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

If Claude Fable stops helping you, you'll never know

jonready.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

471–480 of 534 posts

Re: If Claude Fable stops helping you, you'll never know

#471

Post by SamvitJ »

nsingh2 wrote: post #217
jsw97 wrote: post #184

Given the high rate of false positives people are reporting for the non-silent cybersecurity, biological, etc., safeguards, there is a strong likelihood that you will encounter silently nerfed behavior even if you are _not_ violating their TOS. Ultimately this will be evident in the way customers / external benchmarkers experience Fable. Hopefully competition will drive future models toward a lower false positive rat…

It's such an obviously bad policy, it's mind-boggling that they thought this was a good idea. It just breeds paranoia and mistrust, especially when people are already a bit paranoid about silent model quantification for cost cutting reasons.

Do you mean "quantization" not quantification?

Re: If Claude Fable stops helping you, you'll never know

#472

Post by tenuousemphasis »

scottydelta wrote: post #470

It's not silent anymore, It just showed me this: Fable 5's safety measures flagged this message for cybersecurity or biology topics. They may flag safe, normal content as well. These measures let us bring you Mythos-level capability in other areas sooner, and we're working to refine them. Switched to Opus 4.8. Send feedback with /feedback or learn more ⎿ Tip: You can configure model switch behavior in /config

>Unlike our interventions for cybersecurity, biology and chemistry, and distillation attempts, these safeguards will not be visible to the user. Fable 5 will not fall back to a different model. Instead, the safeguards will limit effectiveness through methods such as prompt modification, steering vectors, or parameter-efficient fine-tuning (PEFT).

Re: If Claude Fable stops helping you, you'll never know

#473

Post by killerstorm »

scottydelta wrote: post #470

It's not silent anymore, It just showed me this: Fable 5's safety measures flagged this message for cybersecurity or biology topics. They may flag safe, normal content as well. These measures let us bring you Mythos-level capability in other areas sooner, and we're working to refine them. Switched to Opus 4.8. Send feedback with /feedback or learn more ⎿ Tip: You can configure model switch behavior in /config

It's silent specifically for ML topics. For biology and cybersec (like, finding bugs) it will show a clear warning.

Re: If Claude Fable stops helping you, you'll never know

#474

Post by tsunamifury »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #314
bigbadfeline wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your "Venn diagram" is wrong. People don't decide against crime because they are dumb, they don't do it because of legal repercussions. Did you forget there's law? Why argue about dumbing down people in order to fight crime, that's nonsense. Private entities deciding to dumb down people as a replacement of law is worse than any crime.

> Your "Venn diagram" is wrong. People don't decide against crime because they are dumb, they don't do it because of legal repercussions. That's a factor that shrinks the "people inclined" circle. It doesn't change the analysis they're making, or make the analysis wrong.

History proves you wrong quite clearly. As information has spread violence and terrorism has reduced

Re: If Claude Fable stops helping you, you'll never know

#475

Post by splwjs »

There's already an obvious stench to "you should scale down your engineering team to a skeleton crew whose core competency is using our product, so that it's the only way to modify your product"; that's going to result in a lot of foodless tables when anthropic et al decide they have enough leverage to stop subsidizing their subscription prices down to what, 4-10% of the marginal cost? Well it doesn't matter how much they want to jack the prices up, if your engineering team requires tokens to do anything you'll just shut up and pay whatever it is.

There's another big problem with the blackbox shrugoff of "no, there's no way to know how many tokens a given request will cost, idk just assign an agent to that or something lol"

But now the software may just decide for itself that your application of it needs to be silently diverted onto a snipe hunting trail. Surely they'll only ever do this for anyone developing a competing product. Or malware. Or Criminal activity. Or one of ten other applications that the system will never misjudge.

You don't need a datacenter the size of Ohio to figure out that agentic ai maximalism is going to hurt you more than help you.

Re: If Claude Fable stops helping you, you'll never know

#476

Post by CooCooCaCha »

KeplerBoy wrote: post #467
theLiminator wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But, history says the supercomputer of today will fit in your pocket in a few years. I don't think this will be true in the same time span anymore. Each miniaturization is costing more and more money. Perhaps they'll come up with exotic fundamental improvements, but I don't think the rate of improvement of compute/watt will match the previous decades.

That has never been true, unfortunately. The 2005 top500 was led by bluegene/L achieving 280 FP64 TFlop/s. Apple is talking about 17.5 FP16 TFlop/s on the iphone 17 neural engine. So 20 years later we are still nowhere near, not even at reduced precision.

Because we’ve been able to spend more and more on the next miniaturization. That does not seem infinitely sustainable or even physically possible to sustain indefinitely.

Re: If Claude Fable stops helping you, you'll never know

#477

Post by [deleted] »

theLiminator wrote: post #151
SwellJoe wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think we agree? What moat? You answered yourself: "capital intensive" But, history says the supercomputer of today will fit in your pocket in a few years. They've bought up all the RAM and GPUs, which pushes the capital requirements upward for everyone else. But, they can't corner the market forever, there are too many competing interests. AMD and Intel keep making new GPUs and APUs. The memory makers can't just se…

> But, history says the supercomputer of today will fit in your pocket in a few years. I don't think this will be true in the same time span anymore. Each miniaturization is costing more and more money. Perhaps they'll come up with exotic fundamental improvements, but I don't think the rate of improvement of compute/watt will match the previous decades.

[deleted]

Re: If Claude Fable stops helping you, you'll never know

#478

Post by TalkingCodeMonk »

soraminazuki wrote: post #245
HarHarVeryFunny wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, this breaks the notion that the technical debt you're accumulating with today's AI can be fixed by tommorrow's AI. Tomorrows AI may either refuse, or silently mess up your code because Anthropic don't like what you're working on.

Yup, you always have to consider the modus operandi of the tech industry when listening to the utopian dream that very same industry is espousing.

Given long term trends, Googles official motto next decade:

"BE Evil"

Re: If Claude Fable stops helping you, you'll never know

#480

Post by whiplash451 »

shaky-carrousel wrote: post #447
whiplash451 wrote: post #441

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The moat looks deep today but it's going to become more shallow every year. Unless the frontier labs start nerfing their models, which is exactly what seems to be happening. The counter-point to your argument is a future where less and less un-nerfed open-source frontier models exist. Sure, China/Meta might keep commoditizing their complement by releasing un-nerfed models, but these come with their own limitations…

A nerfed model is a useless model which makes the moat shallower, not deeper.

Not if the model is part of a broader product that happens to be very useful/relevant to private companies willing to pay a lot for it (e.g. a coding agent that can do many things but won't help you build a frontier LLM model).

My intuition is that Claude and the likes are going gung-ho after this, along all the verticals that will generate money without threatening their moat.

Post reply on HN