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

461–470 of 1001 posts

Re: Claude Fable 5

#461

Post by schipperai »

mohsen1 wrote: post #436

It seems like Fable will refuse to do any work when it comes to developing LLMs or even asking questions about topics related to LLM. Simple things like asking to explain a paper fails! From the model card: 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…

Let's hope not all frontier AI assimilates these guardrails. It would be a shame for independent researchers and students.

Re: Claude Fable 5

#462

Post by dchftcs »

balverineorder wrote: post #304

I have been refactoring a project using Opus 4.7/4.8 for the past few weeks or so. I just decided to switch to Fable 5 max today. It stopped half way through and it just blocked me and switched back to Opus 4.8 automatically. "This model has specific safety measures that flagged something in this message. This sometimes happens with safe, normal conversations. Send feedback or learn more." It would not identify what…

I suspect this will be a significant problem blocking long-horizon tasks in practice, basically the more turns there are, the larger the chance the classifier produces a false positive. The disappointment of the user will also scale with the length of the task, as you're in the middle of some complex thing and now gets derailed, after already have paid for many tokens.

Re: Claude Fable 5

#464

Post by jrumbut »

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…

It could be my use cases, which have always seemed to be outside the wheelhouse of these models, but I find it very hard to downgrade after accessing a more capable model.

Opus 4.8 produces output in 15 minutes that is 3-4 hours of my work away from output that used to take me 40ish hours (a solid week of dedicated effort).

Last year(-ish, maybe it was 18 months, I forget when the jump happened), the frontier models couldn't touch this work. The output looked like a hardworking intern on their first day. Nice formatting, decent volume of words, but no understanding.

So it might work if it turns out to be a substantial leap in capability.

Re: Claude Fable 5

#465

Post by SkitterKherpi »

mohsen1 wrote: post #436

It seems like Fable will refuse to do any work when it comes to developing LLMs or even asking questions about topics related to LLM. Simple things like asking to explain a paper fails! From the model card: 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…

It also tried to force usage the paid Claude API instead of claude code usage just because there's a mention of another provider we might want to plug in (which hasnt even happened) for AI integration.

Re: Claude Fable 5

#466

Post by KronisLV »

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…

> it feels like they are trying to get subscribers to switch to usage-based billing

I think they might be hitting a point where subsidizing the expensive models for subscriptions makes less and less sense.

With Opus 4.X, last month I paid 100 USD for the Max subscription and got a token equivalent of 4.1k USD.

I imagine that Fable is more expensive to run.

Re: Claude Fable 5

#467

Post by peteforde »

I just tried out Fable on a modest Plan prompt in Cursor. Generating that plan - not building it - just consumed 4% of my $200 monthly usage budget.

That's one hungry, hungry hippo!

Significantly too rich for my blood, but nice to have it there the next time I'm debugging a threading or USB protocol bug.

Re: Claude Fable 5

#468

Post by kypro »

I just gave it a go at a problem I've been working on this week. Nothing fancy, just some inefficient code that we've been adding incremental improvements to for a while now to the point where some out-of-box thinking is probably required to push it any further – something Fable is obviously more than capable of.

After Fable did some thinking for a few minutes it gave some suggestions. A couple of them were valid – but very low impact, bordering on entirely pointless – but it's main suggestion.. It told me to make an update that would very clearly break the existing functionality.

So I thought about it for a moment...

Hm, I mean, I guess we could do that if we also did x, y & z to mitigate the behaviour change – maybe that's what Fable was thinking?

I replied, explaining that it would change the behaviour, assuming it would explain what it was thinking given there was clearly more to it. But no, it just said it was wrong.

This isn't some super advanced or complex code either. Had I gave this question to a senior engineer in a technical interview and they gave the answer Fable gave me I would view that very negatively. I was expecting something creative and interesting, not irrelevant + incorrect.

I'm sure it's a step up from 4.8 (although am not interested in burning the tokens to find out), but this clearly isn't as significant a change as some are implying. I'm sure if I asked it to come up with some out-of-box suggestions it could, but any competent engineer would have realised that by themselves.

Re: Claude Fable 5

#469

Post by madrox »

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 suspect it'll go on the subscription plan once other providers have similar benchmarks.

As annoyed as I am about this move, I get it. Users flood the newest, best model whether they really need it or not, and are efficient at using their entire quota. They've had so much trouble reigning in subscription usage it makes sense.

Re: Claude Fable 5

#470

Post by bergheim »

simonw wrote: post #46

Pelican for Fable 5 on default settings is a clear improvement on Opus 4.8 Fable 5 default: https://gist.github.com/simonw/036bee5a703e7ec84e34efa974438... Opus 4.8 (the "max" one is closest to Fable): https://simonwillison.net/2026/May/28/claude-opus-4-8/#and-s... Now here are the Fable pelicans for all five of the thinking effort levels - low, medium, high, xhigh, max: https://tools.simonwillison.net/markdown-svg-r…

Anyone care about these pelicans that always come up anymore?

Clearly at this point they are part of the training data.

They even all look sort of ish the same. Daytime, colors,...

Post reply on HN