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

421–430 of 1001 posts

Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1

#421

Post by juancn »

velcrovan wrote: post #121
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…

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…

It may be like what happened in ResNets using blank space in the image as working memory (because they didn't have any), so they would use non-important parts as a scratchpad.

Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1

#422

Post by Helloworldboy »

velcrovan wrote: post #121
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…

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…

[dead]

Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1

#423

Post by peri-cl »

redox99 wrote: post #318
simonw wrote: post #144

Pelicans 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…

[flagged]

Z.ai's domains are z.ai and zhipuai.cn. Not the deceptive lookalike url which is plastered across that image. Would you consider deleting it?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Z.ai

Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1

#424

Post by redox99 »

peri-cl wrote: post #423
redox99 wrote: post #318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Z.ai's domains are z.ai and zhipuai.cn. Not the deceptive lookalike url which is plastered across that image. Would you consider deleting it? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Z.ai

It's not my image

Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1

#426

Post by kbrannigan »

EliasWatson wrote: post #308

To 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…

The human brain is fascinating Three years ago The idea of having A robot writing production level code in 10 minutes that would have needed a team of 5 people and 2 months. Was pure Scifi

Now it's boring , not good enough

Wow there should be a term of that .

Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1

#427

Post by sleazebreeze »

vunderba wrote: post #407
peab wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Sometimes Opus 5 (high/xhigh) feels like I'm dealing with the programmer equivalent of Zeno of Elea. Every time, without fail, it would get me 90% of the way there and then leave a small note, exception, or deferral. When instructed to address that, Opus would somehow take nearly the same amount of time as the first 90%. And then it would finish with yet another deferral . Repeat ad infinitum. You can sometimes get a…

Yes and the last bit is always mysterious and inscrutable. I have to think way too hard to figure out what the actual problem is. I’ve noticed it does a lot of explaining the mechanics of the problem it found, but almost never explains why it’s important until I ask.

And the worst part is that this little problem will keep sneaking into the context of future sessions, unless you spend the time to fix it. Even if it isn’t important, I’ll sometimes have Claude fix it so it will shut the F up about it going forward.

Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1

#428

Post by jxjddjjddj »

velcrovan wrote: post #121
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…

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…

[dead]

Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1

#429

Post by ActionHank »

pookieinc wrote: post #9

"Price. Fable 5.1 will cost an estimated 25% less than Fable 5 for typical workloads, wherever usage is billed by token. This is because we’re reducing our pricing on cache reads (where the model reads inputs that have already been processed and stored). For highly agentic work, the savings will often be much larger—up to approximately 45%." Glad to see this!

The big issue they face right now is that vastly cheaper open models are proving capable for more and more uses at cents on the dollar.

This is the right direction, but they aren't going to get there fast enough.

They will list, investors who don't know anything about tech will buy, the world will realise that China just put out a model that is good enough at a fraction of the price, they will crater.

Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1

#430

Post by milleramp »

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…

I wasted a lot of tokens last month asking "Please explain the meaning of this sentence in plain language"
Post reply on HN