I had already cancelled my subscription after finding the original Fable safeguards literally unusable (very basic chemistry, cryptography use cases), but with the false positives being admittedly worse now and the subscription not covering Fable for long I fail to see the point of consumer subscriptions now. Perhaps that's the goal, but it's a tough sell when Minimax M3 and GLM 5.2 are comfortably in Opus 4.5-4.8 territory but 1/5th-1/20th the price.
Redeploying Fable 5
21–30 of 59 posts
Re: Redeploying Fable 5
#22>Our testing confirmed that many less capable models—including Claude Opus 4.8, GPT-5.5, and Kimi K2.7—could identify the same vulnerabilities as Fable 5 did in the report. That is nice advertising for Kimi, huh?
In a way, but note that the government actors here have Opinions on the Chinese having capable models.
Re: Redeploying Fable 5
#23"For Pro, Max, Team, and select Enterprise plans, Fable 5 will be included for up to 50% of weekly usage limits through July 7, after which it will be available via usage credits." The party will be short-lived.
You had two weeks to build up a queue of everything you wanted to do with it!
Re: Redeploying Fable 5
#24This post has been marked as a dupe, but it provides a lot more details than the other announcements of Fable's re-enablement provide:
> The export control directive on June 12 came after the government became aware of a report in which Amazon researchers had found a method of bypassing Fable 5’s safeguards: prompting it so that it identified a number of software vulnerabilities. In one case, the model produced code demonstrating how the relevant vulnerability could be exploited. Over the past two weeks, we have worked closely with the government and other partners, including Amazon, to review the report and evidence.
> Our testing confirmed that many less capable models—including Claude Opus 4.8, GPT-5.5, and Kimi K2.7—could identify the same vulnerabilities as Fable 5 did in the report. When it came to the demonstration of how to exploit the single vulnerability, every model we tested could produce the same demonstration as Fable 5 (including Claude Haiku 4.5, Sonnet 4.6, Opus 4.6, Opus 4.7, Opus 4.8, GPT-5.4, GPT-5.5, and Kimi K2.7).
This indicates three things:
1) WTF was Amazon thinking? Didn't their researches try the same thing in other models too before telling the CEO to tell the government it was dangerous (!?)
2) Anthropic - in particular Dario - really needs to learn government relations better. Most of the problems Anthropic has had with the government seem to stem from Dario's attitude rather than actual facts. (Eg, the DoD debacle seems to have ended up with OpenAI signing almost the same contract Anthropic already had, just worded differently)
3) The administration decision making is just wacky. In a normal administration they'd have actual policy documents you could look at to understand under what circumstances they think models have a problem. With this they just seem to make it up as they go, and the tools they use make no sense at all. If it is dangerous for cyber security reasons why would export controls make sense to use?
Re: Redeploying Fable 5
#25"For Pro, Max, Team, and select Enterprise plans, Fable 5 will be included for up to 50% of weekly usage limits through July 7, after which it will be available via usage credits." The party will be short-lived.
Huge bummer. So what's the point of an anthropic subscription? Or is this just the end of subscriptions? Looking forward to gpt-5.6 (assuming we can still use our subscriptions there).
Opus isn't nothing!
I think the 5x subscription is here to stay - I'd bet they make money on that from lots of people not using it.
The 20x is already unavailable in Teams plans.
Re: Redeploying Fable 5
#26It’s nice to have access again, but I’m hesitant to include it in my workflow now. In fact I’d rather not use American models at all if I could. I have the sense that this limited usage model will persist, Opus at its current token price will gradually be phased out, and eventually the cost of these models will be unsustainable and impractical. I’d rather not play this game anymore and seek out more reliable provider…
I mean that's the software playbook, get users addicted by offering it cheap and once you have them hooked, you raise the prices. There is no reason to think any non american company wouldn't follow this strategy. It's a different matter than the export control issue entirely and one that is systematic to software in general.
[deleted]
Re: Redeploying Fable 5
#27It’s nice to have access again, but I’m hesitant to include it in my workflow now. In fact I’d rather not use American models at all if I could. I have the sense that this limited usage model will persist, Opus at its current token price will gradually be phased out, and eventually the cost of these models will be unsustainable and impractical. I’d rather not play this game anymore and seek out more reliable provider…
Don't worry, now that Fable is freely available, a Chinese distill will be out a few months from now. To riff on Musk, the US AI industry is the bootloader for the Chinese AI industry.
Re: Redeploying Fable 5
#28Earlier quoted context omitted.
Huge bummer. So what's the point of an anthropic subscription? Or is this just the end of subscriptions? Looking forward to gpt-5.6 (assuming we can still use our subscriptions there).
Opus isn't nothing! I think the 5x subscription is here to stay - I'd bet they make money on that from lots of people not using it. The 20x is already unavailable in Teams plans.
Opus is at the same level as open weights models now. Okay, maybe a tiny bit better. So basically "nothing" - I don't see the point of using closed weights if there is an equivalent open weights model.
Re: Redeploying Fable 5
#29Can’t wait for the Ender’s Game class of jailbreak frameworks to be built.
Re: Redeploying Fable 5
#30Nice! I go to the x20 again.
That won’t get you access to Fable for long, it’ll be billed as extra usage soon.