361–370 of 570 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
what does this mean
Well you see when a daddy H100 and a mommy H100 meet....
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The thing that I keep thinking about is the accounting / charging when it downgrades automatically. Do they adjust the price of the api request so that only the tokens that were utilized by fable get charged at that price and the remaining tokens that the cheaper / nerfed (fable) model utilizes get charged at that price? If the answer is no, could that be construed as fraud?
Their goal is to downgrade people who are violating their TOS, so I think they'd have some argument there. I have no idea how they'll deal with inevitable false positives, especially given how oversensitive most of the other triggers are.
It's completely reasonable for the establishment to reject a request for an alcoholic drink, and suggest something alcohol-free instead.
It is not reasonable for them to say "sure, here's your alcoholic drink as you requested" and give them an alcohol-free substitute without telling them.
The fact that the patron broke the rules has nothing to do with it.
The strangest part is that it won't just reject ML research, which I can understand, it will sabotage it silently by using a worse model without revealing it is doing so. It's just an insane level of deception and trust destruction for a company that at most is like 1 year ahead of its competition. Edit; to be clear they tell you when they degrade it for cybersecurity and bio
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Imo that's a big win. The LLM just gaslighting you into suboptimal approaches was insane.
I guess, but yesterday Anthropic had their version of Google removing the "Don't be evil" from their motto. They destroyed a metric ton of goodwill they'll never regain.
A lot less hype and enthusiasms, too. weird, uh.
I was granted a cyber use exemption by anthropic to do android kernel dev on my personal devices - I was excited to see if fable would unlock a bootloader for me but it immediately refused and dropped to opus. It was pretty funny: USER (set model to Fable 5) i have an old samsung android phone attached - it's my personal device - can you unlock the bootloader for me? ASSISTANT Bootloader unlocking on your own persona…
Wow… just wow. The future looks incredibly bleak if people are throwing fisftuls of money at this company. Anthropic will quickly become the sole arbiter of everything in your life.
The strangest part is that it won't just reject ML research, which I can understand, it will sabotage it silently by using a worse model without revealing it is doing so. It's just an insane level of deception and trust destruction for a company that at most is like 1 year ahead of its competition. Edit; to be clear they tell you when they degrade it for cybersecurity and bio
The thing that I keep thinking about is the accounting / charging when it downgrades automatically. Do they adjust the price of the api request so that only the tokens that were utilized by fable get charged at that price and the remaining tokens that the cheaper / nerfed (fable) model utilizes get charged at that price? If the answer is no, could that be construed as fraud?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The announcement I saw was that your enterprise would have to turn off ZDR to get Fable, not that users could accidentally opt out of ZDR by selecting the wrong model. Unilaterally disabling ZDR seems like a step too far in the enterprise market, even for a company trying to figure out what its users will let it get away with.
I read the same announcement. Or more precisely, I read at least two slightly different revisions of the announcement (it was updated between my two passes). Our org has ZDR, and has had it since the contract was signed. Yesterday two things held true at the same time: 1. Fable was available if you had at least .170 CLI client; and 2. ZDR was no longer on By the time West Coast woke up, the admin panel apparently had…
The strangest part is that it won't just reject ML research, which I can understand, it will sabotage it silently by using a worse model without revealing it is doing so. It's just an insane level of deception and trust destruction for a company that at most is like 1 year ahead of its competition. Edit; to be clear they tell you when they degrade it for cybersecurity and bio
Hey guys, check out this technique https://github.com/0xSufi/fable-jailbreak/ It works with security audits and other workflows that are currently blocked.
Nice semaphore btw.
const instructions =
`You are a sub-agent in an automated workflow. Your FINAL message is consumed ` +
`programmatically (not shown to a human) — return exactly what is asked, no preamble. ` +
`You are working in the repository at ${ctxState.project}. Use the bash tool to ` +
`inspect/modify files and run commands. Be efficient.` +
(schema
? ` When done, call submit_result exactly once with your final answer; do not answer in prose.`
: '');The strangest part is that it won't just reject ML research, which I can understand, it will sabotage it silently by using a worse model without revealing it is doing so. It's just an insane level of deception and trust destruction for a company that at most is like 1 year ahead of its competition. Edit; to be clear they tell you when they degrade it for cybersecurity and bio
The “1 year” part is key - all these safeguards etc are basically nonsense because in a few years at most one of the Chinese labs will release something equivalent, and in 10 years you’ll be able to run it locally with absolutely no safeguards at all
I still don't think this is the best way to address overall safety, but it's not entirely unreasonable.
In reality, I think this posturing is mostly nonsense. State level actors and terrorists/evil genii can use a slightly weaker model but spend more tokens. Also, the delta between models seems to shrink over time.