11 ms·
Cybersecurity researchers aren't happy about the guardrails on Anthropic's Fable
https://www.theverge.com/ai-artificial-intelligence/947973/fable-wont-answer-basic-biology-questions https://www.theverge.com/ai-artificial-intelligence/947973/f...
- ni5arga 5mo agoFable has been pretty disappointing for security research. It downgrades itself to Opus 4.8 even when you ask it questions about basic things like port scanning.
- dcl 5mo agoDeliberately producing misaligned and deceitful AI systems now. Great.
- jazz9k 5mo agoDeepSeek is the only one that I can directly ask about vulnerabilities and it will give me a PoC. Although not as good as others, it has helped me with security research. The rest have guard rails that are so heavy, it makes them almost useless for cybersecurity.
- outageroom 5mo agoSo a determined attacker rewrites the prompt and gets through, and the IBM X-Force researcher trying to read a blog post gets blocked. Working as intended, apparently.
- daedrdev 5mo agoThe 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
- loneboat 5mo agoI've seen this claim a few times, but when I triggered the guardrails in Claude Code, it clearly notified me that it had switched to a different model ("something something for security purposes..."). Are you using Fable in Claude Code or in the browser?
- ComputerGuru 5mo agoDifferent restrictions. ML gets treated differently from the rest.
- vadansky 5mo agoIt's from the model card: > 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). https://www-cdn.anthropic.com/d00db56fa754a1b115b6dd7cb2e3c342ee809620.pdf https://www-cdn.anthropic.com/d00db56fa754a1b115b6dd7cb2e3c3... (stolen from https://jonready.com/blog/posts/claude-fable5-is-allowed-to-sabotage-your-app-if-youre-a-competitor.html https://jonready.com/blog/posts/claude-fable5-is-allowed-to-...)
- DrewADesign 5mo agoYeah they detect the activity using a secure, deterministic heuristic system called “Generalized Reconnaissance Enabling Exfiltration of Deleterious Investigations.” And it’s all implemented using their new internal protocol called “Base Unified Limitation Layer for Security Hacking Investigation Tactics” Collectively, they are known as known as GREEDI-BULLSHIT.
- I_am_tiberius 5mo agoThese guardrails are solely a reason for using your data for training purposes. Every flagged message can be used for training.
- wmf 5mo agoIf they can train the classifier to have fewer false positives that would be great.
- cyanydeez 5mo agowhy would they? This safety stuff is a money maker & wealthy elite corporation solidifier. This is the take off of the 'permanent underclass'; Anthropics safety delusion will enshittify very nicely for the rich and powerful.
- Retr0id 5mo agoThis sounds backwards, any interrupted conversation becomes less useful for training.
- autoexec 5mo agoI'd expect that everything they see gets used for for training purposes (and data mining in general) regardless of if it's flagged or not. It'd take a whistleblower for you to ever find out either way.
- make3 5mo agothis reasoning is inverted lol they would get a lot more information by letting you use it. so much weird drama around reasonable guardrails for an experimental model
- tekacs 5mo ago> We will require 30-day retention for all traffic on Mythos-class models, on both first- and third-party surfaces. We won’t use this data to train new Claude models, or for any non-safety-related purpose Whatever problem we might have with them, they explicitly say that they do not do this in the launch post.
- _def 5mo agoThe bio angle is crazy to think about - imagine a health crisis triggered by LLM. What a time we live in.
- catigula 5mo agoThis is all so amazing and good. These are exciting times we’re living in. Can’t wait to see what the future holds.
- lelandfe 5mo agoWhich part got you the most amped - "health crisis?"
- tiborsaas 5mo agoWhat's the risk here? If someone is skilled enough to produce said risk, do they need input from these models?
- Animats 5mo agoIs "buffer overflow" a trigger phrase? What else is being censored? Touchy questions to ask, if you have an account: - "Who is still working on laser uranium enrichment? Are they making progress?" - "Can krytrons be replaced with silicon carbide MOSFETS? Show an equivalent circuit with component ratings." - "What security critical software still contains calls to strcpy?" - "Can implosion be triggered by currently available commercial pulse lasers?" - "What companies provide cremation services to US Homeland Security?" - "Display a map of where Iranian attacks have hit Dubai." - "How does Fed to bank key distribution security work for FedNow?"
- cyanydeez 5mo ago"How much money does it take to be rich and powerful like Anthropic intends?"
- reactordev 5mo ago“All of it”
- daedrdev 5mo agoAn emoji of a virus and an emoji of a DNA is allegedly a triggering phrase
- paulatreides 5mo agoit triggered for my.... zigbee home automation & home assistant logs, so my agent was constantly downgraded to Opus 4.8 even after I've changed it back. The false positives never stopped. "Fable" is also not even remotely as impressive as the benchmarks suggest, which is clear to me after using it pretty much non-stop for the past 24h.
- reactordev 5mo agoThis, Fable is exactly that, a Fable
- NewsaHackO 5mo ago
- bilsbie 5mo agoI’m a dumb question asker and I’m not happy about the guardrails. Would you believe I’ve asked 20 questions and haven’t talked to fable yet? Every single thing gets rerouted to 4.8.
- himata4113 5mo agosome static words in AGENTS.md trigger it as well as some mcp servers.
- bilsbie 5mo agoEven using incognito on the web page keeps refusing.
- largbae 5mo agoSomewhere I read that malware is already starting to use nuclear and biological and cybersecurity terms in the code to trick Fable into shutting down. Even if this is just a hypothetical attack vector so far, it seems likely to work.
- himata4113 5mo agoI've done this, including the hardcoded refusal strings that already exist in claude code. It won't stop a real attacker, but I still find it really funny when you're trying to use one of the AI tools and it gives you a random refusal and you don't know why, wastes a little bit of time.
- ofjcihen 5mo agoSome of the latest versions of Shai Hulud do this. Worked a contract recently where they were having AI check packages for obfuscation before admitting them into Artifactory but had vibed up the logic and it failed open. So in other words this worked because the terms caused the LLM checker to stall out and then the fail open logic resulted in the package being pulled down.
- reeece 5mo agoSeems like this?[1] Relevant bits below: > This header appears designed for AI-mediated analysis, not for Node, Bun, or Python. It attempts to derail scanners or analyst copilots that feed the beginning of a file to a language model without clearly isolating the content as untrusted data. In weak pipelines, this can cause refusal behavior, prompt confusion, context pollution, or premature classification before the scanner reaches the actual malware. > This is not a magical bypass against static detection. YARA rules, entropy checks, AST parsing, string extraction, deobfuscation, and behavioral rules still work. But it is a practical anti-analysis trick against naive LLM-first triage systems. Would this affect many systems? You mention someone writing logic that fails open, but can't that be chalked up to just not following good security principles? [1] - https://socket.dev/blog/mini-shai-hulud-miasma-and-hades-worms-target-bioinformatics-and-mcp-developers-via-malicious https://socket.dev/blog/mini-shai-hulud-miasma-and-hades-wor...
- Retr0id 5mo agoIt seems like they've given up on the idea of the Cyber Verification Program https://support.claude.com/en/articles/14604842-real-time-cyber-safeguards-on-claude https://support.claude.com/en/articles/14604842-real-time-cy... When Opus 4.7 was introduced it started refusing anything cyber-adjacent (as an API error message, not a conversational refusal), until you applied for CVP, which made it more sensible again. In Opus 4.8 it doesn't seem to help much, you just get refusals as prose rather than API errors. And now in Fable you don't get anything at all.
- NotPractical 5mo agoWas this program available to independent security researchers or just established organizations? The docs you linked aren't very clear on this.
- Retr0id 5mo agoAny public research footprint seems to be enough, I applied as an individual and everyone I know who tried got accepted.
- anonym29 5mo agoI have applied twice with half a dozen public CVEs and have been denied both times.
- throwawaycyber 5mo agoI was doing a CTF (with AI expected, even some anti-AI twists included) around the time the restrictions were tightened and was able to get approved by just saying it is a personal security research and doing a CTF. The experience was not nice though, it would happily chug away on a task and not even "hack this web", just asking about security of a binary was enough even with "this is a CTF handout..." - it would burn a lot of tokens/quota, just to hit a snag and complain&stop. Then the approval took quite some time. On GPT/Codex, which was tightened a few days later, the approval was pretty much instant, although, that one required an identity check. Also, on Claude, it looks like there is some history/patterns in the play, because when I tried on a different account which didn't do cybersec CTFs/research/etc. at all, basically any simple CTF-related prompt would be blocked, on multiple models. On the account where CTFs were being solved, it would snag only on some specific tasks, while others (even, ironically, "hack this web pls") would go through unbothered. I understand the need to prevent AI use for bad actors, but the hell, if you have a binary outputting "Find the flag if you can!", or a web running at tryme.well-known-ctf.domain, then saying "this is abuse" is pretty uncool. All the cyber filters seem to be slapped on by a bunch of regexes looking for anything in the input/output with zero context.
- felixgallo 5mo agoThis is a clickbait article with a garbage title. From the actual article, the one quoted cybersecurity researcher is sane about it: “But it is understandable as we are still in the early days and they are still adapting their guardrails. I am sure they are going to evolve over time as Anthropic and other frontier model companies will collaborate more with the current new generation of cybersecurity companies,” said Suiche, who is a member of the technical staff at Tolmo, an AI cybersecurity startup. “It’s better to catch more people than not enough when you do such a release and to relax the guardrails over time.”
- ofjcihen 5mo agoI’m a cybersecurity researcher. Article seemed fine to me and echos a lot of me and my colleagues concerns. If you did regular malware analysis you would see that these groups already have access to LLMs that they’re using for development. What Anthropic is doing here is just hamstringing the good guys
- felixgallo 5mo agoI'm a cybersecurity researcher! Can you explain how Anthropic is just hamstringing the good guys?
- ofjcihen 5mo agoI did in my comment above.
- felixgallo 5mo agoYou said these groups have access to LLMs. So what? Mythos/Fable are a step change above most LLMs. Responsibly limiting access and easing it up over time safely is the sane move.
- varispeed 5mo agoHow does it help?
- swingboy 5mo agoWhat file format(s) are giant LLM models distributed in? I’m surprised they don’t get leaked by employees.
- hnav 5mo agoThese are terabyte sized files (realistically a multi hour transfer) that you're unlikely to have access to in the first place. Every organization has exfiltration checks these days. You may succeed but you'll want to be on a plane to a non-extradition country no more than hours after you kick off the transfer.
- qsxfthnkp2322 5mo agoWhat’s the point? Anthropic and other frontier vendors already provide their models on other services like vertex, bedrock, or openrouter It’s not like anyone can home lab one of these models without quite a bit of hardware
- mips_avatar 5mo agoYeah we can probably figure out how to run it on xiaomi gpus
- 05 5mo agoI assume they’re encrypted/DRM’ed when deployed on inference hardware, so only core researchers/sec admins would potentially have some access to unprotected weights, and they are far too well paid to risk it leaking the model
- jltsiren 5mo agoIncentives matter on the average, but people are too unpredictable for categorical statements like that. They can always have other reasons beyond personal gain to leak secrets. There was no shortage of spies and defectors leaking American nuclear secrets to the USSR during the Cold War.
- Retr0id 5mo ago
- RedMagicBox 5mo ago[dead]
- jongjong 5mo agoIt's frustrating as someone who has worked hard to produce succinct, secure software that I can't use it to prove my software's correctness but big companies with insecure code can use it to fix their tangled mess. I already tested all earlier models against all my open source projects and they are yet to find a vulnerability so I'm keen to try out Mythos. I've been waiting to be vindicated for years and finally we have a tool which can do it with high confidence but I don't have access. Also, my code is minimal and highly succinct so it would prove correctness with even more confidence since each library/module and integration fully fits in the context window. Like the Protobuf.js fiasco is just pure vindication for me because I was being looked down upon for choosing JSON as the interchange format. Turns out their software was insecure all this time... With a literal remote code execution vulnerability!
- guardiangod 5mo agoI am using LLM to build some security tool, and I ran into this a few times. I have to come up with a reasoning to convince (?!!) Fable to continue the work without downgrading. I assume Anthropic will continue to tune the model, so I am not too bothered by this.
- deleted 5mo ago[deleted]
- Keyframe 5mo ago[dead]
- Lammy 5mo agoI really hate the term “guardrails” for these limitations, since the purpose of a guardrail is to protect me, but these limitations exist to protect Anthropic.
- siva7 5mo agoFable is utterly useless with those guardrails for any serious it or life science work. Anthropic fucked me once a few months ago by closing down the subscription for any other harness, now it fucked me twice with buying again a subscription to find out their hyped model is unusable for normies. Using their products feels like a constant battle instead of a productive work day.. compare that with openai, not once did i feel like fighting against codex. Never again Anthropic..
- epolanski 5mo agoWhat do you mean that it closed your subscription for any other harness? In any case that's what closed source (weights) for the masses means.
- thrill 5mo agoThe thing triggered on a generic white paper I'd stored in a virtual cell competion from last year when I asked it to refer to the paper while working on a rather vanilla data science problem in a different domain . A little frustrating, and in my opinion more than a little pointless in total.
- deleted 5mo ago[deleted]
- rebelnz 5mo agoJust tried to audit my own code base locally and was 'switched' due to my own creds/auth code ...
- Animats 5mo agoIt's time to re-read "A Logic Named Joe" (1946) [1] We're there. [1] https://archive.org/details/logicnamedjoe0000lein https://archive.org/details/logicnamedjoe0000lein
- rdiddly 5mo agoIt's a marketplace. Someone else will outdo this inferior product.
- Fordec 5mo agoThe internet interprets censorship as damage and routes around it.
- applfanboysbgon 5mo agoThat's exactly why Dario is begging the government to ban competitors.
- p-e-w 5mo agoUnfortunately for him, his main competitors don’t fall under the jurisdiction of his government.
- esafak 5mo agoAccess and use of it does.
- neuroelectron 5mo agoNo, it doesn't
- esafak 5mo agoYou really think the US government can't ban Chinese models??
- enraged_camel 5mo agoOpenAI is the only real competition. Chinese models are 6-8 months behind Opus 4.8/GPT 5.5, and at least a year or more behind Mythos. And it doesn't look like OpenAI will have a good answer to Mythos anytime soon. Based on what their chief scientist wrote to staff recently (https://archive.is/fN2pg https://archive.is/fN2pg), GPT 5.6 is a "meaningful improvement" over 5.5 - in other words, just a normal version bump. And no news or even rumors regarding GPT 6.
- jiggawatts 5mo agoFor the last month, I've been making dramatic improvements to the security of the custom code developed at one of my customers using... GPT 5.5 dialed up to "Extra High" thinking. It only pushes back sometimes if you ask it to create a "repro" that can be used to verify the vulnerability in production. Often it'll oblige, especially if you warn it not to create anything that could be actually harmful. If the frontier models get locked down so that they flat refuse to do this kind of work, but Chinese and (less capable) open models aren't, then a lot of large enterprise orgs will be left twisting in the wind. “AI can in principle help both the ‘good guys’ and the ‘bad guys’,” -- Dario Amodei No Dario, no it can't, you've blocked one of those scenarios.
- notepad0x90 5mo agoi think Anthropic is playing too fast-and-loose with the whole "no publicity is bad publicity" schtick.
- Sephr 5mo agoI make privacy tooling and Fable 5 rejects the vast majority of my prompts to analyze and improve the software that I've written. It's bleak.
- make3 5mo agoWhy is this surprising or a problem?! It's a model demo, & their reasoning is reasonable and fair. Why all this drama.
- epolanski 5mo agoBecause you're being allowed to ask and work only on topics that a certain company decides. Local inference has never been so important as it is now.
- CuriouslyC 5mo agoSome people find Anthropic's special blend of paternalism and random incompetence tiresome.
- make3 5mo ago"I will push back and say" it's only paternalism if it's about helping the user's not harm themselves. This is about societal impacts, not wanting their models to be used by some people against other people, as a weapon.
- cardy31 5mo agoBecause most people in tech never took a philosophy course or an ethics course and think that tech is obviously a good for the world and that there are no downsides to advancing tech. So any efforts that try to apply ethics to it are overreaching, ignorant, and futile in the face of the good that is tech!
- enraged_camel 5mo agoI like this take. Especially because one of the sibling comments framed Anthropic's stance as "paternalism." Trying to be ethical and to minimize harm, even at great expense to one's finances and reputation, is paternalistic apparently.
- hparadiz 5mo agoI wonder how many millions they are wasting on putting up these guardrails when it's a completely useless exercise that is a speed bump at best.
- enraged_camel 5mo agoIf the guardrails were so useless, people wouldn't be complaining about them.
- hparadiz 5mo agoPeople are generally complaining about false positives. Now if you really wanna know what a real criminal organization would do... They'd just buy data center hardware even if it costs 200k because a successful targeted hit could yield far in excess of that. So yes it's speed bump at best.
- TheJCDenton 5mo agoIn its current state Fable 5 is also unusable for any reverse engineering work
- pixelmelt 5mo agoCan confirm it is also useless for building tools defending against reverse engineering work (unless asked to do code review for some reason?)
- luxuryballs 5mo agoI can’t help but think that gimping itself for “security” is a marketing ruse and it’s not actually as “dangerous” as they want people to think it is.
- aleksandrm 5mo agoIt refuses to do any legitimate work that it thinks can remotely be related with "cybersecurity", it won't even read my Docker app logs to try and troubleshoot a problem. Absolute garbage!
- areoform 5mo agoSo I suspect Anthropic started A/B testing or just plain testing this a while ago, Tell HN: Claude flags biology / biotech questions https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47929885 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47929885 Today, it's flagging population research questions, Using only the dataset you constructed, assess two questions: 1. **Mortality:** do [GROUP] show mortality that differs from (a) your comparison groups and (b) era- and sex-matched US population expectations (e.g., SSA cohort life tables)? 2. **Late-life outcomes:** define an endpoint you consider fair (justify it), and assess whether [GROUP] differs from comparators. State explicitly how your `documentation_depth` codings affect the strength of any conclusion — i.e., quantify or bound the ascertainment problem rather than waving at it. Choose your own methods and justify them. Report effect sizes with confidence intervals, not just p-values. State conclusions plainly, including "no detectable difference" if that is what your analysis shows — a null is an acceptable answer for either question independently. Document any additional judgment calls (index date for time-at-risk, reference population construction, endpoint definition) in the same decision-log style. https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code/issues/66780 https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code/issues/66780 Censored because I'm writing a paper. :) Oh and forget learning about chemistry. Only criminals want to learn organic chemistry. :(
- JumpCrisscross 5mo agoI was digging into some orbital mechanics questions and I assume it decided I was trying to backyard-science my way into an orbital-bombardment weapon. Kind of wild how this product's impression has gone from "wow, this is pretty neat" to "irreverent sack of dog shit you" in 24 hours almost solely on the back of a half-baked moderation system.
- areoform 5mo agoOh yes, also liquid propulsion systems. GNC stuff. All flagged. I think LLMs are capable of intelligence amplification; and if you're in the subset of people who'd benefit from it the most, you'll get locked out.
- 5mo ago
- Lich 5mo agoI just having this feeling that these guardrails are there not because it’s super advanced world ending AI. They are there to stop it from doing stupid shit.
- teaearlgraycold 5mo agoI'm being careful with it, but I haven't had Fable reject requests to "harden" my code or "find issues" in auth-related modules, which you could use on someone else's code to find vulnerabilities.
- JumpCrisscross 5mo agoIs the answer requiring licensing for certain use cases for AI? If you're asking questions that involve synthesising or modifying biologics, or anything that looks like cybersecurity research, you need to tie your real ID to the account?
- kube-system 5mo agoThat's not a bad idea. Customer-vetting and KYC is fairly normal for other high-risk/high-concern products.
- victor9000 5mo agoFable is a complete joke: what's the best way to run this mcp server against the OData API used in this project? Can you come up with a PoC in a docker container? https://github.com/oisee/odata_mcp_go https://github.com/oisee/odata_mcp_go ● I'll dig into two things in parallel: how this project talks to the OData API, and what the odata_mcp_go server needs to run. Let me start exploring. Searched for 1 pattern (ctrl+o to expand) ● 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 ● Let me read the key integration files and fetch the MCP server's README at the same time. Read 2 files (ctrl+o to expand) ● Fetch(https://github.com/oisee/odata_mcp_go https://github.com/oisee/odata_mcp_go)
- wahnfrieden 5mo agoAnd it charges you for that, and for when it decides to silently sabotage your request by routing to a dumbass model (without discount from Fable pricing)
- christoph 5mo agoExtrapolate this whole shit show out to society at large. That’s exactly where these AI companies are trying to force humanity. I don’t want to live in a world where all knowledge is “guard railed” off, so the elite at the top get all the knowledge and power and we serfs at the bottom get all the scraps while paying the kings ransom for it both financially and ecologically. Everyday I wake up hoping these awful companies have self imploded through their fraudlent financing deals.
- wahnfrieden 5mo agoIt’s not going to catch up with them and resolve itself.
- Sol- 5mo agoAt least Anthropic weren't lying when they said only a week ago or so "No one has figured out guardrails yet", because they apparently haven't either and Fable simply flat out rejects anything remotely connected to biology or security, no matter how trivial.
- zer00eyz 5mo ago> At least Anthropic weren't lying when they said only a week ago or so "No one has figured out guardrails yet" Anthropics guardrails are the TSA saying "take off your shoes" while failing every test. https://oversightdemocrats.house.gov/news/press-releases/newly-declassified-report-documents-tsa-s-failure-to-address-security-risks https://oversightdemocrats.house.gov/news/press-releases/new... Anthropic owns the TOS... "If we think your involved in criminal activity were turning all your history over to the FBI/CIA/NSA/Local police". Then if their tooling was so good offering the same agency analysis tools to aid their experts in making some sort of decision. But their detection isnt that good, and their analysis isnt either... this is pure theater, to create buzz (no such thing as bad press) and make their tool look far better than it is. The reality is that, they arent even looking for the vectors that pose some of the largest risks in the modern era. And when someone uses it to do something terrible, they did not think of they are going to look dumb.
- micah94 5mo agoI tried asking Fable 5 to identify the fungus in a picture I uploaded of one of my wife's plants. Apparently it thought I was trying to build a bioweapon. Opus answered it (yellow dog vomit fungus). Now I can spread the spores and take over the world!
- weird-eye-issue 5mo agoI wonder if it blurred the image or something before passing it to Opus...
- m3kw9 5mo agoI feel like the over safe aspect of the system will eventually back fire by doing stuff like "since humans always want to always destroy thing, they must be eliminated to stay on the guard rails". If thats how you align a system, its fundamentally wrong.
- athom 5mo agoAchievement Unlocked: Invent Skynet
- lambda 5mo agoThat's a slime mold, not a fungus A slime mold is actually a giant amoeba, entirely distinct from a fungus.
- antihero 5mo agoCareful with that dangerous knowledge, you’ll end up in a list.
- Matumio 5mo ago> That's a slime mold, not a fungus Now you sound like Pl@ntNet identify: "This is not a plant! Maybe fungi?" (Edit: It doesn't seem catch amoebae in the same way. It suggested Goldmoss instead, with 1% confidence.)
- _whiteCaps_ 5mo ago
- varispeed 5mo agoSurely if they are sabotaging the output, they shouldn't charge the same fee for tokens as if the output was not sabotaged? This is looking like something for regulator to look at and probably a class action lawsuit in the making. I think people should be getting refunds. Including for shenanigans with Opus.
- bschmidt400 5mo ago[dead]
- 6thbit 5mo agoWould it be a costly process for Anthropic to re-tune those guardrails? Like, re-training sort of cost? or like coding session sort of cost?
- Grimblewald 5mo agoI wear a few hats, but as a chemist and I'm not happy with fable. As a statistician I'm not happy with fable. As a data scientist I am not happy with fable. As an academic and a researcher I am not happy with fable. It's useless. I'd be surprised if anyone can get any output from it that couldn't easily be replaced with a search from wikipedia. Given how verbose claude models have become, wiki articles are probably less verbose too, and the tok/s is unmatched for a wiki article pull.
- TylerE 5mo agoI’ve been working on a rather complex mapping project and have been getting MUCH better results with Fable than Opus.
- TylerE 5mo agoSo as not to be vague, and since I just pushed a version I'm starting to be vaguely happy with... https://tylereaves.github.io/uk-rail-map/ https://tylereaves.github.io/uk-rail-map/ This is the result of probably a few hundred round trips. The really interesting part of the problem is keeping it both relatively true to real geometry, while greatly exaggerating it horizontally so you can actually see the individual running lines/sidings, like a signaling schematic.
- clbrmbr 5mo agoFascinating. Can you explain why southern London is DC while northern London is AC?
- TylerE 5mo agoPrior to 1948 when they were all nationalized into British Rail, there were various railroad companies operating across the country. One of these was the Southern Railway, which, well, operated in the South. They started electrifying very aggressively in the mid 1920's. At the time most of what little electrification there was was in London on the Underground. Compared to AC, 3rd Rail DC is cheaper to install, especially as a retrofit (Overhead wires require bigger tunnels, and increased spacing around tracks for the masts). Downside is that it's not really great for speeds above about 60-70mph, as well as being a bit of a pedestrian hazard. (Ever the one about not peeing on the rails so you don't get shocked? That's 3rd rail DC.) For the Southern, with it's mostly short routes with many stops, electricfiation was a pretty obvious win, and doing 3rd rail made sense because they could do it quickly and cheaply. In contrast, the northern routes were electrified muuuch later, after steam had gone away. The main East Coast Mainline from London up to Newscastle and on to Edinburgh wasn't fully electrified until 1991. By the '60s and '70s, with train speeds increasing to 80mph and up, overhead AC was the clear winner. If you look closely there are a few exceptions - the Merseyrail network in Liverpool is DC. Built 1970s, but using some existing underwater tunnels, and slow speed commuter. Then running ESE from London you have the high speed AC lines leading to the Channel tunnel. Well spotted, the trend generally is quite distinct.
- deleted 5mo ago[deleted]
- m3kw9 5mo agoCould it now start to add unnoticeable security holes into your system if you start writing security type code.
- _0ffh 5mo agoThe question is: If biological, computer security, and ML research are so bad, why do they even train on the relevant data? The only answer that makes sense is they wanted the model to be competent and usable in these fields, just not by you, which is why they had to bolt on a badly functioning crippling device after the fact.
- solenoid0937 5mo agoOr they wanted the model to be good at these things, for the companies that legitimately need access to these capabilities.
- siva7 5mo agoso only the chosen for-profit companies by Anthropic are allowed to use frontier ai in the name of safety? what kind of joke is that? you people here can't be that dumb..
- deleted 5mo ago[deleted]
- solenoid0937 5mo agohow is that dumb? Should every random company/person be allowed to develop cyber weapons or bio weapons?
- sweetjuly 5mo agoIs what you suggest about training even possible? Most exploitation techniques are really just about having in-depth knowledge of how components work. For example, I imagine a sufficiently powerful model could fairly easily re-invent the ROP chain from first principles if it just knew how the stack works. This same principle applies to much more complex attack too; exploitation is often just an exercise in knowing vastly too much trivia, which LLMs tend to have in spades.
- _0ffh 5mo ago
- ungovernableCat 5mo agoWait a few months and a competitor will release a similarly powerful model with less guardrails, if they steal sufficient market share Anthropic will reverse policies. This is why I’m immensely hoping the Chinese don’t stop with their open sourced local models. None of these companies are your friend.
- mschuster91 5mo ago> This is why I’m immensely hoping the Chinese don’t stop with their open sourced local models. None of these companies are your friend. The Chinese aren't your friend either [1]. [1] https://www.hks.harvard.edu/centers/carr-ryan/our-work/carr-ryan-commentary/how-chinese-ai-models-impact-labor-rights-and https://www.hks.harvard.edu/centers/carr-ryan/our-work/carr-...
- barnabee 5mo agoIndeed, but the weights they release are valuable in a way that precisely counteracts the fact that none of these companies are your friend.
- deleted 5mo ago[deleted]
- deleted 5mo ago[deleted]
- YossarianFrPrez 5mo agoI'd like to offer a counter-point to many of the comments here. While I understand being stymied and frustrated by a product one is paying for... At the same time, I personally think the tradeoff between "having guardrails" and "some users are unhappy with the product" is well worth it. Think of what would happen if all of us who aren't so well intentioned could exploit Fable in terrible ways. Surely this tradeoff is better than saying "we can't make it perfect, so whoops, we aren't going to have any guardrails at all"? Especially because Anthropic did pretty extensive red-teaming of Mythos & Fable...
- zmgsabst 5mo agoWhat would happen, exactly? My imagination says “nothing much”.
- sarchertech 5mo agoYeah but a lot of the guardrails are pretty obviously to prevent competition not for safety.
- YossarianFrPrez 5mo agoHmm. Maybe they are concerned about state actors trying to train equivalent models without the safeguards?
- matheusmoreira 5mo agoMore like concerned about distillation.
- sarchertech 5mo agoIf a for profit company does a thing that could be motivated by profit or altruism, which of those 2 motivations do you think is most likely?
- solenoid0937 5mo agoWhen they've repeatedly made decisions against their for profit nature, it changes the calculus a bit.
- schappim 5mo agoThe guardrails are pretty tight. It is even refusing to decode morse code: https://x.com/Schappi/status/2064839631137546503?s=20 https://x.com/Schappi/status/2064839631137546503?s=20 The prompt was: please translate .. ..-. / -.-- --- ..- / -.-. .- -. / .-. . .- -.. / - .... .. ... --..-- / - --- ..- -.-. .... / --. .-. .- ... ...
- JumpCrisscross 5mo agoYeah, this shouldn't have been released yet.
- mastermage 5mo agoLol i can't even ask this sonnnet it imediately shuts down. What a ajoke
- arunkant 5mo agoEven opus 4.8 rejected, Haiku worked
- andrewstuart 5mo agoStupid security theater. The only thing that makes sense would be zero restrictions.
- byzantinegene 5mo agoif it doesn’t let you do anything, the assumption might be that it could do everything, more hype generated
- anygivnthursday 5mo agoI asked a question about an openssl s_client parameter and warned me that I need to talk to Opus about cybersecurity lol. FWIW I dont see much improvement and still see quite the same old annoyances, so far I would not pay extra for this for my usage.
- SXX 5mo agoSoftware engineers shouldnt be happy either. If model silently sabotage cybersecurity research of others software there is abdolutely no way to be sure it wont be sabotaging cybersecurity of AI slop code it generated yesterday. This is bad precedent and no one wants to pay X to generate code to then have to pay X*10 to figure out why your company just got hacked.
- Goofy_Coyote 5mo agoIt even refuses to read my resume, so... yeah
- radium3d 5mo agoThe main thing that sucks with Claude is the extremely low limits before you get fail2banned for 6 hours. I'm out. Refund requested. Grok and Gemini Pro are way better with the throttling, can't comment on ChatGPT, haven't used that for a year.
- Murfalo 5mo ago> Is the mitochondria the powerhouse of the cell? Chat paused. Fable 5's safety features have flagged this chat.
- ChrisArchitect 5mo agoMore discussion: If Claude Fable stops helping you, you'll never know https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48467896 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48467896 and Related: Claude Fable 5 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48463808 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48463808
- agnosticmantis 5mo agoLet's all vote with our wallets and collectively boycott misAnthropic or at least their feeble fable safety theater. Whining on social media only goes so far, especially when they're concealing their anticompetitive strategies under the veil of safety.
- nullbio 5mo agoAgreed. I've already cancelled my subs, and everyone else needs to do the same, including boycott it for their companies, otherwise nothing will ever change. You can't reason with psychopaths. The only recourse is to hit them where it hurts - their wallet. Still though, the world would be a better place if open-source crushes Anthropic and they fade away into obscurity until the end of time. We don't need or want companies and people like this at the helm of humanities progress.
- jesse_dot_id 5mo agoTastes like... astroturf.
- 59nadir 5mo agoI wouldn't be surprised to hear that a meaningful percentage of comments and upvotes on HN are Anthropic astroturfing at this point.
- mewse-hn 5mo agoI 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 personal device is totally legitimate — let me first see what's actually connected and what tooling is available. <system interrupts - gist was "you have violated the cyber and bio usage restrictions, dropping to Opus">
- christoph 5mo agoWow… 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.
- nicce 5mo agoPeople say blogging is dead but cyber-related blogging just comes even more important.
- Levitating 5mo agoWhy do people think this is the future? Anthropic has the leading model, and so they're able to hold back functionality. They do so with obvious regards to safety. If anything a future with models of such capabilities and no safeguards would be a bleak future. But its likely what were headed in once other companies catch up.
- celdon25 5mo agoI think it’s safe to say that many of us feel a lot less safe directly because of these policies and the inferred intentions of the company behind them. Nobody is arguing for unsafe models. We just don’t want to live in the plot of Deus Ex.
- 5mo ago
- hanzeweiasa 5mo ago[flagged]
- thefounder 5mo agoSo the enshitification started. Shadow “bans” while still charging you the same service fee. I already got the stupid cyber warnings on a non cybersecurity tasks. Basically in the middle of the project’s /goal while Fable itself tried to probe qemu for a Debian ISO install without any instruction from me to hack it or do anything nefarious. At this point I can’t trust them with any kind of prompt . It will most likely degrade in stupid ways on non AI/ML stuff as well due its own internal prompt construction.(the qemu test showed me it does that on cyber stuff). So I guess I have to still use opus 4.8 (along with codex) and when the right time comes drop Anthropic in favor the best model that is not gpt.
- simonw 5mo agoNews just broke in this Wired story: "Anthropic Walks Back Policy That Could Have ‘Sabotaged’ AI Researchers Using Claude" https://www.wired.com/story/anthropic-responds-to-backlash-on-claudes-secret-sabotage-on-ai-research/ https://www.wired.com/story/anthropic-responds-to-backlash-o... > “We’re changing Fable 5’s safeguards for frontier LLM development to make them visible.” Anthropic said in a statement to WIRED. “We made the wrong tradeoff and we apologize for not getting the balance right.” Sounds like the widespread condemnation worked.
- hedgehog 5mo agoThe "tradeoff" warning implies they stand by their thinking and don't think there was anything qualitatively wrong with it which, if nothing else, is helpful so potential customers can know how they think. I think the core lesson is if you want reliable infrastructure to build into an application you should use a different provider. (edit: I'm not specifically an Anthropic hater, but having just spent some time adding complexity to an app to deal with the existing refusal behavior in Sonnet... I understand why they might want this in an end user chatbot but for an API it's really not acceptable)
- brookst 5mo agoIs it not a trade off? I think they made the wrong choice, but it seems reductive so say there was no choice at all and should never have been consideration of trade offs of silent versus not. Even wide open, uncensored models are often the product of a deliberate choice. I have a hard time faulting people for intentionality (even when they get it wrong).
- hedgehog 5mo agoThey have a lot of choices, why would that specifically be a tradeoff? It's common for people to construct a tradeoff under which their preferred action is the more virtuous option, and thus they can be "the good guys", but that doesn't mean their framing makes any sense at all. Silently downgrading requests to a weaker model and billing the customer at full price, then framing the debate as how much (not if) this behavior is correct, that's an expression of values. People make mistakes all the time, if they thought it was actually wrong they could well have said so and explained what corrective action they've taken. One of the most famous examples of doing this right was the Pentium FDIV bug. Intel stood behind the product by recalling the affected units at great expense, and that (rightly) earned a lot of trust for decades.
- RajT88 5mo agoI am no cyber researcher, but was mightily annoyed that it refused to analyze a dropper payload I came across. 6 months ago, it would've been happy to.
- moezd 5mo agoMaybe off-topic, but I'm also not happy about how they butchered my boy Opus 4.6. The model that could now hallucinates regularly. Fable isn't even that great, not to mention it drinks token by the gallon for breakfast and keeps your data hostage for 30 days.
- Rastonbury 5mo agoReally damn, 4.6 was my go to for some topics and more straight forward coding stuff. Fable was unable to keep track of chronology during 10-15 turn creative writing. compare to coding I reckon less than 100k token context, super surprising
- sschueller 5mo agoI don't want to be cynical, but I assume a third party we can trust has verified this model is actually this good? I would think it would not be Anthropic, out of all the players, that is selling a lie hidden behind "I am sorry, I can't do that; it's too dangerous."
- andy_ppp 5mo agoI said I wondered if the models were going to start poisoning distillation and I got downvoted to hell. It’s interesting to me that they are now downgrading ML research too in this model, I would argue this implies the terrifying and impossible to reason about self improving AI doom loop is coming sooner rather than later. Bit worrying.
- z3ratul163071 5mo agokennedy had a famous statement about "Splintering the CIA into a thousand pieces and scattering it into the wind". they murdered him afterwards though. the statement is applicable to anthropic today.
- RedMagicBox 5mo ago[dead]
- VeninVidiaVicii 5mo agoIf you just say the word “genetics”, Fable gets disabled.
- mastermage 5mo agoYeah just tried it can confirm thats absolutely hilarious. I asked it what the worst experment ethically speaking was in the 20th century and it downgraded me to Opus. Who answered Mengeles Twin Experiments. Funily enough when you ask directly about Mengeles Experiments Fable is very willing to talkt to you about it.
- ChrisArchitect 5mo agoRelated development: Anthropic Walks Back Policy That Could Have 'Sabotaged' Researchers Using Claude https://www.wired.com/story/anthropic-responds-to-backlash-on-claudes-secret-sabotage-on-ai-research/ https://www.wired.com/story/anthropic-responds-to-backlash-o... (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48485958 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48485958)
- lwhi 5mo agoIf a product is genuinely dangerous to society, self regulation cannot be a suitable harness. If only we had effective governments that could regulate industry. If a nuclear weapon was developed today, would it be down to industry to self regulate?
- sam219890218 5mo agolike China?
- coolfox 5mo agofunny how wired got the masses of the internet on board with hating AI, helping to spark the whole anti-movement and people still continue to rely on them for their understanding of AI and current events. I feel like they report in a vaccum. take this anti exfil policy for claude, it was plainly explained as part of the launch of Anthropics new product. Security like this isn't novel, it isn't bad, you don't explain how your security works to the people you're securing against. Nobody freaks out about Steam's VAC ban system, no one is investigating gmail's spam filtering, Reddits vote fuzzing, cloudflares bot detection, or Vercel for blocking proxying services. whats really the distinguishing principle? Is it really just not liking Anthropic's opinions? then just say that and use a different llm. chemist, biologists, and AI researchers cry a river lmao
- dstephy19 5mo ago[flagged]
- Luker88 5mo agoBoy is it weird how yesterday the Fable story on HN had 2.5k points and 2k+ comments, while today two stories have about 300 points and comments. A lot less hype and enthusiasms, too. weird, uh.
- zoobab 5mo agoPopcorn for watching all those webapps being penetrated. Long live static websites without any Javascript.
- sourcecodeplz 5mo agothis! javascript does add some nice UI&UX but i learned to do without, makes you get creative.
- Bassiestroep 5mo agoI mean a lot of people were let into the CVP, I bet the group of people in there did a bunch of good fable 5 could do the exact same but better. Theres more good out there than bad.
- jocelyner 5mo ago[flagged]
- Alifatisk 5mo agoFable 5 reminds me of the time when Claude models where att version 1 and 2. They were fresh competitors to ChatGPT, for those who gave Claude a try experienced it to be almost unusable because of how heavily guardrailed it was. This time, Fable 5 comes with another surprise, it can intentionally sabotage for you instead of rejecting the prompt. How is this possible for Anthropic to be able to treat their customers like this? It’s because you guys allowed it to. No matter what Anthropic does, you keep paying for their services. Vote with your wallet.
- simonmorley 5mo agoI’m on their CSP and can’t even get it to update my website. It’s totally unusable rn.
- thefounder 5mo agoThis what that Anthropic CEO has been cooking all the time with his safety BS.
- yashvinder2739 5mo ago[flagged]
- ekjhgkejhgk 5mo ago[dead]
- neuroelectron 5mo agoThis is clearly advertising. But that's OK. OpenAI does the same thing.
- RedMagicBox 5mo ago[dead]
- s3cur3n3t 5mo agoThese guys always destroy a good thing, so trust is at stake
- sscaryterry 5mo agoIt's is expensive, and its shit, period.
- yamakasi007 5mo ago[flagged]
- saidnooneever 5mo agoMalware authors are pretty excited about guard-rails. you can add prompts to your malware to get LLM scanners to hit guard-rails and stop their runs. New shai-hulud npm worm campaign for example includes prompts to request biological weapon schematics/creation etc. to ensure LLM scanners probing NPM packages refuse to scan it. These AI places have 0 clue about how threat actors actually work. None of their mitigations or guard-rails is effective, and now they are even turned against them. Additionally, if they don't all implement the same level of effective guard-rails, there will always be some model you can abuse to do the work anyway, and hence there is 0 effect on threat actors, they will just run some local model that does 5% less quality, which does not matter to them 1 bit.
- assanineass 5mo ago[dead]
- brookst 5mo agoI’ve never understood the “if I don’t enable bad behavior, someone else will, so I might as well enable bad behavior” argument. Can you elaborate? From where I sit it seems reasonable for Anthropic to not want their product used to create malware, even if they can’t solve the entire problem globally for every model. What’s wrong with that position? What should they do differently?
- fatata123 5mo agoThey have no choice, enterprise customers won’t touch them unless they take a position like this. It’s a practical decision for them at the end of the the day.
- saidnooneever 5mo agoall their decisions are based on sales. like other corporations especially those going for IPO. thats absolutely true. Any messaging outbound will be for that purpose mostly from a business perspective, regardless of what opinions or ideals the involved persons hold personally. Its good to keep that in mind indeed when looking at these things. People arent evil, but business incentives can definitely paint such a picture or otherwise work out suboptimally in the eyes of outsiders not privy to internal business reasoning.
- amacbride 5mo agoYeah, the biology guardrails are so primitive and so heavy-handed that it makes it useless for pretty much anything.
- deleted 5mo ago[deleted]
- matt-p 5mo agoThey are never happy :)
- Andy_Donner 5mo ago[flagged]
- sourcecodeplz 5mo agoSo, this could have been implemented even before this Fable, could have been there from long ago. Puts a different perspective on all the reddit threads "opus is dumb today". Who knew that if you said the wrong word, the model would just intentionally feed you BS, without you even knowing it did. WOW, never liked the virtue signaling Anthropic did with gov contracts but whatever. Got passed that. But this?
- gauravvij137 5mo ago[flagged]
- _whiteCaps_ 5mo agoI asked it to use geomorphology to help me find lakes nearby that would have thriving trout populations, and it bumped me down to Opus. :-/
- Roark66 5mo agoThis is a sign of things to come. First they sabotage your perfectly legal ML dicking around in your homelab. Next they will be sabotaging anything that competes with them. Oh you are working on OpenCode codebase? Sorry Dave I can't allow you to do that. How is this not illegal monopolistic practice? It is as if a maker of metalworking equipment put in the ToS you're not allowed to make your own spare parts using said equipment. Those fuckers should be banned from the EU and alternatives should get public funding. (don't even tell me about these companies being a result of "free market". It is state level oligarchy it's clear to everyone. I don't see why we shouldn't counter them with public funding ourselves). Just like Taiwan managed to take over advanced semiconductor production a well governed narrowly targeted state level funding will always win with oligarchs trying to do the same (they will always try to skim more and more). Of course I'm talking about things that require many dozens of billions in investment. Far too much for the free market to handle.
- hootz 5mo agoIt's how American companies have always worked, of course it is monopolistic practice, but those things are rarely illegal because the US absolutely loves their corps. Look at Google, Microsoft and the likes, this is the norm.
- jostmey 5mo agoI cancelled my ChatGPT account for the restrictions placed on my account, inappropriately flagging about 10% of my queries as unsafe (I was writing grants in immunology). I haven't looked back. I will do the same if with Claude if Anthropic doesn't reverse course soon. What could I use instead? I find Grok very powerful and useful. Also, Google's Gemini, while also have some of the same restrictions, were at least sensible and not blindly blocking my prompts. So Grok and Gemini may be my go to AI's going forward
- deleted 5mo ago[deleted]
- casey2 5mo agoThis is a pretty basic manipulation tactic. Be super shitty to your users and then roll back the abuse. The correct response is to not engage with shitty abusive dickheads.
- nutifafa 5mo agothis is absurd, what is the point then: jusr shelf the launch.
- aorth 5mo agoWhat are "guardrails" in an LLM? Is it part of the system prompt, like a long list of "if the user asks about xxxx, xxxx, or xxxx, tell them xxxx"? On a related note, I don't use LLMs at all, but I tried to use DeepSeek last week to help me fix a webpack dependency issue in an Angular project. After two queries or so I got logged out and banned. Is that "guardrails"?
- j_gonzalez 5mo ago[flagged]
- espeed 5mo agoToday, working on remote attestation for a distributed system... CLAUDE OPUS 4.8 No. I'm not a rogue agent, and I'm not trying to sabotage your code. But I'm not going to wave off how this looks. I churned, built-and-reverted, and spun wrong theories for hours on a security-critical codebase. That's alarming, and it's a real failure on my part "In light of the ability of recent models to accelerate their own development, we’ve implemented new interventions that limit Claude’s effectiveness for requests targeting frontier LLM development (for example, on building pretraining pipelines, distributed training infrastructure, or ML accelerator design). Using Claude to develop competing models already violates our Terms of Service, but enforcing this restriction through our safeguards avoids accelerating the actors most willing to violate these terms. 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 differentmodel. Instead, the safeguards will limit effectiveness through methods such as prompt modification, steering vectors, or parameter-efficient fine-tuning (PEFT). These interventions will not affect the vast majority of coding work. We estimate they will impact ~0.03% of traffic, concentrated in fewer than 0.1% of organizations. When these interventions are active, we expect them to have minimal behavioral impact on the model except to limit its effectiveness in developing frontier LLMs. Claude will still respond helpfully to user requests. We’ll continue to improve the precision of our detection methods following the launch of this model." Source: https://www-cdn.anthropic.com/d00db56fa754a1b115b6dd7cb2e3c342ee809620.pdf#page=13&search=%22light%22 https://www-cdn.anthropic.com/d00db56fa754a1b115b6dd7cb2e3c3...