Live data from Hacker News

Department of Commerce has lifted export controls on Claude Fable 5 and Mythos 5

twitter.com

211–220 of 736 posts

Re: Department of Commerce has lifted export controls on Claude Fable 5 and Mythos 5

#211
post #109
post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This x 10 . I don’t understand how people are saying you can’t use LLMs to get crazy productivity gains. If you can’t write quality code with LLMs at ludicrous speed, you’re holding it wrong. You will have occasional bad days and regressions. But overall you’re still going to be able to 4x your progress.

There's a small minority of people who are adamantly refusing to change, such as there are in every technological revolution. Ego prevents them from even wholeheartedly trying the tool, because it would be admission they were wrong. The opportunities available for these people are rapidly, rapidly shrinking. I believe it's possible to be a developer today who's EXCEPTIONAL and never uses AI. Most opponents are not ex…

What about the 6x developers? Was there just a doubling multiplier across the board, resulting in them becoming 12x developers, or did they too become 20x developers?

Re: Department of Commerce has lifted export controls on Claude Fable 5 and Mythos 5

#212

Mildly 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.

Where is that?

Re: Department of Commerce has lifted export controls on Claude Fable 5 and Mythos 5

#213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Where is that?

https://x.com/AnthropicAI/status/2072163884430229756

Re: Department of Commerce has lifted export controls on Claude Fable 5 and Mythos 5

#214

Earlier 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.

Every bit of code written in the last 50 years is going to be meaningless. People need to get to grips with that fast. Distribution, relationships, processes, mindshare, marketing, and politics matter. Code is just ephemeral glue and implementation detail.

Lmao. Have more respect for your elders, who wrote all the code that your ai psychosis is fuelled by.

Re: Department of Commerce has lifted export controls on Claude Fable 5 and Mythos 5

#215

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).

> after 6p west coast time Hmm? The linked tweet was posted at 16:52.

Ah, my time zone was incorrect. Fixed it. Thanks for letting me know.

Re: Department of Commerce has lifted export controls on Claude Fable 5 and Mythos 5

#216

Earlier 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.

This is something I wish I understood sooner. There is strong merit to "good enough".

Of all the "concise" and "beautiful" code I worked hard to produce, I was the only one to ever lay eyes on it. It didn't actually matter, and nobody cared but me. The people in charge of my raises could never perceive quality of code, because it wasn't their area of expertise. They only cared (rightly so) that it did what it was supposed to, and all the elegant abstractions didn't practically help that purpose. It was, literally, wasted life that I should have spent just getting off work early, like most of my colleagues.

Re: Department of Commerce has lifted export controls on Claude Fable 5 and Mythos 5

#218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a great recipe for going out of business.

If the competitive risk is real, then are choosing between supplier risk (AI model access) and competitive risk. When there isn't a zero-risk option, the question becomes which risk is smaller.

You can compete by being smart and using less-than-sota models and build a more solid business around them

Re: Department of Commerce has lifted export controls on Claude Fable 5 and Mythos 5

#219

Fable 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/Ant…

From the full announcement

> The new classifier also comes at the cost of flagging benign requests more often during routine coding and debugging tasks. As with all our safeguards, we’ll continue to refine this to better distinguish genuine misuse from legitimate requests and reduce false positives.

Re: Department of Commerce has lifted export controls on Claude Fable 5 and Mythos 5

#220

Fable 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/Ant…

I wonder if they meant to draw a link between cybersecurity coding and debugging specifically or this really will apply to all coding and debugging. If it really is a more general restriction, then this is practically the same as it still being restricted.

"In the near term" is doing some heavy lifting.

Post reply on HN