Live data from Hacker News

Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1

anthropic.com

491–500 of 1001 posts

Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1

#491

All the benchmarks in the world don't matter if the model just straight up refuses to do mundane things. Claude has too much of an attitude.

I think a lot of CTOs that signed enterprise contracts with Anthropic are going to be in for a rude surprise.

It's one thing to generate some code and ship it, but it's another when your developers don't understand said code and it brings down production. If the model refuses to assist debugging the problem because it triggers some safety mechanism, you might be fucked.

Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1

#492

(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…

Are you guys nerfing Fable 5 to make it cheaper? I know you probably can't admit to it in public, but my email is on my profile.

Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1

#493

(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…

As someone working in science, this belief confuses me. How (by what means) do you think Fable 5.1 will be able to make further progress in scientific domains? The problem with science is that there is no agentic harness. The agent can't test things. At best it can hallucinate something and ask if that hallucination "makes sense", but this doesn't work in science.

> As someone working in science, this belief confuses me. How (by what means) do you think Fable 5.1 will be able to make further progress in scientific domains?

The same way it did in the previous versions: brute force.

I don't believe that LLMs have any particular intelligence we don't, but there's an endless list of problems we either don't have bodies to throw at, or the bodies we can throw at it, don't have such a huge large context to crunch problems.

What LLMs will always intrinsically fail at is showing us genuine new intuitions. The technology is about predicting the next plausible token/sentence.

They will not revolutionize human knowledge, but they can definitely widen it a lot.

Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1

#495

> We’re introducing Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1. They’re the world’s most advanced models for coding and knowledge work—and their research capabilities offer an early glimpse of how AI models will contribute to scientific progress. I'm not an emdash hater but this isn't how you use them. It should be a comma.

Language is use :)

it got want to use em dash. but decide: do? q is if appropriate. check martian websner blog. verdict yes---emdash + comma interchangeable---proceed---judgment superficial however no desire dig deeper style irrelevant effect on reader irrelevant meter and rhythm irrelevant restate equivalence with comma established::chain unbroken::consider semicolon? consider ellipsis consider comma consider sentence break all no. preference for emdash est fiat. and all nail shapeds are for hammering.

Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1

#496

(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…

Please bring to the other models, and also please only apply the AI text watermarking only to EU citizens. I may not be able to tell when Claude writes about things i don't know, but in CC it writes about my code and it is obvious.

I am surprised Anthropic can use their models accurately solve this issue?

Are different services for different users based on geolocation really that difficult? I thought a lot of services operated like this already.

Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1

#497

(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…

Both a fable and mythos release? I'm glad to see you take the belt-and-suspenders approach seriously!

Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1

#498
post #435

Anyone ever seen the SouthPark episode making fun of Game of Thrones: A Song of Ass and Fire? Anthropic's announcements reminds me of "The Dragons Are Coming" running joke. What they have done: * Nerfed Fable, as many of noted it's useless * Leverage Mythos as a marketing strategy, claiming its too good to release * Removed thought traces, one of the only useful things to make sure your prompts are working correctly…

and yet we still have people saying the rate of change is increasing my view is we had a leap over the last fe years and it's tapering off. this is fine, but for the IPOs

The improvement is compounding just about every way you can look at it. The frontier keeps getting smarter. And at any sub-frontier threshold the cost is dropping dramatically. The amounts of smarts you can fit on hardware is increasing so dramatically that even 6 year old consumer GPUs are increasing in price. The pace of change in LLMs and downstream applications is absolutely ripping compared to 2023 or 2024.

Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1

#499
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…

Just the other way I was thinking that if I asked "What does Lamborghini do?" the only correct way to answer is a single sentence "Which Lamborghini are you referring to?".

But LLMs will fail at this question: they will tell you about Lamborghini's latest car and mix some history in it. Just try.

Which is the wrong answer anyway, because there's at least two major companies called Lamborghini, one making cars, one making agricultural equipment and at least one famous person (Elettra) with that family name.

This very simple test/question makes me realize how much do I hate LLMs in a sense: while I agree that the answer it gives is the most plausible for 90% of the users, it's ultimately both wrong and long. And that 90% compounds.

But there's no "correct" answer in my eyes than "who are you referring to?". Possibly without listing all the possible Lamborghinis.

Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1

#500
AI is really not "just software" anymore. It is able to discover facts and advance science. Hard to disagree that we're near or at the point where Artificial Intelligence has expanded reality into 4 quadrants:

objects that are not alive: dust, rocks, water, wood, hats, lego, aluminum, etc.

objects that are alive but not intelligent: trees, mold, staphylococcus, cancer, grapes, etc.

objects that are alive and intelligent: cats, Steven Tyler, dolphins, crows, dogs, elephants, etc.

and now intelligent but not alive: Fable, Grok, GPT, etc.

Post reply on HN