If Claude Fable stops helping you, you'll never know • Hacker News Board

Re: If Claude Fable stops helping you, you'll never know

#501

Post by hedora » Wed, Jun 10, 2026, 4:18 PM UTC

windowshopping wrote: post #311

SwellJoe wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think we agree? What moat? You answered yourself: "capital intensive" But, history says the supercomputer of today will fit in your pocket in a few years. They've bought up all the RAM and GPUs, which pushes the capital requirements upward for everyone else. But, they can't corner the market forever, there are too many competing interests. AMD and Intel keep making new GPUs and APUs. The memory makers can't just se…

> I think we agree? That is such a crazy way to start a response to someone trying to argue with you. I should try this. That's amazing. I know you didn't mean it as a trick, at least I'm pretty sure you meant it sincerely, but I'm just struck by the power of it to defuse and redirect the conversation. And this was a very low-grade example, but I could imagine this being useful in much more heated contexts.

In fairness I completely agree with 99% of their comment.

I was nitpicking the use of the word “moat”. For it to be a moat, it’d need to be more expensive to traverse than to build.

Instead, the big AI firms are trying to create a monopoly on capital in an area where real costs are dropping 90% year over year.

Re: If Claude Fable stops helping you, you'll never know

#502

Post by hedora » Wed, Jun 10, 2026, 4:24 PM UTC

gorgoiler wrote: post #309

SwellJoe wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think we agree? What moat? You answered yourself: "capital intensive" But, history says the supercomputer of today will fit in your pocket in a few years. They've bought up all the RAM and GPUs, which pushes the capital requirements upward for everyone else. But, they can't corner the market forever, there are too many competing interests. AMD and Intel keep making new GPUs and APUs. The memory makers can't just se…

They’ve bought up all the RAM and GPUs… Is there an endgame where even this is considered overly complex? Instead of starving the competition by buying up all the compute, why not just buy up… all the money!? Hoover up as much investment capital as possible so that your competitors can’t get funding.

They did get a bunch of investment grants from Trump, so your tax money (and power bills) are subsidizing them. They also arranged for ETFs to eliminate consumer protection rules to force everyone’s retirement to buy SpaceX/Anthropic/OpenAI shortly after IPO. That totals $3T in valuation (unless it goes up in first week trading), so your retirement is basically going to be weighing “AI bubble” similar to “MAGA”, and then everything else is rounding error. (The rule changes waive profitability requirements, and shorten the cooldown from IPO to indexing from a year to weeks).

I guess that’s one way to try to make capital finite.

Re: If Claude Fable stops helping you, you'll never know

#503

Post by splwjs » Wed, Jun 10, 2026, 4:30 PM UTC

jbs789 wrote: post #494

splwjs wrote: post #475

There's already an obvious stench to "you should scale down your engineering team to a skeleton crew whose core competency is using our product, so that it's the only way to modify your product"; that's going to result in a lot of foodless tables when anthropic et al decide they have enough leverage to stop subsidizing their subscription prices down to what, 4-10% of the marginal cost? Well it doesn't matter how much…

Repeat of the cycle where companies moved to the cloud, now locked in. Move engineering to Claude, then locked in. What’s played out at the infra level will now play out at the software engineer level… is that analogous…?

I'd argue it's different because ephemeral, vps, baremetal, self-hosted, the skillset is still "managing a linux server" and the most radical shift is to an expectation that a server is a thing that is created and destroyed on demand (so now you need to script deployment), which isn't really a radical shift away from the skillset.

The goal of AI seems to pretty explicitly be "stop coding; from now on the mechanic fixes your car", which I would argue is a very different shift.

Also if you host a criminal content on AWS they probably close your account and ban you instead of silently rerouting all traffic away from your server (which may just be hosting a game where you kill goblins or steal cars or something) and refusing to acknowledge that that's what's happening.

Re: If Claude Fable stops helping you, you'll never know

#504

Post by bauldursdev » Wed, Jun 10, 2026, 4:35 PM UTC

splwjs wrote: post #503

jbs789 wrote: post #494

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Repeat of the cycle where companies moved to the cloud, now locked in. Move engineering to Claude, then locked in. What’s played out at the infra level will now play out at the software engineer level… is that analogous…?

I'd argue it's different because ephemeral, vps, baremetal, self-hosted, the skillset is still "managing a linux server" and the most radical shift is to an expectation that a server is a thing that is created and destroyed on demand (so now you need to script deployment), which isn't really a radical shift away from the skillset. The goal of AI seems to pretty explicitly be "stop coding; from now on the mechanic fix…

Ya if you just run VMs but now a lot of cloud vendors have you build stuff using their proprietary features so decoupling becomes harder and can be risky.

Re: If Claude Fable stops helping you, you'll never know

#505

Post by jatora » Wed, Jun 10, 2026, 4:45 PM UTC

jpfromlondon wrote: post #442

jatora wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is ridiculous. How about the rational users who use the best current model regardless of brand? The value of the model is in the quality of the output over time. I give every major model a chance. Coding and scripts in the chat are nothing compared to the power of agentic SWEEEEEEEEE. And nothing is remotely close to claude and gpt. If you're comfortable with being well behind SOTA intelligence, then good for yo…

that isn't rational, rational is using the model that can best solve your current problem in the timeliest cost considered manner. I'm not working on the frontier problems, I don't need god-in-a-box for $600 per month.

its not god in a box and its not $600 per month

and almost nobody is working on frontier problems. they just want frontier intelligence to solve their given problems in a superior manner.

you're minimizing and exaggerating all of the wrong things. cope more i guess - more compute for us!

Re: If Claude Fable stops helping you, you'll never know

#506

Post by tracker1 » Wed, Jun 10, 2026, 4:49 PM UTC

splwjs wrote: post #475

There's already an obvious stench to "you should scale down your engineering team to a skeleton crew whose core competency is using our product, so that it's the only way to modify your product"; that's going to result in a lot of foodless tables when anthropic et al decide they have enough leverage to stop subsidizing their subscription prices down to what, 4-10% of the marginal cost? Well it doesn't matter how much…

Given the cost overruns and rework from AI swarms... I feel that the AI Gatekeeper model is a much better approach to how to leverage AI for most things... One person, directing one agent and babysitting to understand, correct and gate the results.

Re: If Claude Fable stops helping you, you'll never know

#507

Post by knollimar » Wed, Jun 10, 2026, 5:10 PM UTC

platinumrad wrote: post #198

dakolli wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's literally no indication that this is the case, or will ever be. Unless you're a completely naive person who's impressed with all output of an LLM because you don't know what you're talking about. These models aren't impressive, and the people who think they are impressive are even less impressive.

The is a large middle ground between "aren't impressive" and "Claude can spit out billion dollar companies on demand".

A dog talking is impressive but you can't build a SaaS around it as if it's a genius.

The dog's words aren't the impressive part here

Re: If Claude Fable stops helping you, you'll never know

#508

Post by jollyllama » Wed, Jun 10, 2026, 5:10 PM UTC

splwjs wrote: post #475

There's already an obvious stench to "you should scale down your engineering team to a skeleton crew whose core competency is using our product, so that it's the only way to modify your product"; that's going to result in a lot of foodless tables when anthropic et al decide they have enough leverage to stop subsidizing their subscription prices down to what, 4-10% of the marginal cost? Well it doesn't matter how much…

These AI companies have never been incentivized to make your code better, but I guess they're saying the quiet part out loud now.

Re: If Claude Fable stops helping you, you'll never know

#509

Post by theLiminator » Wed, Jun 10, 2026, 5:16 PM UTC

hedora wrote: post #499

theLiminator wrote: post #357

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, I'm talking about a supercomputer from today in your pocket. That probably requires at least 5000x perf/watt if not even more.

That’s only two order of magnitude software optimizations, a bunch of plus delta’s, and one order of magnitude on hw. I’d give that over 50% odds of happening in the next few years.

I don't disbelieve a 5000x speedup is possible, I disbelieve that a modern day supercomputer will fit in your pocket in even the next 10 years.

Re: If Claude Fable stops helping you, you'll never know

#510

Post by radu_floricica » Wed, Jun 10, 2026, 5:41 PM UTC

woodrowbarlow wrote: post #459

radu_floricica wrote: post #448

My biggest problem with Fable is that it includes health into its biology restrictions. Which means half the use I'd get from it ... doesn't exist. I'm not as bitter as I could be. I'm actually quite surprised at the sanity of not avoiding the health topic completely - I think only OpenAI had a few months where ChatGPT was tip toeing in any health related conversation. Otherwise it's been almost completely ungated, a…

> it saved and helped countless lives it has also done the opposite, including affirming a mentally ill person's suicidal ideations.

Well, I'm pretty sure ambulances occasionally run people over. Doesn't mean we should ban them.

Orders of magnitude matter.