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

841–850 of 1001 posts

Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1

#841

Post by troupo »

streetfighter64 wrote: post #784
NL807 wrote: post #772

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure if something like this is already on the table, but I would like to see Claude responses more in line with Simplified Technical English [1] by default. I find those writing styles a lot easier to read. This has been standardised as ASD-STE100 [2]. I've seen few people making SKILL.md files with that in mind, which works great, but having this by default without invoking the skill command would be better. 1.…

By default? I doubt it would be useful or desirable for 95% of users. I'm guessing most people find natural language easiest to read, STE seems to be like a project almost akin to Esperanto or Lojban.

STE is a much more natural language than whatever Anthropic's models produce: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49528326

Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1

#842

Post by oefrha »

glub wrote: post #712
nsingh2 wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From Artificial Analysis cost per task, it looks like Fable 5.1 (max) is more expensive per task than Fable 5 (max)? Cache hit price went down, but the other components still add up to more. Edit: 5.1-xhigh seems to be cheaper than 5-max, and 5.1-xhigh has a higher index score than 5-max. Also interesting that Fable 5.1 (high) is comparable to Opus 5 (max), but nearly half the price. https://artificialanalysis.ai/mod…

From my limited testing of just 2 hours, reasoning output of 5.1-max is at least 7x of 5-max, on the same project and comparable prompts. It reasoned for ~2 minutes trying to figure out an appropriate directory name. I've never seen 5-max do that. Could be a misconfiguration though.

I did a bunch of Fable 5.1 xhigh review work on a bunch of critical components, ones with direct comparison from Fable 5 xhigh runs from two weeks ago. Token cost was 1.5-2x for each component.

Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1

#843

Post by luckystarr »

vablings wrote: post #142
jumploops wrote: post #70

> For example, in testing by the investment firm Millennium, Fable 5.1 found the cause of a rare crash on their internal systems that none of their engineers (or any other model) had been able to explain after several years of trying. Say what you will about LLM-generated code, but stories like this give me hope that software will never be as buggy as it once was.

Software will be buggier than ever but also way less buggy.

Translation: As the number of bugs per line of code is a constant depending on language and project, we will experience a world full of bugs now that LLMs generate so much more code. On the other hand, LLMs are so quick at fixing them, the number of bugs should go down.

I wonder which trend will be winning though. I personally won't bet on quality.

Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1

#844

Post by agile-gift0262 »

madrox wrote: post #405

I am finding that I am now less interested in better models than I am in token budgets. My issue with Anthropic models now is that I don't feel like I can rely on them as a daily driver because they'll dry up before my quota resets. I am becoming dependent on AI to make a living, and I need predictable spend on it. If I know I can't use a model regularly all month, my enthusiasm is limited. I urge Anthropic to get be…

> I am becoming dependent on AI to make a living

IMO, if you depend on AI to make a living, I'd invest in hardware for local inference, and learn on how to effectively make a living using AI inference you control, on hardware you control. Sure, economically speaking it's way cheaper to use one of these heavily subsidised services (for now), and their models are faster and more capable, but if your livelihood depends on AI inference, and you are renting AI inference, you are a being a serf of the tokenlord. And your livelihood depends on the whims of the tokenlord. They can increase rent prices, they can decide you can no longer do whatever you are doing, and you have no recourse, because you are dependant on them to make a living.

Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1

#845

Post by sandos »

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…

I only use OpenAI models, and Sol is the only one to refuse me yet, and ofc it was completely bogus and I was unable to convince I was just working a regular bug for a well-known product for a well-known company using my official github account.

Aaargh.

Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1

#846

Post by NamlchakKhandro »

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 are you going to be profitable?

Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1

#847

Post by OrangeMusic »

fugaziboutit wrote: post #832
NL807 wrote: post #772

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure if something like this is already on the table, but I would like to see Claude responses more in line with Simplified Technical English [1] by default. I find those writing styles a lot easier to read. This has been standardised as ASD-STE100 [2]. I've seen few people making SKILL.md files with that in mind, which works great, but having this by default without invoking the skill command would be better. 1.…

"All people agree on this rule. A single man with high wealth must find a wife." -- Jane Austbot

I don't get your comment. Care to explain?

Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1

#848

Post by dozerly »

nullbio wrote: post #826
boardwaalk wrote: post #745

I let it go a few hours on a not trivial but well-known problem, and it felt like it was just a little too plodding and just kind of mucked around a little too much and wasn't aggressive enough about getting stuff done. I asked it to wind it down and finish up and it took another hour and 15 to actually stop and commit without really getting much more done. Not very impressed here, if you can't tell. This new version…

The incentives are not aligned. Anthropic makes money when you burn tokens. They also hide the tokens you burn from you, so you can't even validate if you actually burned them, you just have to believe them. This is not a lasting business model, nor one I'm interested in using.

Commodification of inference cannot come fast enough!

Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1

#849

Post by madrox »

agile-gift0262 wrote: post #844
madrox wrote: post #405

I am finding that I am now less interested in better models than I am in token budgets. My issue with Anthropic models now is that I don't feel like I can rely on them as a daily driver because they'll dry up before my quota resets. I am becoming dependent on AI to make a living, and I need predictable spend on it. If I know I can't use a model regularly all month, my enthusiasm is limited. I urge Anthropic to get be…

> I am becoming dependent on AI to make a living IMO, if you depend on AI to make a living, I'd invest in hardware for local inference, and learn on how to effectively make a living using AI inference you control, on hardware you control. Sure, economically speaking it's way cheaper to use one of these heavily subsidised services (for now), and their models are faster and more capable, but if your livelihood depends…

There are a lot of things in my toolchain pre-AI that I did not own and relied on to make a living. Mobile developers are in even worse shape, and iOS developers doubly so. The idea we were somehow less beholden before AI, I think, is silly.

None of us can wholly do our trades without support. Local inference is a fun idea, but you'll be out-competed by the serfs, as you call them.

Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1

#850

Post by poink »

einsteinx2 wrote: post #678
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…

> Has frontier progress finally stalled? From my experience using coding agents approximately 7 days per week for the past year and a half or so, we hit the top of the S curve about a year ago around Opus 4.5, and it’s mostly been harness and other tooling improvements since then with small percentage improvements coming from the actual models. I was saying this already months before Fable dropped and thought from al…

Anecdotally, this has also been my experience

Fable and Sol are better than Opus 4.5, but I don’t think I’d be weeks ahead on my projects if I’d had them in December

Post reply on HN