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

Claude Fable is relentlessly proactive

simonwillison.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 748 posts

Re: Claude Fable is relentlessly proactive

#111

Post by simonw »

jrflowers wrote: post #71
asp_hornet wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The author just wrote an anecdote about how a prompt to fix an issue played out. Their conclusion wasn’t about cost or gushing at its ability but that it’s dangerous: > Fable is arguably smarter and hence more suspicious of potentially malicious instructions. But that smartness is very much a two-edged sword: if it does get subverted by instructions, the amount of damage it can do given its relentless proactivity is…

It’s a pretty glowing review about a product that costs money with a two-sentence “Watch out!” at the end of it. Seems pretty reasonable to mention how much money it burned through given that “it’ll circumnavigate the globe instead of walking next door” has a direct concrete measurable effect (cost) unlike theoretical damage.

In case it's not clear, "relentlessly proactive" is meant to act as both a glowing review and a warning at the same time, even before you get to the bit about safety at the end.

Re: Claude Fable is relentlessly proactive

#112

Post by [deleted] »

rmunn wrote: post #52

Great article, until I got to the last paragraph where he claimed "Fable is arguably smarter and hence more suspicious of potentially malicious instructions". Arguably smarter, I have no problem with. But he's making a category error in jumping from there to "more suspicious of potentially malicious instructions". That doesn't follow at all; the word "hence" is incorrect. To use D&D scores as an analogy, LLMs have an…

[deleted]

Re: Claude Fable is relentlessly proactive

#114

Post by adrianmonk »

pianopatrick wrote: post #35
senectus1 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they didn't stop to think if they should." I'm convinced this is going to be the summary of the 2020 decade...

If we're in a simulation, maybe it's a simulation about the dangers of AI.

If we're in a simulation, we are AI. But someone could be studying what happens when AI makes its own AI.

Re: Claude Fable is relentlessly proactive

#115

Post by simonw »

system2 wrote: post #95
megous wrote: post #4

Isn't that something you just open a devtools for and have fixed in like 2 minutes? For me, it got frustrated debugging on a real LPDDR4 controller/phy and having me in the loop slowing it down, so it wrote an HW emulator to be able to run the original LPDDR4 training aarch64 binary from the manufacturer, to see what register writes it was making and to compare with the opensource rewrite it was implementing. Mildly…

People burning tokens for the most beginner HTML/CSS problems and writing about it is concerning.

I dunno about beginner, I've been doing HTML+CSS for a few decades and I still find bugs where Safari differs from Chrome+Firefox pretty hard to figure out.

Re: Claude Fable is relentlessly proactive

#116

Post by jen729w »

etdznots wrote: post #40
halfmatthalfcat wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're fighting a battle you can't win. Doesn't care what you think about those using LLMs, they will outproduce you and in corporate environments, shipping things is paramount. If I can ship 5 more things simultaneously with AI, I'm going to beat you even if you think you're creating "better" software.

Example of whats been shipped?

Okay. I rebuilt my website in ~a month with the help of Opus 4.7/.8 and it would have taken me, unaided human, at least 6 months. Link's in my bio if you care.

Satisfied now? Will you stop asking this question? Thought not.

Re: Claude Fable is relentlessly proactive

#117

Post by Ucalegon »

simonw wrote: post #103
sillysaurusx wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Was the fix worth $12 to you?

I'd have been pretty annoyed if I'd been paying full price, hadn't paid attention and that one prompt (screenshot plus a line of text) had cost me $12! On the discounted subscription I can tolerate it, it took a small bite out of my daily allowance but not enough that I regret anything. As an LLM researcher I have no regrets at all because watching it work around the environmental restrictions was fascinating.

[flagged]

Re: Claude Fable is relentlessly proactive

#118

Post by satvikpendem »

qurren wrote: post #85
teraflop wrote: post #3

> But on the other hand... this is a robust reminder that coding agents can do anything you can do by typing commands into a terminal—and frontier models know every trick in the book and evidently a few that nobody has ever written down before. > Running coding agents outside of a sandbox has always been a bad idea I'm continually bemused and astonished by the number of people who clearly acknowledge that it's reckle…

> I'm continually bemused and astonished I'm not. Everyone is told to get 10X the amount of shit per day done these days. Safety checks are out the window at that point.

You can get 10x shit done without `rm -rf`ing your files. I don't see any correlation to getting things done with having a proper sandbox.

Re: Claude Fable is relentlessly proactive

#119

Post by simonw »

Ucalegon wrote: post #117
simonw wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd have been pretty annoyed if I'd been paying full price, hadn't paid attention and that one prompt (screenshot plus a line of text) had cost me $12! On the discounted subscription I can tolerate it, it took a small bite out of my daily allowance but not enough that I regret anything. As an LLM researcher I have no regrets at all because watching it work around the environmental restrictions was fascinating.

[flagged]

How do you mean?

I'm quoting the API list prices for Fable, at it's $10/million input and $50/million output (and $1/million for cache hits on input).

Re: Claude Fable is relentlessly proactive

#120

Post by NichoPaolucci »

system2 wrote: post #95
megous wrote: post #4

Isn't that something you just open a devtools for and have fixed in like 2 minutes? For me, it got frustrated debugging on a real LPDDR4 controller/phy and having me in the loop slowing it down, so it wrote an HW emulator to be able to run the original LPDDR4 training aarch64 binary from the manufacturer, to see what register writes it was making and to compare with the opensource rewrite it was implementing. Mildly…

People burning tokens for the most beginner HTML/CSS problems and writing about it is concerning.

We are at the point where AI starts to seriously impact abilities. Sure, a 2 line CSS fix is the solution, but the human “behind the wheel” has already prompted 6 times and gotten 80% there. It’s been “easy” thus far. No shot they are going to FINALLY look at and edit the code. It’s just one more prompt and the agent will probably fix it, right?

It’s wild. I’ve been in the situation. 80% into a project I COULD probably take over, but realistically? 2 more lines of me prompting could fix it, it’s too easy to avoid the hard work of understanding the code, logic, architecture, etc…

Post reply on HN