Live data from Hacker News

Fable 5 is Back

twitter.com

181–190 of 438 posts

Re: Fable 5 is Back

#181
post #144

I gave it a book on human consciousness I was writing and it flagged it. This model is hilariously bad. Anthropic has defanged this model to the point of malice. No way am I paying to use something that is basically useless.

Same problem, in-progress book about language and thermodynamics gets flagged. Their classifier is just a regex I guess?

Try doing what congress does: take a bill from the house, gut it and put in what you want after the house passes it

Re: Fable 5 is Back

#182
post #144

I gave it a book on human consciousness I was writing and it flagged it. This model is hilariously bad. Anthropic has defanged this model to the point of malice. No way am I paying to use something that is basically useless.

Today I told Sonnet (!) to use a browser MCP to enter a username and password for the project it is working on, it told me that it can't do that because it violates its security protocol. This worked fine before. I love Claude, I have stuck with it even through people saying Codex is better but this is definitely getting to be the last straw. It's completely absurd I am paying them $200+ per month along with pushing…

It’s incredibly ridiculous that it won’t help with that for me either sometimes but yet I’m also sitting on 3 surefire ways of jailbreaking Opus 4.8 that I use for cybersecurity assessments and pentesting

Re: Fable 5 is Back

#183
post #28

I applaud the engineers that work at Anthropic, who have created both amazing products and uniquely intelligent models -- but I really shake my head at some of their business decisions and public comms which have done a lot to damage their trustworthiness in the business and developer community. In just the past month: they decided to silently downgrade (instead of simply refusing) responses related to machine learni…

There are awful models, and there are models nobody use, to paraphrase. Anthropic’s revenue skyrocketed earlier this year, according to their IPO filing. There has simply been too much demand. That’s the growing pain that everyone love to have, other than the affected users of course. That was why they paid a premium for all of the computing they could get from SpaceX, Amazon, Google.

Re: Fable 5 is Back

#184
post #144

I gave it a book on human consciousness I was writing and it flagged it. This model is hilariously bad. Anthropic has defanged this model to the point of malice. No way am I paying to use something that is basically useless.

Today I told Sonnet (!) to use a browser MCP to enter a username and password for the project it is working on, it told me that it can't do that because it violates its security protocol. This worked fine before. I love Claude, I have stuck with it even through people saying Codex is better but this is definitely getting to be the last straw. It's completely absurd I am paying them $200+ per month along with pushing…

[dead]

Re: Fable 5 is Back

#185
post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, I've been using Opus to write a plan and fanout sonnet subagents to implement it. Cheaper and faster

What about quality? Being cheaper and faster, while great and all, is less valuable than quality to me.

All the code an LLM produces is of questionable quality, so I'm not sure why you'd prioritize quality over speed. Speed is their only value add.

Re: Fable 5 is Back

#186
post #86

It won't even review a cyber security blog post I wrote. Absolutely worthless and pitiful guardrails.

I'm having it review a project Opus 4.8 created. No security review, just "look for general issues, performance problems, missing features, etc." It spawned about twenty background tasks. It's still going, but so far, one has completed, and four have failed with guardrail messages. Nothing special, just stuff like reviewing the API: Fable 5's safeguards flagged this message ( https://www.anthropic.com/legal/aup ). Th…

I once had Fable flag on one of the three-word session names that Cowork auto generated at the beginning.

Re: Fable 5 is Back

#187

I have to admit that when it was blocked, I canceled my max plan and asked for a refund. It felt like someone took away my previous toy. So I'm happy it's back again; I upgraded to max again. Coding aside, but Claude Design is phenomenal - for both new designs and redesigning existing UIs. So my customers will face a new wave of refreshed screens all over the place in coming days ;)

[flagged]

I would say this is an important part of the product-market-fit discovery process. Sure, your comment holds true for well established products with a loyal customer base, but for an earlier stage product this rapid iteration process is quite important, especially from an onboarding and ease-of-use perspective.

Re: Fable 5 is Back

#188
post #144

I gave it a book on human consciousness I was writing and it flagged it. This model is hilariously bad. Anthropic has defanged this model to the point of malice. No way am I paying to use something that is basically useless.

It sounds like they were required to this time. See their post about "larger safety margin" on the classifier yesterday.

Re: Fable 5 is Back

#189
post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OTOH: “our product is so good it was banned for being too good” is the best advertising possible. OpenAI would kill to get that. I’m not falling over myself to test out Sonnet 5, but I am very interested in Fable.

> OpenAI would kill to get that. I have news for you, from 5 days ago. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48690101 "U.S. government will decide who gets to use GPT-5.6"

"W have to go through a regulatory approval process like everyone else" is so much less sexy than "Our model was so powerful that it got banned by the government after a few hours and now all our competitors have to go through a regulatory process invented because of us"

Re: Fable 5 is Back

#190
post #144

I gave it a book on human consciousness I was writing and it flagged it. This model is hilariously bad. Anthropic has defanged this model to the point of malice. No way am I paying to use something that is basically useless.

Today I told Sonnet (!) to use a browser MCP to enter a username and password for the project it is working on, it told me that it can't do that because it violates its security protocol. This worked fine before. I love Claude, I have stuck with it even through people saying Codex is better but this is definitely getting to be the last straw. It's completely absurd I am paying them $200+ per month along with pushing…

Really? This has never worked for me and I stopped using browser functions a long time ago because it wouldn't sign into dev environments stood up specifically for it
Post reply on HN