Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Redeploying Fable 5

anthropic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 59 posts

Re: Redeploying Fable 5

#11

Post by tekacs »

I really hope that one day we reach a point where we feel confident enough in the standards of care in upstream software, that we can get rid of these safeguards.

This isn't said out of naiveté or the idea that companies won't cheap out, but at some point – if access to models for defense is broadly available enough – we have to take a step back and say, "Aggressively insure your code against attack with AI on your side, because after the other side will just _have_ AI."

I feel like something lost in a lot of the discussion around mythos and fable is that computer security absolutely has a substantial defender's advantage. It is indeed possible to ship e.g. surfaces that would be super resilient to attack (e.g. no unnecessary open surfaces, etc.) modulo category-shift attacks like RowHammer, etc.

Besides, just making sure that more people in the world actually have access to non-lobotomized models, this is _necessary_ if open source is (hopefully) going to continue to progress and if jailbreaks aren't totally vanquished.

Re: Redeploying Fable 5

#13

Post by gonight »

steve_adams_86 wrote: post #3

It’s nice to have access again, but I’m hesitant to include it in my workflow now. In fact I’d rather not use American models at all if I could. I have the sense that this limited usage model will persist, Opus at its current token price will gradually be phased out, and eventually the cost of these models will be unsustainable and impractical. I’d rather not play this game anymore and seek out more reliable provider…

I agree with this, the last three months have been complete nonsense. I'll take a less capable model with a workflow I know well over playing "what got silently removed this time" or "figure out the latest model's quirks". The behavior of the american AI field/industry this year feels unstable and unsustainable, and I'm personally ready to wash my hands of this and find/build something reliable.

Re: Redeploying Fable 5

#15

Post by tekacs »

teruakohatu wrote: post #14

I hope the redeployed Fable 5 is the same as the version they pulled without any substantially increased restrictions.

Per the article, the safety margin on the classifier is even worse than it was before. It sounds like the model itself hasn't changed.

Re: Redeploying Fable 5

#16

Post by arjie »

steve_adams_86 wrote: post #3

It’s nice to have access again, but I’m hesitant to include it in my workflow now. In fact I’d rather not use American models at all if I could. I have the sense that this limited usage model will persist, Opus at its current token price will gradually be phased out, and eventually the cost of these models will be unsustainable and impractical. I’d rather not play this game anymore and seek out more reliable provider…

Was there a use-case where you deployed Fable where you couldn’t use Opus in a non-interactive case? Perhaps Sonnet 5 will fill the gap because it’s better in agentic loops.

It’s so expensive, though. Useful interactively in coding agent but boy if you have a kind of task that Fable can do in an agentic loop that Opus can’t then you’re in a good place. Doubtless the frontier will move forward. These kinds of “problems of the future” are great to have solutions for.

And for an interactive agentic loop, not using Fable is just missing out on something. There’s no lock-in there.

Re: Redeploying Fable 5

#17

Post by steve_adams_86 »

altmanaltman wrote: post #6
steve_adams_86 wrote: post #3

It’s nice to have access again, but I’m hesitant to include it in my workflow now. In fact I’d rather not use American models at all if I could. I have the sense that this limited usage model will persist, Opus at its current token price will gradually be phased out, and eventually the cost of these models will be unsustainable and impractical. I’d rather not play this game anymore and seek out more reliable provider…

I mean that's the software playbook, get users addicted by offering it cheap and once you have them hooked, you raise the prices. There is no reason to think any non american company wouldn't follow this strategy. It's a different matter than the export control issue entirely and one that is systematic to software in general.

> There is no reason to think any non american company wouldn't follow this strategy.

This is generally true, but there are some providers offering inference at relatively stable prices. They aren’t Opus-tier models, but some appear to be at or close to Sonnet 4.5 or so. For much of the work I do, this is fine.

Essentially if you aren’t at the frontier, you can find cheaper tokens that aren’t about to be rug-pulled or decommissioned on a whim.

Re: Redeploying Fable 5

#18

Post by matthew-wegner »

mkw5053 wrote: post #10
mil22 wrote: post #9

"For Pro, Max, Team, and select Enterprise plans, Fable 5 will be included for up to 50% of weekly usage limits through July 7, after which it will be available via usage credits." The party will be short-lived.

Huge bummer. So what's the point of an anthropic subscription? Or is this just the end of subscriptions? Looking forward to gpt-5.6 (assuming we can still use our subscriptions there).

An Anthropic subscription is a 90%+ off discount for tech influencers to hype up an IPO (no different from companies directly paying Instagram influencers, except less overt).

And yes, after the IPO.

Re: Redeploying Fable 5

#19

Post by UltraSane »

mkw5053 wrote: post #10
mil22 wrote: post #9

"For Pro, Max, Team, and select Enterprise plans, Fable 5 will be included for up to 50% of weekly usage limits through July 7, after which it will be available via usage credits." The party will be short-lived.

Huge bummer. So what's the point of an anthropic subscription? Or is this just the end of subscriptions? Looking forward to gpt-5.6 (assuming we can still use our subscriptions there).

At least it is the end of endless arguments over subscription quotas.

Re: Redeploying Fable 5

#20

Post by sparkling »

>Our testing confirmed that many less capable models—including Claude Opus 4.8, GPT-5.5, and Kimi K2.7—could identify the same vulnerabilities as Fable 5 did in the report.

That is nice advertising for Kimi, huh?

Post reply on HN