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

541–550 of 1001 posts

Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1

#541

Post by kccqzy »

kccoder wrote: post #385
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…

You can change CC's output style ( https://code.claude.com/docs/en/output-styles ). You can also put style notes in your global claude.md. I've instructed claude to treat me like I have adhd, get to the point, and be succinct, ... More or less eliminates the problematic prose. I took time to figure this out after Fable spat out "...then stays purely as cascade-debugging provenance rather than load-bearing arbitration…

That sentence is fine; it’s tolerably annoying. As a long-time HN reader, HN is full of this kind of performative erudition and I’m already used to it. Fable probably learned from the worst parts of HN.

Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1

#542

Post by yoanwaidev »

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…

as an anthropic employee, do you trust the benchmarks?

Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1

#543

Post by jimnotgym »

I wish I could afford Fable.

I am using Claude and Claude code for my own amateur history project. I'm enjoying how it constantly reaches dead ends, and I can reframe the question and get more results. I am starting to get concerned that AI and me are so compatible, that I might not be a human at all...

I also like that, because I'm too lazy to write stuff up, Claude code can keep the current state of research published on my site. It makes running a hobby site a dream. "I just found these pictures. Add them to the site for me". And up they go, resized and all. What a dream of a way to work. "Some of links in this article are dead, run through them and check, and see if you can get an archive link for me if they don't". It's like sending a Teams message to my PA.... which I don't have in real life

Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1

#544

Post by bitbckt »

exceptione wrote: post #451
velcrovan wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> They're packing lots of signal into fewer words FYI, these are so-called `load-bearing` words.

They only use them at the honest seams, though.

Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1

#545

Post by magicalist »

olirex99 wrote: post #355
adastra22 wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I suggest you to give a look to the MCP protocol for hardware that is being proposed by Anthropic. The hardware will be the next harness of LLMs, they will be able to operate machines to reinforce their theories. I still think that a major problem is that biological processes are not “fast” as coding, but they are verifiable. If during post processing we are able to give enough harness to test and verify this kind of…

> I suggest you to give a look to the MCP protocol for hardware that is being proposed by Anthropic. The hardware will be the next harness of LLMs, they will be able to operate machines to reinforce their theories.

Yeah, that's called an API. Again.

The actual hard problem that this hand waves is making (and funding the making of) hardware to reliably do the things you need it to do.

Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1

#546

Post by krm01 »

1970-01-01 wrote: post #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 intellig…

SH is in the wrong bucket

Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1

#547

Post by niccl »

zahlman wrote: post #165
velcrovan wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> They're packing lots of signal into fewer words There's a huge difference between the kind of prose you see in final output vs CoT windows. The final output is very much not what I'd call "packing lots of signal into fewer words" (aside perhaps from "Claude-isms" being easy enough to scan for if for some reason you actually wanted to scan for them, which other agents might want to for all I know); and if agents are…

I find them almost unintelligible. I'm a native English speaker. I read a lot, so I think my comprehension should be at least OK. I'm not even particularly stupid. Yet when faced with things like below (a direct copy/paste from a handoff document in a long running vibe-coding session), I have no real idea of what it's trying to tell me. Is it important? Do I need to do anything?

I think that spending all day trying to parse stuff like this is why a long session is so exhausting

> Worth stating because four documents now assert it. The console freeze was recorded in exactly one place with exactly one justification — a dead drag handle during a booked half-day you do not get back — and handoff-4.3-done.html's own wording is that 4.4's review page "could not break the console, but the downside of being wrong is that half day". No second reason. Checked, not recalled.

Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1

#548

Post by AbstractH24 »

johnsmith1840 wrote: post #398
GodelNumbering wrote: post #139

The price reduction comes from the cache read pricing falling from $1/M to $0.25/M, which means that Fable 5.1 now costs half of Opus's cache read costs ($0.5/M). This gives a lot of credit to the theory that Anthropic did not get much bite on Fable at its original pricing, which in turn likely places a ceiling on LLM pricing in general. Interestingly also, if you take away terminal-Bench-Science 0.1 results, it is h…

I'm a heavy user and fable is great the #1 reason I stopped using it was the horrible safegaurd filter. I found sol close enough in capability and have only been blocked when my request was an obvious offensive cyber work. Fable blocked me on almost everything. Optimizing a OS build? -> block Securing a container -> block 60% is nowhere near enough for that safegaurd system. This just means I am going to be blocked h…

The blocks that fustrate me more are tool permisissions. I ask to do something then flip to another screen and come back to see it never started

Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1

#549

Post by qlm »

sixhobbits wrote: post #305
caconym_ wrote: post #255

> 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.

Grammatically an emdash is fine in most places a comma is fine. It adds a bit more emphasis to the bit after the dash. I went to the grocery store, and bought tomatoes. I went to the grocery store---and bought a Ferrari. The second one has a bit more of a dramatic pause. "Eats, Shoots, and Leaves" is a fun book with a great chapter about the dash with many good examples.

Your first example shouldn't have a comma at all.
Post reply on HN