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

Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1

anthropic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 1001 posts

Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1

#111

Post by rvz »

behnamoh wrote: post #72
felixrieseberg wrote: post #69

(I work at Anthropic) Beyond all the benchmarks, I think Fable 5.1 is a big improvement in writing style. It sounds a lot less stereotypically like other Claude models, has (imho) a much more natural style, and responds to my style instructions more reliably. More work to be done (and we will!) but reading better prose makes me so much happier. Another point I expect not to get much attention until it all happens at…

At this point, I don't believe a word from Anthropic employees; you guys have lost all the goodwill that you accumulated over months last year.

I don't think they care. It is up to you to consider local models or better alternatives instead of paying for more tokens at their casino.

Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1

#112

Post by mchusma »

spicypixel wrote: post #5

Yeah but haiku 5 when?

I think the signal from Anthropic is pretty clear between Haiku not getting an update in a year and the Sonnet issues this year. They don't care about low intelligence models. You should go elsewhere.

That's what we've done, migrated workflows away from Haiku and Sonnet. I actually think this is not a crazy position because these lower models have so much competition from Grok, OpenAI, DeepSeek, and about 20 other labs with really solid models in the Haiku to Sonnet range. So what is the point of Anthropic competing in these spaces where everything is going towards zero cost?

Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1

#113

Post by alasano »

felixrieseberg wrote: post #69

(I work at Anthropic) Beyond all the benchmarks, I think Fable 5.1 is a big improvement in writing style. It sounds a lot less stereotypically like other Claude models, has (imho) a much more natural style, and responds to my style instructions more reliably. More work to be done (and we will!) but reading better prose makes me so much happier. Another point I expect not to get much attention until it all happens at…

> It sounds a lot less stereotypically like other Claude models

Don't give me hope.

I've strained eye muscles from rolling my eyes so hard every day at how Claude writes.

Edit: first discussion with Fable 5.1 "This is the right question and it needs a real trace, not a guess."

Sigh.

Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1

#114

Post by finnnk »

felixrieseberg wrote: post #69

(I work at Anthropic) Beyond all the benchmarks, I think Fable 5.1 is a big improvement in writing style. It sounds a lot less stereotypically like other Claude models, has (imho) a much more natural style, and responds to my style instructions more reliably. More work to be done (and we will!) but reading better prose makes me so much happier. Another point I expect not to get much attention until it all happens at…

[flagged]

Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1

#115

Post by sroussey »

Trasmatta wrote: post #95
felixrieseberg wrote: post #69

(I work at Anthropic) Beyond all the benchmarks, I think Fable 5.1 is a big improvement in writing style. It sounds a lot less stereotypically like other Claude models, has (imho) a much more natural style, and responds to my style instructions more reliably. More work to be done (and we will!) but reading better prose makes me so much happier. Another point I expect not to get much attention until it all happens at…

> More work to be done (and we will!) but reading better prose makes me so much happier. I assume this work will be done for Opus as well? Opus has seemingly gotten progressively worse at its prose and technical writing with each version. I've stopped using Claude entirely for now, because it manages to turn even the simplest technical explanation into the most obtuse and obfuscated word salad imaginable. People orig…

> I feel a sinking feeling of dread the moment I see a wall of text generated by Opus

Agree, Claude lost the joy of using it.

That is a measure that ranks higher than any other benchmark at this point.

Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1

#116

Post by 321ahT »

felixrieseberg wrote: post #69

(I work at Anthropic) Beyond all the benchmarks, I think Fable 5.1 is a big improvement in writing style. It sounds a lot less stereotypically like other Claude models, has (imho) a much more natural style, and responds to my style instructions more reliably. More work to be done (and we will!) but reading better prose makes me so much happier. Another point I expect not to get much attention until it all happens at…

How is it possible that all models from xAI, OpenAI, Anthropic, Qwen etc. win all benchmarks on each release?

Tomorrow all of the above (except Anthropic of course) will bump version numbers and be at the top of HN winning all benchmarks.

Science breakthroughs incoming? First of all, you are already restricting science in Fable, secondly, we have been hearing the same for several years now.

Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1

#117

Post by moogly »

tarr11 wrote: post #35

“ Claude Fable 5.1's writing is generally a step up from earlier Claude models, with fewer stock phrases and less unexplained jargon. In some cases, though, its prose is denser than Claude Fable 5's: sentences run longer and there are fewer paragraph breaks.” I cancelled my pro max Claude subscription last week; codex is much more succinct. I am curious if this is getting better. I don’t think Anthropic realizes that…

Today, Opus talked about "rotation slabs" in relation to logging. (and not log rotation). I didn't even bother asking what that was supposed to mean and switched over to Sonnet.

Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1

#118

Post by kingstnap »

cute_boi wrote: post #77
seaurchinzee wrote: post #59

"Cache reads now cost 75% less, or $0.25 per million tokens." For me, at a typical 95% cache hit rate, I think my optimal context window size before autocompaction goes from ~200K to ~400K tokens. Great for longer horizon tasks.

looks like it is only for api.....

Do API prices not affect usage limits for subscriptions? They do in Codex.

Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1

#119

Post by jbverschoor »

felixrieseberg wrote: post #69

(I work at Anthropic) Beyond all the benchmarks, I think Fable 5.1 is a big improvement in writing style. It sounds a lot less stereotypically like other Claude models, has (imho) a much more natural style, and responds to my style instructions more reliably. More work to be done (and we will!) but reading better prose makes me so much happier. Another point I expect not to get much attention until it all happens at…

Will it respond within a reasonable timeframe?

It’s like we’re on a 14K4 modem when there’s broadband

Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1

#120

Post by nullstyle »

chews wrote: post #97
behnamoh wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At this point, I don't believe a word from Anthropic employees; you guys have lost all the goodwill that you accumulated over months last year.

I share this sentiment, I really did like the models... then the finger printing, encryption of thought traces, staggered access, the constant NO's from Fable on cyber related issues for looking at bugs in my own code... I'm glad I swapped to Kimi/GLM... now with the deepseek harness, I don't even miss Claude Code. I really hope open models give them the market reckoning they wholeheartedly deserve.

Have you shared any details about your dsh setup anywhere? I’ve only dipped my toes in and would love someone else’s perspective on how they use it
Post reply on HN