Anthropic apologizes for invisible Claude Fable guardrails

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Jun 11, 2026, 5:32 PM UTC

xvector wrote: post #95

thewebguyd wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't forget their push for full regulatory capture in the name of "safety" as well so they can pull the ladder up behind them before anyone else has an equally capable model and releases it without the anti-competitive safeguards, while also pushing to completely ban open weight models, or any model trained on a certain level of compute without "rigorous" government testing and validation (which I'm sure, they'll co…

[flagged]

Post by inferniac » Thu, Jun 11, 2026, 5:32 PM UTC

Sol- wrote: post #46

This has dampened my opinion on Anthropic quite a bit. It's difficult to take their marketing for AI as an empowering technology seriously when they are quite clear in their new deployments that they do not mean empowering for you , but empowering for them and organizations that are in their (or the US government's, despite Anthropics performative disagreements with the administration) good graces. You are allowed to…

Post by thinkingtoilet » Thu, Jun 11, 2026, 5:33 PM UTC

Avicebron wrote: post #2

I like Claude Code a lot, I think it sets a dangerous precedent to put guardrails in that return a response from a prompt that was modified by the system in real time in order to subvert the original intent. Fail cleanly. Anything else makes it too difficult to rely on. edit: Giving the absolute maximum benefit of the doubt I understand that they see themselves as "stewards" for lack of a better word. But the EA thin…

Post by 3fffa » Thu, Jun 11, 2026, 5:33 PM UTC

whimsicalism wrote: post #43

mlazos wrote: post #36

The idea of them purposefully wasting my time by having the model act dumber and me having to argue with it without knowing if it’s the prompt or the model was just such an idiotic product decision I can’t believe they shipped that without getting any feedback from users first.

[flagged]

Post by system2 » Thu, Jun 11, 2026, 5:34 PM UTC

xpct wrote: post #87

It's probably good that they walked back on it. It also makes them look somewhat weak in terms of believing their claimed mission.