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

Fable 5 is Back

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 438 posts

Re: Fable 5 is Back

#211

Post by olcarl75 »

pheggs wrote: post #162
olcarl75 wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

how does GLM-5.2 fare against fable/opus 4.8? I am thinking about moving my 5x subscription either towards the GPT equivalent or the GLM one (I heard GLM gives you 20x the token usage for the same price of anthropics 5x)

I find it difficult to compare LLMs in general. It will do better in some cases, worse in others. As far as I see it, most of it is marketing. You can try it out extremely cheaply though through their API and OpenCode. I personally would recommend it.

this makes sense. I will give it a try via opencode and see how does it do.

Re: Fable 5 is Back

#212

Post by himata4113 »

teravor wrote: post #207
himata4113 wrote: post #194

I think this is as good as time as any to bring up that fable/mythos weights are one mistake (malicious or not) away from being leaked to adverseries or available in a random torrent. Imagine this, fable weights are likely distributed to hundreds of datacenters with likely thousands of people directly or indirectly having partial or full access. I just don't quite buy that a 'world ending' fable/mythos model would be…

i believe it's more complicated than that. i know that nvidia offers TEE for their overpriced offerings. i would assume they make use of that so the weights are encrypted. this doesn't mean it cannot leak but it would be a major undertaking. this is why anthropic isn't that worried about having Elon service their models. the workflow would be something like handshaking with the nvidia TEE, provisioning it with your k…

There's so many points of failure before it ever reaches gpus.

Re: Fable 5 is Back

#213

Post by dominotw »

SwellJoe wrote: post #192
dominotw wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you cannot plug and play random models. they are all different trained on different data and rl for different capabilities.

They didn't say "random models". The mentioned other models that are trained for the same purpose with close to the same capabilities. Anthropic's best models are very good, maybe the best in their category. But, they have direct competition. You can, in fact, just switch to Codex or Gemini or GLM. It mostly is plug and play. I have a preference but I also have options.

> The mentioned other models that are trained for the same purpose with close to the same capabilities.

well they dont tell you that do they? there is no way to tell what model can and cannot do unless you extensivevly test it yourself and pray for the best.

Re: Fable 5 is Back

#214

Post by himata4113 »

vlovich123 wrote: post #209
himata4113 wrote: post #194

I think this is as good as time as any to bring up that fable/mythos weights are one mistake (malicious or not) away from being leaked to adverseries or available in a random torrent. Imagine this, fable weights are likely distributed to hundreds of datacenters with likely thousands of people directly or indirectly having partial or full access. I just don't quite buy that a 'world ending' fable/mythos model would be…

Is the model structure going to be easy to reverse engineer just from the weights? Also, I'm going to guess it's an MoE and thus it's possible there's no single machine that hosts all of Fabel / Mythos.

kvcache residency requirements and general latency for good throughput wants good locality, but you're right it could be split across multiple different parts of a single datacenter, but as I mentioned before the weakest link is before the model is ever loaded onto the gpus.

as for reverse engineering I doubt it's something that state sponsored actors would struggle with for too long.

Re: Fable 5 is Back

#215

Post by himata4113 »

Davidzheng wrote: post #204
himata4113 wrote: post #194

I think this is as good as time as any to bring up that fable/mythos weights are one mistake (malicious or not) away from being leaked to adverseries or available in a random torrent. Imagine this, fable weights are likely distributed to hundreds of datacenters with likely thousands of people directly or indirectly having partial or full access. I just don't quite buy that a 'world ending' fable/mythos model would be…

I don't think Anthropic is claiming it's world ending? Just that it has offensive cybersecurity abilities which can be dangerous

Cyber-warfare is pretty world-ending these days. Our relatively peaceful world is built on top of mutual destruction.

See: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48633023

Re: Fable 5 is Back

#216

Post by laurels-marts »

bakies wrote: post #190
madamelic wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Wait what. I never used CC but use Codex CLI with 5.5 daily and authenticating has never been an issue. I even rolled skills that instruct it how to retrieve test user credentials for auth purposes.

Today using the devtools I asked it to reverse engineer the login auth flow of another app in our company and it created a nice browser-like headless script (with cookie jars etc) that emulates the entire Auth0 flow with all the internal API calls, redirect loops etc so that given username/password I end up with a valid JWT without having to open an actual browser instance and go through the login steps manually. Zero hesitation or questions asked.

I think this is in-line with OpenAI's philosophy. They see Codex agents as just tools for developer to use. They don’t try to imbibe them with “feelings”, “constitution” or “morality” the way Anthropic does.

Re: Fable 5 is Back

#217

Post by [deleted] »

stingraycharles wrote: post #203
Avicebron wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm really disappointed with Anthropic that they wont even mention if they will release a fable-like model with the subscription plans. If Opus 4.8 is the best model they will release on the subscriptions I may be too tall for the ride...which is sad, they have been my favorite of the labs until this. @AnyoneAtAnthropic, all we want are assurance we will still get SOTA models that are continuously improving, not regr…

> I'm really disappointed with Anthropic that they wont even mention if they will release a fable-like model with the subscription plans. I believe this is just their strategy to migrate away from these “almost all you can eat” subscription plans. Rather than reducing / removing Opus or Sonnet from the plans, they’ll just keep the new model Fable out (which may as well have been called Opus 5), and slowly everyone st…

[deleted]

Re: Fable 5 is Back

#218

Post by ygjb »

madamelic wrote: post #172
pkoird wrote: 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…

Are you sure it refused because it can't use a username and password? I literally have loops running right now where it uses a database of test users and passwords to log into different roles and do computer use and browser automation testing. Sonnet and Opus complain when I provide credentials and password in chats but it is happy to use ones stored in files and stuff, so it might just be guardrails to push good opsec so that the secrets aren't captured in the session history and prompts.

Re: Fable 5 is Back

#219

Post by zakisaad »

dakolli wrote: post #185
hirvi74 wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

This is a wild take. All cars can perfectly drive around a track, so why would you ever want an F1 car?

Re: Fable 5 is Back

#220

Post by fny »

himata4113 wrote: post #194

I think this is as good as time as any to bring up that fable/mythos weights are one mistake (malicious or not) away from being leaked to adverseries or available in a random torrent. Imagine this, fable weights are likely distributed to hundreds of datacenters with likely thousands of people directly or indirectly having partial or full access. I just don't quite buy that a 'world ending' fable/mythos model would be…

Security has always been and always will be a game of cat and mouse.

We all need cyborg cats to hunt cyborg mice. There's no other compromise unless you want a rat infestation.

Post reply on HN