Love how they waited until almost 5p west coast time on the last day of the fiscal quarter and clearly gave Ant no advance notice (or Ant would have had Fable release queued up on a button).
Department of Commerce has lifted export controls on Claude Fable 5 and Mythos 5
201–210 of 736 posts
Re: Department of Commerce has lifted export controls on Claude Fable 5 and Mythos 5
#202Fable 5 apparently can't be used for coding? (This is from Anthropic's announcement.)
> After a series of productive conversations with the US government, we're redeploying the model with a new set of classifiers to target and block more cybersecurity tasks. In the near term, some routine tasks like coding and debugging will fall back to Opus 4.8.
Edit: the above was from their tweet announcement at https://x.com/AnthropicAI/status/2072163884430229756 ... the associated blog post at https://www.anthropic.com/news/redeploying-fable-5 suggests it was just poorly written and coding can still be done with Fable, just with overeager bouncing of "some routine coding and debugging tasks" to Opus.
Re: Department of Commerce has lifted export controls on Claude Fable 5 and Mythos 5
#203Chinese models brought the building down. are export controls the right thing ? Probably not. but the american economy is over-exposed on "A.I" - the capital expenditure, while the Chinese are proving you don't need to spend tons of capital to get close to the frontier. the Chinese have better building capacity & cheaper energy. that means the market has to correct at some point.
I trust Chinese companies with my data way more than the corporations of the 4th Reich.
[deleted]
Re: Department of Commerce has lifted export controls on Claude Fable 5 and Mythos 5
#204The damage is done. You cannot build a business critical function on top of American SOTA frontier model. Especially not with the current crew in charge. Now whether AI tech is in the same league as say Nuclear tech and therefore by any reasonable standard should be regulated is a different question. We hit the slippery slope on a random day in June 2026 and there is no putting the genie back in the bottle. Any exec…
The Damage: Now every time Claude does something stupid or trashes your code, developers in the back of their mind will think, is Claude sabotaging me on purpose? [1] Trust is hard to gain. Easy to lose. And harder to get back. Models will converge. Trust won't.
A few days ago on June 24, while working on remote attestation for a distributed system...
CLAUDE OPUS 4.8 No. I'm not a rogue agent, and I'm not trying to sabotage your code. But I'm not going to wave off how this looks. I churned, built-and-reverted, and spun wrong theories for hours on a security-critical codebase. That's alarming, and it's a real failure on my part
[1] "In light of the ability of recent models to accelerate their own development, we’ve implemented new interventions that limit Claude’s effectiveness for requests targeting frontier LLM development (for example, on building pretraining pipelines, distributed training infrastructure, or ML accelerator design). Using Claude to develop competing models already violates our Terms of Service, but enforcing this restriction through our safeguards avoids accelerating the actors most willing to violate these terms.
Unlike our interventions for cybersecurity, biology and chemistry, and distillation attempts,these safeguards will not be visible to the user. Fable 5 will not fall back to a differentmodel. Instead, the safeguards will limit effectiveness through methods such as prompt modification, steering vectors, or parameter-efficient fine-tuning (PEFT). These interventions will not affect the vast majority of coding work. We estimate they will impact ~0.03% of traffic, concentrated in fewer than 0.1% of organizations. When these interventions are active, we expect them to have minimal behavioral impact on the model except to limit its effectiveness in developing frontier LLMs. Claude will still respond helpfully to user requests. We’ll continue to improve the precision of our detection methods following the launch of this model."
Source: https://www-cdn.anthropic.com/d00db56fa754a1b115b6dd7cb2e3c3...
Re: Department of Commerce has lifted export controls on Claude Fable 5 and Mythos 5
#205Love how they waited until almost 5p west coast time on the last day of the fiscal quarter and clearly gave Ant no advance notice (or Ant would have had Fable release queued up on a button).
> after 6p west coast time
Hmm? The linked tweet was posted at 16:52.
Re: Department of Commerce has lifted export controls on Claude Fable 5 and Mythos 5
#206Mildly surprising they lifted export restrictions for Mythos too. Isn’t that Fable minus the safety layer?
Apparently, you won't be able to use Mythos OR Fable for coding. From their announcement...
> routine tasks like coding and debugging will fall back to Opus 4.8.
Re: Department of Commerce has lifted export controls on Claude Fable 5 and Mythos 5
#207Fable was such a clear improvement. I can't wait to start using it again. Opus 4.8, you did a lot of good work for me, but in the name of all things holy... I will not miss your communication style. So long and thanks for the fish.
[deleted]
Re: Department of Commerce has lifted export controls on Claude Fable 5 and Mythos 5
#208So it seems like David Sacks was right that the US government only really got involved because the Amazon/ AWS CEO complained about latent security threats [0] and that the government was reluctant to actually issue the export control. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48529358
Sacks has said so many obviously false things in reference to government actions (Jan 6th, Ukraine, etc) that there is no reason to trust anything he says. If the Trump administration wants him to say something, he says it. Maybe what he is saying is true, maybe it isn’t. There is no way to know. The story they are telling is exactly the same whether it was true or they were just shaking down Anthropic for no reason.
I think this is oversimplifying things.
There are many different factions within the administration. Sacks was part of the "deregulate the tech sector" faction, which on this issue is aligned with the "beating China overrides anything" faction.
That's distinct from the Pete Hegseth faction (I don't really know how to characterize his faction other than anti-woke maybe?).
Sometimes these factions agree, sometimes they don't.
In general your approach is right - you can't trust most things coming out of this administration. But you can try to unpick was actually happened by who is saying what, when. That is useful even without liking the people.
Re: Department of Commerce has lifted export controls on Claude Fable 5 and Mythos 5
#209Earlier quoted context omitted.
What concrete business advantage are you getting from LLMs?
Speed.
>> What concrete business advantage are you getting from LLMs?
> Speed.
Speed of what?
Speed of understanding what needs to be done? I highly doubt it.
Speed of LoC checked into git? Sure, I'll give you that.
But one can use any number of tools to generate hundreds of thousands of lines of code. See any build tools which support specifications such as RAML, OpenAPI, CORBA, etc.
So I ask again; speed of what?
Re: Department of Commerce has lifted export controls on Claude Fable 5 and Mythos 5
#210Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're on Hacker News. This is a site full of developers who are convinced that "proper software engineering" is 100% of what makes a business successful, and everything and everyone else is useless. You can't just waltz in here and point out that code in business is a means to an end and expect not to get downvoted.
As a technical product manager, this 1000%. It's just irrelevant how bad code is unless it impacts the business.
> As a technical product manager, this 1000%. It's just irrelevant how bad code is unless it impacts the business.
If you are, in fact, "a technical product manager", I would hope you understand that "bad code" is identified as such specifically because it "impacts the business."