Let me guess: it's the end of the world again. These new models are sooo powerful that will take over the world, just like the others before them. Are they going to try the banned for export for a week marketing move too?
Nobody is saying that. I'm reading more underwhelment. Oh, the halcyon days of three months ago when a new flagship from a frontier lab generated excitement rather than a shrug.
Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1
331–340 of 1001 posts
Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1
#332To be honest, these frontier model releases have become boring for me. Opus 4.8 was already good enough for most of my use cases. I don't have any projects right now that I would use Fable for instead of Opus. So when I see announcements like this I just think "that's cool I guess" and then go back to using weaker/cheaper models. What's far more exciting right now is models like DeepSeek V4 Flash and GLM 5.3 Flash. T…
Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1
#333(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…
Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1
#334(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…
Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1
#335Data retention still sounds bad: "Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1 carry 30-day data retention and aren't available under zero data retention unless expressly authorized by Anthropic." Anyone know who the ZDR special treatment is available to?
Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1
#336Hi Claude, please cure aging, make no mistakes
Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1
#337“ 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…
I just can't stand how often Claude says something like "And the honest part? It's..." Like, were the other parts not honest? I don't understand how Anthropic let it get like this, it's been such a clear regression
Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1
#338Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1
#339Pelicans for thinking effort low, medium, high and xhigh (that xhigh one is pretty good): https://tools.simonwillison.net/markdown-svg-renderer#url=ht... I'm still waiting for effort max to finish. EDIT: I fixed a bug in my tooling so it now records summarized reasoning traces - here's that max pelican, which is a significant improvement: https://tools.simonwillison.net/markdown-svg-renderer#url=ht... Took just under…
Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1
#340(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…
I have a pet theory that the Opus prose style/smell we all have grown weary of is due at least in part to the models writing more for themselves and each other than for humans. They're packing lots of signal into fewer words and they don't care if it sounds cringe because it works better as glue in long-running tasks. I'm also thinking of the 2017 novel "Void Star" where AIs who operate everything have long since lef…
I think the deeper problem is that the models (not just Claude) have a very poor understanding of what their readers already do/don't know.
They belabor obvious points and underexplain jargon, because they don't know what's obvious to you.
The best writing is surprising but inevitable in hindsight. The models don't know what's surprising or what's inevitable in hindsight, making it very difficult to write well.