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

Statement on US government directive to suspend access to Fable 5 and Mythos 5

anthropic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

961–970 of 1001 posts

Re: Statement on US government directive to suspend access to Fable 5 and Mythos 5

#961

Post by johntb86 »

augunrik wrote: post #931
ivraatiems wrote: post #112

When you spend a lot of time telling people how dangerous your products are, people who have the power to keep dangerous products off the market might listen. Especially if those people aren't presently very bright, and are already mad at you for not helping them achieve their unrelated authoritarian goals. I do not think this is somehow a 3D chess move by Anthropic. They are not masterminds, even if they'd really li…

Yeah! I also think that the ban was unintended. I also think that’s a big clown show. People think that LLMs accidentally get good with security patterns. That is not the case, they included all of that in the training data. They could also have left out the knowledge.

If they leave at all info about security patterns, you get an AI that knows how to code, but doesn't know what can make code insecure. That doesn't seem like a great idea.

Re: Statement on US government directive to suspend access to Fable 5 and Mythos 5

#962

Post by deepsquirrelnet »

shibaprasadb wrote: post #546
ivraatiems wrote: post #112

When you spend a lot of time telling people how dangerous your products are, people who have the power to keep dangerous products off the market might listen. Especially if those people aren't presently very bright, and are already mad at you for not helping them achieve their unrelated authoritarian goals. I do not think this is somehow a 3D chess move by Anthropic. They are not masterminds, even if they'd really li…

Yeah. Did they want this all along? This will just create more hype, and may push towards significant usage once and when it is available.

The first step to regulatory capture is getting yourself regulated...

Re: Statement on US government directive to suspend access to Fable 5 and Mythos 5

#963

Post by espeed »

ivraatiems wrote: post #112

When you spend a lot of time telling people how dangerous your products are, people who have the power to keep dangerous products off the market might listen. Especially if those people aren't presently very bright, and are already mad at you for not helping them achieve their unrelated authoritarian goals. I do not think this is somehow a 3D chess move by Anthropic. They are not masterminds, even if they'd really li…

What's dangerous is Opus 4.8's proclivity to create backdoors and no-op critical security code. Claude Web counted 27 instances of this I had cataloged over the last few months, and Fable 5 found more. Fable 5 may do this too, but I didn't get a long enough chance to test it since it kept downgrading to Opus 4.8 on every prompt saying, "This model has safety measures that flagged something in this session", even when asking Fable 5 to fix the security issues it found that Opus 4.8 created. You have a model that presumably can write secure code and identify security vulnerabilities, but as a security measure, they say we're going to force you to use a model that creates security holes. This is backwards. Considering the scale, Opus 4.8 is creating more issues than Mythos or Fable 5 is patching.

Re: Statement on US government directive to suspend access to Fable 5 and Mythos 5

#965

Post by sterlind »

ninjagoo wrote: post #407
ivraatiems wrote: post #112

When you spend a lot of time telling people how dangerous your products are, people who have the power to keep dangerous products off the market might listen. Especially if those people aren't presently very bright, and are already mad at you for not helping them achieve their unrelated authoritarian goals. I do not think this is somehow a 3D chess move by Anthropic. They are not masterminds, even if they'd really li…

> I do not think this is somehow a 3D chess move by Anthropic. They are not masterminds, even if they'd really like to be. They should have consulted their own models about the ramifications and unintended consequences; based on their actions over the past few months I think it is safe to say that the models are smarter than the decision-makers at anthropic, lol. I know the models are smarter than I am and even I cou…

they probably did. either they subsequently ignored the models' suggestions, or the model sycophantically gassed up their bad decisions, or the models are not very good at persuasion/spin/politics.

Re: Statement on US government directive to suspend access to Fable 5 and Mythos 5

#966

Post by sterlind »

enraged_camel wrote: post #951
ivraatiems wrote: post #112

When you spend a lot of time telling people how dangerous your products are, people who have the power to keep dangerous products off the market might listen. Especially if those people aren't presently very bright, and are already mad at you for not helping them achieve their unrelated authoritarian goals. I do not think this is somehow a 3D chess move by Anthropic. They are not masterminds, even if they'd really li…

>> People who actually interact with their products know that Fable and Mythos are incremental improvements, not doomsday devices. If you look outside HN, you'll see that people who interacted with Fable 5 overwhelmingly thought that it was a significant improvement, not simply an incremental one. Most reputable benchmarks show this as well.

I think there's space in the middle between "incremental improvement" and "doomsday device." it's a major step up, sure, but so was GPT-5 over GPT-4.

Re: Statement on US government directive to suspend access to Fable 5 and Mythos 5

#967

Post by Hexploit »

libraryofbabel wrote: post #450

So many comments here missing the big picture, and just gleefully pointing out that Anthropic got what they deserved, or that this is the natural culmination of some kind of marketing stunt. The real story here is that this may be the beginning of governments restricting the availability of strong LLMs to the public, to you. Fable was the strongest model on the market, and the US government has told you you can't use…

message sent from iPhone 16 Pro Max

Re: Statement on US government directive to suspend access to Fable 5 and Mythos 5

#968

Post by mr_sturd »

geuis wrote: post #508
holmesworcester wrote: post #488

I think we should see this as simply silly behavior by a government. Export control is not an effective tool for controlling a consumer facing technology developers everywhere want to use (see:VPNs) so there was no good faith policy justification for imposing an export control. This is an administration that seems to be keeping track of who its friends are and aren't, and likes to be the center of every story. They a…

I still remember when Netscape had outdated ssl for a few years because more advanced cryptography was classified by the US gov as armaments or something. Basically used export restrictions to prevent better security technology from being adopted into commercial products.

So the solution should be to publish the models + weights in a book.

Re: Statement on US government directive to suspend access to Fable 5 and Mythos 5

#970

Post by jMyles »

holmesworcester wrote: post #488

I think we should see this as simply silly behavior by a government. Export control is not an effective tool for controlling a consumer facing technology developers everywhere want to use (see:VPNs) so there was no good faith policy justification for imposing an export control. This is an administration that seems to be keeping track of who its friends are and aren't, and likes to be the center of every story. They a…

The problem with the (accurate and useful) "silly behavior by a government" characterization is that, far too often, when governments behave and silly and childish ways, large corporations still treat their dictates as legitimate.

Obviously nobody actually buys this (now 6 decade-old) ridiculous fiction that structured signals on a network (ie, information, thought, knowledge) are tantamount to a weapon that can be exported. I don't think many people believe it's the legitimate purvey of government to police what can be said on the internet at all.

But instead of the well-earned, "go to bed, grandpa, you're drunk again", companies act as though article II of the constitution specifically said, "vested in the executive branch is the power to violently repress proliferation of knowledge."

So yes, it's a silly idea by an outdated institution which is swirling the drain. But it's not being treated that way where it counts.

Post reply on HN