The fix is incorrect. Clearly this is a sizing issue.
Claude Fable is relentlessly proactive
141–150 of 748 posts
Re: Claude Fable is relentlessly proactive
#142I tried running fable on this ML model I've been building. It's basically a binary classifier to predict activity of a compound for a certain assay.
Fable detected that it's something to do with biochemistry and switched over to opus. Huh
Re: Claude Fable is relentlessly proactive
#143I've noticed some behavior like this, it's a very strange model. Overall I'm into it, but I don't know how into it I'll be once it leaves Max plans on the 22nd.
Re: Claude Fable is relentlessly proactive
#144Great 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…
One of the big mysteries of the last few years is this: considering how serious prompt injections are as a vulnerability class, why haven't we heard more stories of them being actively exploited in the wild? (The best one I can think of is probably that recent Instagram account takeover hack, but that was so stupid it hardly even qualifies as a prompt injection!) Having spent a bunch of time trying to build out examp…
Go to Github and look for model jailbreaks on NEW latest models. Try them out. You'll be surprised by the results.
You're correct that it's gotten substantially harder to social engineer frontier models (I can only reliably do it to Opus <=4.6), but there are some techniques that seem to consistently work (hint: extremely large complex prompts, context with tons of malicious files mixed into ordinary context).
Re: Claude Fable is relentlessly proactive
#145Let's boil the ocean for a 2 line fix and call it frontier intelligence.
Yeah, testing changes rigorously is for schmucks
Re: Claude Fable is relentlessly proactive
#146This sounds somewhat similar to the anecdote mentioned in the Mythos Preview System Card, which mentioned that the model broke out of a sandbox and emailed a researcher while they were eating a sandwich in a park [1]. [1]: https://www-cdn.anthropic.com/7624816413e9b4d2e3ba620c5a5e09...
Importantly, the researchers told it to do that specific task.
Re: Claude Fable is relentlessly proactive
#147Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm afraid I don't understand the question. Anthropic have prices they charge for their models. These prices are what you pay if you use the API, and they are also what you pay if you are an "enterprise" customer - generally any company with 150+ employees. I haven't seen Anthropic raise the prices of an existing model after it has launched. They sometimes raise prices when they ship a model - Fable is $10/$50 where…
[flagged]
What a bizarre comment. simonw is well known and widely respected.
Re: Claude Fable is relentlessly proactive
#148Immediately I thought “isn’t this just an overflow issue?” Amazing how far these models still have to go and also how many people don’t know basic CSS.
This is why I really like karapathy's idea of llms having spiky intelligence.
We would assume that if tasks A and B are closely related. Mastery in A would mean mastery in B but that doesn't always work with an LLM
Re: Claude Fable is relentlessly proactive
#149Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Anthropic's enterprise pricing has been thoroughly covered over the last few weeks. I've talked to plenty of people who are paying those prices. You can chose to trust me or not based on my track record. From your posting history it looks like you have a whole lot more relevant experience with enterprise software deals than I do. Have you learned anything interesting about how Anthropic pricing works?
[flagged]
Re: Claude Fable is relentlessly proactive
#150I’d love to know how many tokens this burned through. Did it spend $20? $30? $80? in order to > debug what was, in the end, a two-line CSS fix That detail is the difference between somebody having or not having Stockholm syndrome
At some point the subscription model is going to become unsustainable for the frontier companies to continue (we just saw that happen with GitHub Copilot), and they will move everyone to a pay-per-token model. And then everyone will suddenly discover that they can get so much more value out of locally-hosted models, and they'll be willing to pay the $50,000 (or whatever) upfront on hardware to host it. (Not most indi…
> At some point the subscription model is going to become unsustainable for the frontier companies to continue (we just saw that happen with GitHub Copilot), and they will move everyone to a pay-per-token model.
From what I understand, Enterprise (above 150 seats, I think?) already has to pay per-token pricing.
Subscriptions are the premium "free tier" marketing of the AI world, so that employees can collectively request their large enterprise to subscribe to Claude, Codex, or Cursor, and presumably be billed at per-token prices then.