Gemini and Claude (having Gemini review Claude's code) seems to yield better results. Curious if this jump to 80.3% score in agentic coding will make me see a big difference in actual usage.

After having worked with Opus 4.7 for a while I accidentially continued a session that was using Sonnet 4.5 and it felt just very dumb. The replies were much shallower than what I was used to, context was ingored, mistakes were made. I don't think there is a big difference between Opus 4.6 and 4.8, but to Sonnet 4.5 the difference is palpable.

Re: Claude Fable 5

#275

Post by rightlane »

My experiences so far have not been positive. The cyber security nerf is ridiculous. I am working on an AI based decompiler, every single interaction with Fable on my project has been flagged for cyber security.

Do they expect us to use this as a toy? Releasing a new more powerful model but not allowing normal use cases because the word "secure" showed up is a Dilbert comic, not a viable product.

Re: Claude Fable 5

#276

Post by rfgplk »

bkjlblh wrote: post #220

> In light of the ability of recent models to accelerate their own development, we’ve implemented new interventions that limit Claude’s effectiveness for requests targeting frontier LLM development (for example, on building pretraining pipelines, distributed training infrastructure, or ML accelerator design). Using Claude to develop competing models already violates our Terms of Service, but enforcing this restrictio…

Meaningless and easily bypassable. Will actually try coding up a tensor library with it, see if it sabotages anything.

Re: Claude Fable 5

#277

Post by ibejoeb »

cuuupid wrote: post #60

Not missing the forest for the trees, this effectively means in 3-5 months China will drop open source models that are every bit as capable and dangerous as current day Mythos except with no safeguards. And the only companies safe from this are the large corporations that shook hands with Anthropic? Because Fable doesn't seem to have actual safeguards, more like 'if you talk about this you will be talking to Opus.' I…

I don't think China has any incentive to arm the rest of the world with highly capable models that can be used against them. Undoubtedly they will continue with the arms race, but they will preserve the best stuff for their own use.

Re: Claude Fable 5

#278

Post by trollied »

PeterStuer wrote: post #186
AquinasCoder wrote: post #42

From today through June 22, Fable 5 is included on Pro, Max, Team, and seat-based Enterprise plans at no extra cost. On June 23, we’ll remove Fable 5 from those plans. Using it after that will require usage credits. If capacity allows, we’ll extend the included window. After this point—when sufficient capacity allows us to do so—we aim to restore Fable 5 as a standard part of subscription plans. We intend to do this…

I'll be amazed if they manage to keep their infra responsive over the next 2 weeks.

They just leased a massive spacex data centre.

Re: Claude Fable 5

#279

Post by recitedropper »

raoulj wrote: post #258

On this thread and similar, I'm noticing that some strong opinions about $LLM_PROVIDER are coming from accounts without much post history. With so much on the line, and the way that HN can influence developer behavior, I wonder what ways we can responsibly consume opinions in a thread like this. Not to cast too much criticism. HN is extremely well-moderated (thanks team!). But think we-developers need to be very wary…

Do you see the pattern as new accounts tending to boost or criticis $LLM_PROVIDER? I think I see both...

Either way, I agree that HN is quickly becoming more manipulated and low SNR, like the rest of the entire internet.

Re: Claude Fable 5

#280

Post by thisisnotclear »

yandie wrote: post #47

I've been running Opus 4.8 for agentic coding and I don't see it being significantly better than Sonnet 4.5 (not that I can tell). I find that pairing Google Gemini and Claude (having Gemini review Claude's code) seems to yield better results. Curious if this jump to 80.3% score in agentic coding will make me see a big difference in actual usage.

I find not much difference between Sonnet 4.6 and opus models too for most task that I need - maybe my needs are not enough for frontier models
Post reply on HN