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

941–950 of 1001 posts

Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1

#941

Post by gejose »

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…

> They're packing lots of signal into fewer words

This has not been my experience. I see it generating walls of text with very little SNR.

Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1

#944

Post by nullbio »

pbasista wrote: post #920
nullbio wrote: post #825

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So basically, Anthropic can charge you for tokens you don't even see. "Trust me bro, you really did use $5,000 worth of tokens to generate that pelican". We need AI consumer rights, urgently.

I think that it would be sufficient to realize that no one is forced to use a specific AI model or model harness that has anti-consumer features built in. People should just walk away if they see something like that. This is where the actual, practical, consumer rights start. Not with the regulation. But with the customers being determined to stand up for themselves. And not just fold. There are plenty of good enough…

Agreed, and that's exactly why I don't use Claude anymore and haven't for months now. But I'm not most people. Most people don't vote with their wallet, unfortunately.

Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1

#945

Post by bigfishrunning »

848585858 wrote: post #818
kbrannigan wrote: post #426

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 .

surely we will see all of this production code changing the world in the next two weeks like with every revolutionary new model release

Yup, i'll believe the hype when Windows doesn't suck anymore.

Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1

#946

Post by not_a_bot_4sho »

andsoitis wrote: post #940
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 recently ended my Claude subscription, returning back to ChatGPT because I could no longer bear Claude’s prose, finding it excessively verbose, robotic, repetitive, and condescending.

I use GHCP but similar sentiment.

Stopped using Anthropic models for this reason. Their prose become too obtuse and just... alien. No human talks or writes like that. It's incredibly taxing to deal with.

Sticking to a mix of GPT and Gemini for now.

Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1

#947

Post by freepiai »

ashkankiani wrote: post #895
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 canceled my Claude subscription, though I did get some utility out of it, because of how much steering was required to use it on complex projects. A big reason being that anyone who is using Fable seriously will run out of usage limits very quickly, and so will lean on the "Fable for review + design discussion, Opus 5 agents for implementation" paradigm. But an incredibly annoying UX problem is that the resulting r…

[dead]

Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1

#948

Post by mark_l_watson »

I have worked at three companies (Capital One, Google, and SAIC) where for high value work the cost of compute was no real concern. I understand the economics of spending big for huge payoffs, so this is a serious question:

Does Fable 5.1 really provide much benefit over models like Kimi K3 that are 1/3 the cost? Or GLM-3 that are 1/12 the cost?

If you can talk about your work, what kind of tasks do you work on where the higher cost is very much worth it?

Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1

#949

Post by miroljub »

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 don't work at Anthropic)

What a surprise that someone working for the Anthropic marketing department roams social media to praise every single Anthropic release :)

On the other hand, what I find more worrying is that this is the top comment here on HN. I can't believe such an unsubstantiated marketing post can get so many upvotes to be the top comment.

Re: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1

#950

Post by telephone3 »

alasano wrote: post #187
vablings wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Good software will be good-er. Bad software will be nightmare fuel.

Wow, I feel this deeply. I work with bad software. It is bad because people built it using tools that were designed to "make coding easier". I feel a cold chill imagining the level of institutional cruft that could be allowed to build up with unrestrained ai coding.

With that said - the process of fixing those old mistakes is greatly aided by llms... but you still need to understand what you are fixing, and understanding why giant blocks of code are copy-pasted everywhere, or why convoluted hacks evolved over time as reactions to bizarre underlying untreated bugs is, imo, ultimately a human/organizational/processes problem.

Anyway I think you are bang on.

Post reply on HN