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

691–700 of 1001 posts

Re: Claude Fable 5

#691

Post by enraged_camel »

uncivilized wrote: post #605
simonw wrote: post #534

I've spent enough time with this now in Claude Code (and Claude.ai and Claude Code for web) to have an opinion on Fable 5: it's a beast. I'm throwing some VERY difficult problems at at - things I've been dragging my heels on for months - and it's crunching through them very happily. One that I'm willing to share (albeit from just a week ago) - I built a Python library last week that bundles MicroPython compiled to WA…

This looks like a toy project, not a “VERY difficult” problem like you stated.

What does that mean? Have you never worked on extremely difficult problems as a side project?

Re: Claude Fable 5

#692

Post by AussieWog93 »

Have run a few tests this morning, very good first impression!

Asked it to check to see if a particulr bug related to an in-memory cache had been fixed. Fable confirmed that the caching bug had been fixed, but found adjacent issue while looking at the code (hash keys were not uniquely generated per-user; quite serious and real!)

Ran the same prompt through Opus and it also found an adjacent issue, but it was a red herring (deliberate per-user hardcoded value for a "local pickup" delivery profile).

Frontend stuff also seems to be much better than before, from the one prompt I tried!

Re: Claude Fable 5

#695

Post by Escapade5160 »

It's crazy to release a model that just swaps you to another model when you ask it hard questions. Fable changes to Opus 4.8 when you talk about cybersecurity, biology, and a couple other categories. You still pay Fable input token cost though. Frontier models are stalling, this is anthropic trying to hype the market up. Now they're talking about stopping frontier model research. It's kind of strange how the moment they become the highest valued AI company, all of a sudden they're talking about everyone stopping frontier model development for "safety". They're just as corrupt as the rest.

Re: Claude Fable 5

#696

Post by steve_adams_86 »

I'm using it to review recent work and it's doing a genuinely excellent job. This is a clear step up. Fewer decisions I have to guide it away from, faster conclusions on planning, more willing to go out of the way to make the correct decisions possible... This is really interesting. It feels like going from Sonnet to Opus, but, of course as a step up from Opus.

This feels more like working with a competent peer than ever. I won't use it once it's API-only, though. I don't mind guiding Opus as required and staying closer to the code. I can tell that Fable would lead to a lot more 'set and forget' programming which I'm still not fully comfortable with.

Regardless, this is cool. It's very fun to use. It was able to find legitimate issues with my work this week and we've made meaningful improvements. Opus can do this, but typically in much narrower contexts, and often with hallucinations or partial-errors. It needs to walk many things back or revise plans. So far that's not the case at all with Fable.

edit: I just realized I had Opus review the same work already. It missed everything Fable caught today. And it's actually worthwhile stuff to address. It's hard to say no to a model which demonstrably makes your code better, but... Those API prices will be brutal. Maybe a review here and there, I guess.

Re: Claude Fable 5

#697

Post by matheusmoreira »

simonw wrote: post #534

I've spent enough time with this now in Claude Code (and Claude.ai and Claude Code for web) to have an opinion on Fable 5: it's a beast. I'm throwing some VERY difficult problems at at - things I've been dragging my heels on for months - and it's crunching through them very happily. One that I'm willing to share (albeit from just a week ago) - I built a Python library last week that bundles MicroPython compiled to WA…

Fable has been producing some really good work on my end as well. Definitely better than Opus 4.8. The only problems are the cost and constant cybersecurity refusals. A single session uses up 100% of my 5h window without finishing, and that's when it doesn't get derailed by nonsensical refusals.

Re: Claude Fable 5

#698

Post by dominotw »

motoboi wrote: post #597
jumploops wrote: post #446

It's interesting that we're seeing these gains when it seems Mythos/Fable is "just" a scaled up version of their existing architecture[0]. When GPT 4.5 launched, the gains compared to the model size didn't seem that great, leading some to believe that the only progress we'd see would come from RL. This model certainly has quite a "substantial amount of post-training and fine-tuning", but it's also based on a new pret…

There’s nothing much new about the architecture. The real gains come from the usage traces. It turns out that having a text based interface for a text-trained model creates a very nice feedback loop. Right now as we speak, people are generating text traces on anthropic and OpenAI servers that teach their models to do everything under the sun, text wise. So people right now getting super mad at how dumb the model is w…

> There’s nothing much new about the architecture. The real gains come from the usage traces.

sorry. how do you know. i am so curious about where exactly gains are coming from but so hard to even get a little bit of insight.

i wish govt would fund these labs and make it free and opensource. way better investment than stupid overseas wars.

Re: Claude Fable 5

#699

Post by dominotw »

Escapade5160 wrote: post #695

It's crazy to release a model that just swaps you to another model when you ask it hard questions. Fable changes to Opus 4.8 when you talk about cybersecurity, biology, and a couple other categories. You still pay Fable input token cost though. Frontier models are stalling, this is anthropic trying to hype the market up. Now they're talking about stopping frontier model research. It's kind of strange how the moment t…

yea i dont trust simonw comments at all. I still havent seen what he has built with ai thats so impressive to justify hiis all his nonstop ai hype.

You would think he is churning our cancer drugs or something if you read his comments

Re: Claude Fable 5

#700

Post by shruubi »

I have a theory, this is obviously based on speculation based on how Anthropic is treating Mythos and the whole media noise around it's dangers and who gets access to it.

My theory is that Anthropic are banking on being the top model when the race to IPO finally reaches the finish line, and to do that they need to have the top model but not let any competitors see it or derive from it to have a comparable model in the market.

Fable is their way of showing the public "the model does exist but in a mode that makes it harder/impossible for competitors to derive a comparable model from results.

Post reply on HN