17 ms·

There is a shadow hanging over this Fable thing

• shillyshilshlll 4mo ago
  [dead]
• Cider9986 4mo ago
  https://archive.ph/ERGwR https://archive.ph/ERGwR
• istvan0 4mo ago
  > So many comments here missing the big picture, and just gleefully pointing out that Anthropic got what they deserved, or that this is the natural culmination of some kind of marketing stunt. They are not wrong, it feels like that Game of Thrones season where someone thought it would be a great idea to let the fanatics re-arm. > The real story here is that this may be the beginning of governments restricting the availability of strong LLMs to the public, to you. Fable was the strongest model on the market, and the US government has told you you can’t use it (technically, only if you’re not a US citizen, but in practice, even if you are). If you think the solution here is going to be open source Chinese models and / or running on your own hardware, think again. Do you think China is going to allow the strongest LLMs from companies within its borders to be open source a year from now when they have Mythos capabilities, if the US government is keeping the strongest American models back? Unlikely. These are heading in the direction of being powerful cybersecurity weapons and it will be in the interest of nation states to restrict and control them. In 2 years time, I would be surprised if the strongest LLMs are available for general use at all. The world is a bit bigger than US and China, if Anthropic did it, another company can do it as well. I am highly skeptical about Mythos's part in the whole cyber security angle and Anthropic seems to agree with me: > We have reviewed a report that we believe is the basis of the government's directive and validated that the level of capability displayed there is widely available from other models (including OpenAI’s GPT-5.5) It does sound funny to hear this from Anthropic after they spent recent months with scaremongering about Mythos's capabilities, now they say it was a prank bro, you can actually achieve more or less the same with good old GPT-5.5. > Will we be the poorer for that, or will we be safer? I think poorer, because I hate being told what technology I can and can’t use, but I’m not certain. Maybe you think the government should restrict strong LLMs. Maybe you don’t. But either way, this is big news and a rubicon has been crossed and a precedent set. That’s true even if the motivation for this is just the government settling scores with Anthropic. What this has demonstrated: if you can't run the software on your own hardware, you should assume that it can be taken away at any moment.
  • Iolaum 4mo ago
    > The world is a bit bigger than US and China With respect to AI capabilities is it really? I don't see anyone else producing frontier closed source LLM's or frontier open source LLM's outside of US and China.
    • SgtBastard 4mo ago
      Mistral in the EU, for one.
      • Iolaum 4mo ago
        Unfortunately Mistral is not close to the frontier. Their last release Mistral Medium 3.5 128B is near the performance[0] of QWEN-3.6-27B, a much smaller model that was released earlier. It's good that they exist, and I hope they catch up, but if you don't have origin constraints for your use case I don't see why you would chose their models today. [0]: On the only benchmark they both published performance results - SWE-bench Verified -they are within a margin of error Mistral 77.6 vs Qwen 77.2.
        • istvan0 4mo ago
          Within Spec Driven Development style coding for me Claude Sonnet 4.5 was the game changer and Mistral is I believe at that level already. GLM is allegedly also on par with even some of the Opus models, so if the US vendors would vanish tomorrow, there would be alternatives. Would I miss Opus 4.8 and the Claude Code harness? of course I would! But the world wouldn't stop. What I am trying to get at is that the frontier is great, but you can be fine with less as well.
      • SilverSlash 4mo ago
        they already firmly in irrelevant territory
        • ignoramous 4mo ago
          > irrelevant territory Not for the EU. Given the political importance of LLMs and the talent pool in France (let alone rest of the EU), I fully expect them to catch up.
• 2gremlin181 4mo ago
  Potentially relevant: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38361050 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38361050
• slopinthebag 4mo ago
  Meanwhile the world keeps spinning and most people don't even know what Anthropic is, much less anything about Fable. If AI lived up to a tenth of the promises the American labs produce, the world would be drastically different today. It's not. I'm doubtful of future impact based on that. I'm happy we can utilise current OSS models to the extent we can now. They'll improve. The world will continue as usual. And hopefully we can put this bubble behind us.
  • Tenoke 4mo ago
    Did you think 5 years into the invention of electricity the world already was vastly different? The internet? Would you have written them off because random people didn't know much about them at that point - which isnt even true as chatgpt has been ~ the 5th most popular site in the world for a couple of years now?
    • Izkata 4mo ago
      > which isnt even true as chatgpt has been ~ the 5th most popular site in the world for a couple of years now? That part is kind of their point - it doesn't have the distribution issues your other examples have.
    • slopinthebag 4mo ago
      I mean, besides the fact that electricity and the internet are orders of magnitude more transformative than a statistical next-token prediction machine, none of the predictions behind LLMs were made of either in the first 5 years. Gangnam Style is the most popular video ever, surely it means something right?! If we're cooked, it's only because of a mass hysteria behind this thing. It's an extremely useful technology, we're just losing our collective mind because of it.
      • IAmGraydon 4mo ago
        100% correct, but the last thing a person suffering from delusions wants to hear is that they’re suffering from delusions. LLMs inadvertently hack some very primal parts of the human brain, and specifically the part that anthropomorphizes things with seemingly human-like behavior. Combine that with herd behavior caused by social media and you have a perfect mass delusion machine. It’s nearly impossible for people inside the delusion to see their way out. This is going to be studied for many, many generations to come.
• matt3210 4mo ago
  I guess current AI, IS the best it will ever be
• matt3210 4mo ago
  What a coincidence, Anthropic getting handicapped so xAI can try to catch up
  • johnwheeler 4mo ago
    XAI rents out compute to anthropic. I feel like Sam Altman is behind this that little rat.
    • maxbond 4mo ago
      What makes that more likely than that people at the DoD are alarmed (with or without good justification) at Fable's capabilities plus finding a jailbreak (or what they interpret as a jailbreak while Anthropic seems to dispute the requests met the level Fable should refuse)?
    • cm2187 4mo ago
      How is that going to help him? "Our models are so inferior they are not deemed a threat unlike anthropic's"? I think it is either a missile directed at anthropic, as retribution for not giving the DoD what it wants, in which case it is likely to resolve pretty quickly. Or it is a shift of policy toward export restrictions on powerful LLM and then every model will be impacted as they reach the threshold. In which case this could have massive implications of revenues, valuations, and the whole datacenter buildout. And frankly on the location of the white collar workforce if it is indeed a productivity multiplier, all countries reciprocate, and not all countries can match the US LLMs. And why would the EU allow exports of chip manufacturing equipment if the US then restricts the export of derivatives of those chips to the EU?
      • llelouch 4mo ago
        There are many people in this administration invested in OpenAI like the Kushner's. They are attacking Anthropic however they can. You will notice a lot of propaganda on social media sites against anthropic. It's very obvious.
      • trhway 4mo ago
• ookblah 4mo ago
  lol if this is an attempt by the admin like the DoD thing to "knock them down a peg" it actually has the opposite effect for me, showing that anthropic is that far ahead you have to resort to dirty tricks.
  • isoprophlex 4mo ago
    OTOH, maybe Dario is colluding with some people the US government to drum up some PR before the IPO? "OoOoo these models are so scarily good, export controls were forced onto them" So much smoke, mirrors and SV techbro bullshit going around that it has become impossible to figure out what's what.
    • hattmall 4mo ago
      This is definitely what it feels like to me, especially since it was going to be taken away from the subscriptions anyway right? Plus I had been having huge reliability issues anyway. Now they got to tease something, put it behind a more intense paywall.
  • nozzlegear 4mo ago
    > it actually has the opposite effect for me, showing that anthropic is that far ahead you have to resort to dirty tricks. The Mythos marketing strategy in action
  • pelorat 4mo ago
    Of course it is, the USA is under the control of a petty toddler that demands absolute loyalty, not to the country, but him personally.
• emodendroket 4mo ago
  > As a brief aside, I am once again extremely disappointed in the myriad of Silicon Valley people who angrily argued that a Democratic led government would ‘pick winners and losers in the AI race’ are now completely silent or defending the actions of this admin. I cannot help but feel that that previous posturing was just a machiavellian play for power, which has just been the worst feeling in the world. I mean, yeah. But did it take this long for that to be apparent to you?
• matheusmoreira 4mo ago
  I really hope it's just the USA punishing Anthropic for their insolence. If this is actually the beginning of AI regulation, we're probably heading towards dark times.
  • snackerblues 4mo ago
    Dark times like: - Staying alive - Keeping our jobs ?
    • matheusmoreira 4mo ago
      Dark times like the end of personal computing, regulatory capture, powerful AI models and computers that can run them becoming something only a special class of people can have, further concentration of wealth and power into corporations and governments.
• uludag 4mo ago
  > I actually have another draft post in the barrel about how I think we should see a resurgence of the ‘flash game’ renaissance because it has become so much easier to make fun little games with AI tooling. I have been lurking on the aigamedev subreddit to see exactly what sort of games people are coming up with and I can say I have been incredibly disappointing. I've been faithfully trying the games people post and have come to the conclusion that game design is a very difficult art to learn, and something LLMs really can't help with that much. My guess is that these games are "fun" just like toddler paintings are "beautiful." And there are so many quality indie games you could get for the 25+ dollars you'd spend generating the code. Anyways, I guess that's another discussion for another blog post.
  • theahura 4mo ago
    most flash games were horrible too! You had to go through a load of crap to find games like boxhead, motherload, or bloons. I'm a big believer in volume here. You don't have to be an amazing programmer to be an amazing game designer, but before, the former was a prerequisite for even getting started. The beauty of AI tools applied to games is that you can just focus on the latter. Over time the gems will rise to the top
    • kg 4mo ago
      This presumes that people will have the time and the patience to wade through the slop and find the gems. Right now people do that with the tide of low quality human-authored games to find the gems but when there's 10x or 100x as many low quality games will people still have the patience? I hope so, but I don't know. We're already seeing a huge uptick in the number of games being released every year on Steam and most of them don't get more than a handful of reviews, positive or negative.
      • theahura 4mo ago
        Not all the things that are good will rise to the top, but most of the things that rise to the top will be good. We've gotten pretty good at ranking systems as a species at this point, I'd say
• modeless 4mo ago
  > But this government [...] I'm hearing a lot of this kind of thing. "Oh if only it was a different government". I'm sorry, but when you cry out for government involvement, it's not always going to be coming from the government you personally wanted. This is the whole problem with government involvement! I don't think that message is getting through, but it's the real lesson that should be learned here.
  • kristjansson 4mo ago
    It’s actually ok to be more critical of a government that’s capricious than one that merely advances polices one disagrees with
  • FunHearing3443 4mo ago
    I agree. This situation was created in the first place because both parties and their constituents have been OK giving the executive branch more and more power as long as it benefits “their team”.
    • deleted 4mo ago
      [deleted]
    • Guvante 4mo ago
      The left has been complaining about the executive branch over reach for quite a long time. Hell as much as the drone strikes get simplified down to "Obama killed people without trials" the main complaint at the time was that he was acting without Congressional approval. Democrats shouldn't have responded to Congress getting blocked up by Republicans realizing that they could make "ineffective government" a self fulfilling prophecy but pretending everyone is okay with it isn't accurate either.
    • jmyeet 4mo ago
      Saying "both sides" doesn't make you enlightened. It's either intellectual laziness or intentional dishonesty. I absolutely abhor "bothsidesism". One party is rounding up people and putting them into concentration camps while doing a mass deportation. That same party is trying to end birthright citizenship. That same party set the world order ablaze with a completely pointless tariffs regime. That same party started a war in Iran to please their donors and the Israeli PM, a war that is going to (IMHO) go down as the biggest strategic blunder in US history. One party doesn't want half the population to have bodily autonomy. In fact some of them have openly said they want to hand out the death penalty for getting an abortion. One party has doubled the national debt in a decade to hand out massive tax cuts to the ultra-wealthy and also gutting essential services. One party has a president credibly implicated with Jeffrey Epstein. That entire party bar a handful of individuals (who have been punished for their "disloyalty") have gone to great lengths to hide the evidence of that malfeasance. One party is killing people essentially to manipulate the market with repeated lies about an "imminent deal". One party is wholesale engaged in voter suppression and election rigging. It's the same party for all of these things. What the other party is guilty of is being complicit in all of the above by refusing to oppose it. Still bad but nowhere near the same.
• woggy 4mo ago
  Any reason to think that open models will not catch up, given enough time?
  • vineyardmike 4mo ago
    The article addresses a pretty compelling reason... Why would the makers of open models (mostly Chinese firms) continue to open them up, now that the value chain and economy shifts? Previously, it was a (Chinese) national goal to force the market to compress OpenAI/Anthropic margins (and compressing their revenue along the way), to ensure the Chinese had access to high quality models, and could afford to compete. Now there is an opportunity to usurp and be the international default, and claim the margin for themselves by closing their models. Beyond that, there is likely an upper bound of capability-per-parameter, which means that there is an upper bound on "local" models, and once you need the cloud, why would the government not target clouds next?
  • girvo 4mo ago
    Chinese model companies are already beginning to close, instead of opening. The latest big Qwen models are not open, for example. And it doesn't look like they will be, either.
    • thepasch 4mo ago
      MiniMax and Moonshot both literally just released the weights for their latest flagship models, a few weeks after DeepSeek did the same. One lab a pattern does not make.
  • zozbot234 4mo ago
    By all indications, Fable is way too big to feasibly host locally. Even Opus is probably near enough to the limit.
  • nijave 4mo ago
    I suspect it will lead to less open sourcing but at the same time that will drive on premise deployment demand from enterprises. If that happens, presumably the weights eventually make their way online...
• throwaway132448 4mo ago
  If you find yourself cheering for one billionaire versus another, you’re the definition of pathetic.
• pdantix 4mo ago
  with how the admin is talking about taking a stake in openai, it's so incredibly clear this is the government attempting to kneecap an openai competitor
• pu_pe 4mo ago
  It stinks to high heaven, especially considering how over-the-top security protocols were introduced with Fable. The US government is asserting its influence on the economy and showing Anthropic that their IPO will depend on bending the knee.
• andrewparker 4mo ago
  OP point out that OpenAI used the "too dangerous to release" marketing ploy with GPT-2... Positioning this as "both sides" have played this card. But at this time Dario was at OpenAI and was a co-author on the GPT-2 research paper announcing the model. The "too dangerous to release" approach has been him the whole time, at both companies.
  • karmasimida 4mo ago
    Dario's brain child
  • jeroenhd 4mo ago
    To be fair, generative AI is wrecking society in new and unexpected ways every week. From lies and misinformation to people choosing chatbots over therapy and relationships, there's a profound impact on society that will only get worse in the coming years. The look for junior programmers who are capable enough to get anything done when the AI is down has been depressing, and things are looking much worse for the years to come. Important safety features ("do not generate child porn", "statements should be factual or backed by evidence") were simply not part of the design of these systems and have yet to truly solved to this day, but AI companies decided to release these technologies onto the general public regardless of their glaring flaws. I like AI for its shitposting capabilities and its neat parlour tricks, but I also believe so far it has been a net negative for everyone but the richest minority of society who benefits from firing people and having computers do half their jobs badly. It's too late now, but in hindsight I do agree that these systems were too dangerous to release in this shape.
    • jrowen 4mo ago
      I feel like it could be a law that there is essentially no way to guarantee that AI is any more or less safe than humans. It kinda seems incompatible with what we understand to be "intelligence" which arguably requires a certain unpredictable freedom...Has a method of "baking in" such safety features even been conceptualized? Or is it just a matter of nurturing/raising/policing them after the fact and hoping for the best like with us? Kind of taking this a step further, what is the worst thing that an AI run amok could do to existentially threaten the human race? I feel like almost anything could be short-circuited by some form of "pulling the plug" before it got too far. But, hypothetically, if it were possible to launch nukes without human intervention, or with maybe a small amount that could be socially engineered, that seems plausible (or releasing some kind of super-pathogen that is stored in a lab somewhere). So, what if, along the lines of MAD doctrine and the plot of Battlestar Galactica, the best thing we could do for AI safety is just to engineer our other systems so that a hypothetical superhuman adversary could not use them against us? Which is just making our world safer all around rather than trying to kludge arbitrary limitations into an "intelligent" system. (This doesn't really solve AI child porn and fake news but those things are mostly just imaginative reflections of the people using them and you can't really fix that any more than you can stop people from doing it themselves)
• JimsonYang 4mo ago
  I seriously feel like there's easier ways for OpenAI to catch up to anthropic and it would be a waste of political capital that the idea of Sam pulling strings for this to happen seems highly unlikely
• MASNeo 4mo ago
  While this is regrettable the guardrails were rather sloppy and I managed to do things with Fable that really should not be possible. It seems with all the focus cyber and bio security, threat scenario analysis went out the door. I guess they will fix the guardrails and then open it up again.
  • trhway 4mo ago
    the bigger point i think stands - we're going to have a similar story with AI as for example the 40-bit encryption of the past and drones of today, i.e. sure export controlled and most probably regulated practically away for general public. I.e general license to possess/access 8B model max, and maximum 3 models summing to max 16B in total.
    • MASNeo 4mo ago
      Yes. Very much feels like the encryption story indeed. This is very normal in many industries. Explosives, space, chemicals etc. The difference is that still the bio and space hackers are few and SWE are plenty so there is more of a collective voice. I’d love to build a hobbyist space rocket. However, many tools and fuels required per my research can’t be obtained outside the US. So I didn’t even start.
  • IAmGraydon 4mo ago
    >I managed to do things with Fable that really should not be possible. Such as?
• CSMastermind 4mo ago
  > OpenAI did the same “too dangerous to release” song and dance for the awesome, world ending AI that was GPT-2. Wasn't that when Dario, et al were at the company. One way to view this is that OpenAI expelled the cultists and they went on to form their own organization that continued using the same tactics. Certainly some of the Anthropic press around Fable seems to me to be just marketing but I also think there's a core of people there who really believe it. I also think like all good advertising/lies there's some truth to the claims even if they're exaggerating.
• einrealist 4mo ago
  Nice summary. Reading this reminds me about the strong encryption discussion. > We optimize what we can measure, not what we actually want to achieve. We hope and pray that these are the same thing, but they often aren’t. He points out the core problem with LLMs. I believe it is impossible (or extremely expensive) to ensure that the models are aligned safely for everyone and any intention. And 'safe' can mean different things for a different audience.
• jhylau 4mo ago
  trump doesn't like dario given what he has said in the past.
• marsven_422 4mo ago
  [dead]
• deleted 4mo ago
  [deleted]
• agnosticmantis 4mo ago
  Counterintuitively, this is a huge win for misAnthropic and other closed labs in the US. They can nerf the models, ask for IDs from users and do what it takes to comply with whatever regulation they've been fighting for. Foreign labs releasing open source models won't be able to comply, and as a result open source models will remain stunted at pre-mythos levels or their use will be criminalized. We should look past the petty fights these closed labs have, and see their common interest in banning open source and/or local models.
  • dpe82 4mo ago
    Why would foreign (relative to the US) models suddenly sit still? There's enormous incentive to improve; surely they'll be able to figure out how just like their American counterparts? We've seen this movie before with crypto export bans in the 90s. The rest of the world caught up and then surpassed the US very quickly - and that was without the enormous financial incentives of AI.
    • sbmthakur 4mo ago
      Even without those incentives, the messaging is clear: you don't want your inference to be shut arbitrarily. Export controls are nothing new but a lot of people have underestimated them due to globalization and the general nature of software. This is a good opportunity for entities around the world to get their setup going.
    • boppo1 4mo ago
      The US will try to ban them, for being too dangerous or for being an IP violation[0] of some companies we've deemed too big to fail. [0] lmao how ironic
      • dpe82 4mo ago
        That wouldn't stop their development and use in the rest of the world...
• RamblingCTO 4mo ago
  Damn. I tried using it yesterday in a conversation about mixing my own carb drings and electrolytes (continuing from opus 4.6) but fable rejected it for whatever reason. Not sure how I could use fructose and maltodextrin for anything shady, but ok. And now it's gone and I couldn't even test it once! Dammit
• somesortofthing 4mo ago
  I've really come around to trusting OpenAI a lot more than Anthropic the past few months. Reading between the lines of his own output, Dario Amodei comes off as both a dogmatic believer in ASI as a perfect, infallible ruler for humanity and quite an extreme American nationalist. The company, likewise, looks to be in ideological lockstep. I could see them, say, allowing or consciously creating runaway ASI they believed was ideologically aligned with them. OpenAI seems generally less dogmatic and more practically oriented. There's really nothing particularly good about them, but you can at least predict how a normal company will act.
  • krackers 4mo ago
    You didn't even need to read between the lines, that was basically what the CEO stated point blank in interviews and in his writing. (I noted the same thing a few weeks back, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48341224 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48341224 but his recent blogposts should make it crystal clear if there was any lingering doubt).
  • Havoc 4mo ago
    >I've really come around to trusting OpenAI a lot more than Anthropic Pretty wild statement given the "Pathological liar" chat around the OAI leader
    • somesortofthing 4mo ago
      You can infer a pathological liar's true intentions from the incentives they find themselves subject to, but not a zealot's.
      • peter422 4mo ago
        Well this administration is full of pathological liars, so what are their true intentions with this?
      • mnicky 4mo ago
        So in summary, your statement is that you’ve “come around to trusting” this “pathological liar”?
• pjmlp 4mo ago
  This is why we must diversify our technology stack back to the 80's style of computing heterogeneity.
• tilltheend 4mo ago
  The government is playing into the whole "oohh Mythos and Fable are too dangerous, and you, Mr. Investor should understand powerful, alright, very dangerous and powerful, now go give all your money to Dario and his cronies, thank you very much!"
  • simianwords 4mo ago
    The post talks about this kind of rhetoric > Speaking of the HN/Reddit folks, lots of people are gleefully cackling about how Anthropic got what they deserved for their ‘marketing stunt’ with Mythos. As I’ve said before, this isn’t the first time we’ve had an AI CEO argue that something is ‘unsafe’ for personal gain. Do you not think it is time to give up the whole "it is hype" rhetoric and come to reality -- the models can actually be unsafe and naturally Fable is closed off and the government is pulling access.
    • IAmGraydon 4mo ago
      I think we should consider them unsafe when they show themselves to be unsafe. So far…nothing. Just like with the hype of businesses automating away their workforce. Nothing. Maybe you have evidence otherwise?
      • solenoid0937 4mo ago
        "So far, nothing?" All of the companies and nonprofits participating in Glasswing to issue a joint statement is "nothing?" Or do you have a conspiracy theory ready for that as well?
• temporaryacc2 4mo ago
  The excessive scepticism on Hacker News has poisoned any attempts at rational AI discourse. The American Government has weaponised state power in a clumsy, corrupt and punitive attack against Anthropic, in an escalating war over control of AI. Meanwhile, HN has anchored on "marketing hype" as the only possible explanation - all evidence is contorted to fit into this increasingly contrived explanation. Object level analysis is disregarded in favor of dunking on Anthropic. AI is a threat to your job, status, beliefs, and way of life. For HN, believing this truth is harder than coming up with rationalisations for why it MUST be untrue. I appreciate the grounded few on HN who continue to engage with object level analysis, and accept that the world is about to change in a pretty bizarre way.
  • echelon 4mo ago
    Most of the people on HN thinking this stuff is garbage won't be working in tech in five years. There simply won't be jobs for them. The risk is that all of these very incredibly smart and disgruntled people decide to do something about it. Elite overproduction, but instead as a result of enormous shift in supply side economics.
    • qsera 4mo ago
      Actually I am one of them, and I am thankful for the people who are true believers of AI marketing. Your payments and subscription keeps the LLMS free for people like me who use it as a better search and use it to learn a lot of new things that had no good documentation. I don't worry about losing my job. I worry about becoming useless. If you know what I am saying..
      • temporaryacc2 4mo ago
        If you do not pay for access to the latest models, your experience with AI is a 6-12 month lagging indicator as to current capabilities. Therefore, it is impossible to have a conversation with you about AI capabilities, because you are anchored on a ceiling that we've long since exceeded.
• airport_barfly 4mo ago
  Everyone's focusing on marketing and market manipulation here, but the real consequences are more serious IMO. If a volatile administration can ban you from running code that you wrote -- without any democratic processes like a law or lawsuit -- why would you build anything in the US?
  • simoncion 4mo ago
    > If a volatile administration can ban you from running code that you wrote -- without any democratic processes like a law or lawsuit -- why would you build anything in the US? That's not what's going on. But, what's going on has always been possible. Even to this day, there's software that's is subject to export controls. There's also an often-changing list of countries that US-based companies are prohibited from doing any business with. For software, this has been going on since the 1990s. "Weirdly", the US-based software business has been doing really well. Anthropic was instructed to prevent Foreign Nationals from using a subset of their software. Anthropic chose to prevent everyone from using that subset of their software. Anthropic had other options. One of those options was to gate access to the software behind the ID, biometrics, and -if present- passport capture that Big Tech seems to be very excited to do. I expect that -if they end up changing anything at all about access control- we'll see them doing something very similar to that in the coming weeks.
    • nijave 4mo ago
      >Anthropic chose to prevent everyone from using that subset of their software. >Anthropic had other options. Well, not exactly. They weren't given prior notice and a deadline to comply. That was really the only option to comply with the order. However, things may change in the future
• andai 4mo ago
  >custom harness Means you pay full price per token right? (Which I think works out to roughly 10x more than using Claude Code?) Actually, for enterprise I think it doesn't make a difference anymore, since they switched to per-token billing.
  • theahura 4mo ago
    No, we use subscriptions. We wrap the underlying Claude Code with ACP. See: https://github.com/tilework-tech/nori-cli https://github.com/tilework-tech/nori-cli
    • andai 4mo ago
      Thanks, TIL. I'm surprised about that. I'm not up to speed on the current situation (though I did find this, which may be of interest[0][1]), last I heard was a few months ago when they stopped banning people for using 3rd party software on the subs and started charging extra usage for it instead. In this case it's automating the official software, which was a grey area (e.g. claude -p). And is now apparently totally cool. Except seems to also be switching to extra usage on June 15th[0][1]. The ACP thing seems to be in the same category as claude -p, billing-wise, from what I gathered[2]. [0] https://support.claude.com/en/articles/15036540-use-the-claude-agent-sdk-with-your-claude-plan https://support.claude.com/en/articles/15036540-use-the-clau... [1] https://www.techtimes.com/articles/317625/20260602/anthropic-ends-subscription-subsidy-agents-june-15-credit-pool-replaces-flat-rate-access.htm https://www.techtimes.com/articles/317625/20260602/anthropic... [2] https://www.digitalapplied.com/blog/anthropic-claude-credit-overhaul-june-15-2026 https://www.digitalapplied.com/blog/anthropic-claude-credit-...
  • nijave 4mo ago
    Correct on Enterprise. Teams has a 150 user cap. On Enterprise you might end up saving money if the other harness is more efficient.
• andai 4mo ago
  https://www.cnbc.com/2026/06/05/trump-open-ai-altman-stake.html https://www.cnbc.com/2026/06/05/trump-open-ai-altman-stake.h... Circumstantial, but... timing is odd. It got me wondering if this means all big models are US-only now? Are they gonna do the same with GPT-5.6, etc? Seems pretty unlikely to me. So I expect Fable to come back pretty soon.
• smooc 4mo ago
  This should be a red herring for Europe (and others using US models). Every non-American company is now at a disadvantage against American companies. The implications can not be overstated.
  • dpe82 4mo ago
    As we learned with export restrictions on crypto in the 90s, that disadvantage will be short-lived and backfire in the long-run.
  • sajithdilshan 4mo ago
    It indeed is a wake up call. But at the same time the strong data protection laws, copyright and privacy laws make it extremely difficult for a European company to develop a frontier model. Activist lawyers can sue and drag startups for training their model on a news article and the legal expenses would be higher than the engineering costs. ChatGPT was released 4 years ago and still out of 27 countries in EU, only Mistral based in France has a model closer to a frontiers and IMO EU has already lost the race and still trying to catch up to yesterday models.
  • graemep 4mo ago
    Google Deepmind is headquartered in the UK and has R & D in multiple countries. How would the US ban non-nationals from using something that is largely developed outside the US by people who are not US nationals? Mistral might be a bit behind but this might give them a lot more business. Most of all, a lot more people will switch to Chinese models. They will catchup, soon enough. I have not had much of a chance to try Fable, but it did not seem better than Opus for what I tried it out on. Maybe its better on bigger jobs/vibe coding type tasks which is not something I do anyway.
    • cbg0 4mo ago
      The US can create sanctions with legal repercussions, the same way they've done with Iran or Cuba in the past.
      • 4mo ago
• fofoz 4mo ago
  You will miss the good old Europe that only regulated.
  • baq 4mo ago
    this is my take, I hope Brussels has people on the dialer from 6am today. mistral needs 50B euros pronto
• tamimio 4mo ago
  It turned out Amazon are the snitchers on anthropic after all Edit: if anthropic couldn’t resolve this matter, they can do something reallllly funny right now and open source it to the public :)
• tedggh 4mo ago
  With Anthropic history of using the news as their free marketing agency, I remain a bit skeptical. My guess is that something will be worked out in the next hours or days and Fable will be back.
• PeterStuer 4mo ago
  "Meanwhile, Anthropic’s competitors have friends up and down the administration — the Kushners are heavily invested in OpenAI, as an example.2 So another way to read this is that this is an opportunity for other labs to give Anthropic a black eye. Fable is, by all accounts, an incredibly strong model. Very convenient that it’s no longer available for consumers, especially right as Anthropic is about to IPO." This is both absolutely key, and also irrelevant. 'Security' is clearly a pretense, as otherwise the demand would not have been restricted to 'foreign nationals'. It is not like any US administration every trusted every 'US national'. But the reason for the restriction is basically irrelevant. The fact that it happened, should be the final wake up call for the EU to take 'Digital Sovereignty' serious. Not just in 'talk', but with actual commitments in budgets and effort.
  • zhoBEENG 4mo ago
    A requirement of digital sovereignty is the ability to build competitive digital companies. It seems unlikely to me at this point that the EU is going to turn that ship around.
    • solenoid0937 4mo ago
      This is the time for the EU to offer favorable terms to Anthropic and deferred regulation. Give 'em an escape hatch.
  • foltik 4mo ago
    > 'Security' is clearly a pretense, as otherwise the demand would not have been restricted to 'foreign nationals'. Given everything else this administration has done, you now decide to accept their stated intentions at face value?
• shevy-java 4mo ago
  But why depend and rely on AI? There are more and more posts coming up recently about AI being problematic. But people use it. It's strange. It's like hitting yourself with a hammer on the head, wondering why that hurts but you keep on doing it.
• vlad-asis 4mo ago
  [flagged]
• megous 4mo ago
  Oh, so that's why. Well, at least it managed to finish most of the work on one of my pet projects yesterday. :) Looks like the weekly limits again reset prematurely during this change. Interesting how this works.
• rurban 4mo ago
  I just call it Flaky 5. Only works sometimes. Or not at all
• zkmon 4mo ago
  > run a ton of agents in parallel most of the time What makes you think everyone (and government) should play along and align with your way of dependency on AI? Not even 1% of the people use AI the way you do. Fable model is not a basic need. Government represents the average Joe. You could also say "I make a ton of nuke weapons and this government has stopped the public sharing of how to make them!".
• Havoc 4mo ago
  >This was announced on 5:21 PM on a Friday. Sorta a suspicious time. Whenever someone does something intentionally on a Friday evening, my first thought is ‘o, the markets.’ The insider trading kleptocrat has found a new toy
  • zahlman 4mo ago
    Markets were calm in after-hours trading. It's not as if there is nobody paying attention. That would be a massive inefficiency that couldn't realistically have persisted all the way to 2026, especially not with the introduction of AI to the trading world.
  • efficax 4mo ago
    anthropic is a private company, so i'm not sure which market you mean. their shares probably trade on secondary markets in low volumes but it would be strange for them to make decisions based on that trading.
• hmokiguess 4mo ago
  My theory is that this is about setting up a precedent for control, the "foreign" framing is especially revealing in this direction imo. Lots of countries are discussing "Sovereignty AI strategies" right now. The weird part for me is the 30 days retention change, if this was a calculated theatre, then what part did that play? Wondering if that was also an ask from the govt just not disclosed by them.
• duffydotsvg 4mo ago
  Disagree with the popular conclusions that this is either calculated anti-marketing or politically-motivated axe grinding. Both theories might carry some weight, but they belie the bigger picture. If you believe AI will be a determinant of economic growth, defense capacity, scientific advancement, and geopolitical supremacy over the next few decades, then state supervision/control was always inevitable. There's already precedent in nuclear tech, chip tech, aerospace tech, etc. In theory, the stakes here are 100x higher. USA and China will do whatever they can to get a competitive edge over the other. Meaning this is probably just the first salvo in an ongoing series of similar events. At the end of the day, I'm not sure any of it will matter. All signs point to the models being basically impossible to contain.
  • timmg 4mo ago
    I guess it will be interesting if, in a week or two, OpenAI launches a "Fable class" model and it isn't blocked by the government.
• drevil-v2 4mo ago
  This kills the entire enterprise market for AI models better than Opus 4.8 1) No one is going to build any workflows/capabilities that could have the underlying intelligence rug pulled instantly by a bureaucracy or malevolent politician. 2) Even if a company was silly enough to take on the risk, is Anthropic going to ask all their enterprise customers to provide passports for all their employees and then setup individual Claude accounts for each and every employee of each and every enterprise customer in order to gatekeep access to Mythos? Because a plain ole api key no longer cuts it
  • ojosilva 4mo ago
    This is the first impression I got, a glass ceiling on AI that will hit the market hard. Timing was right at the late Friday's let's-avoid-the-crash point, we'll see how this flies on Monday. But it's also, as sibling comments mentioned, a bend-the-knee between Government and Anthropic. Once OpenAI catches up, and Anthropic lawyers-up as well, it will probably be reversed or morphed into a "models must have the US seal of AI-approval and, therefore and hereafter, we AI-approve the new US-verified Fable 5.1" - which will coincide with a at-large deployment at the DoD, Pentagon, and friends. Otherwise the Chinese will catch-up and, heavens forbid!
  • dgellow 4mo ago
    And what if the US government does the same for Opus or other models? No model is safe from being banned that way
  • vrganj 4mo ago
    For American AI models better than Opus 4.8. The much-decried EU AI Act provides a safe, predictable regulatory framework to base ones AI development on. It provides legal stability compared to unpredictable arbitrary decisions by the US executive. If AI companies have any sort of sense in them, they'd be well-advised to consider relocating to Europe.
    • mnicky 4mo ago
      > If AI companies have any sort of sense in them, they'd be well-advised to consider relocating to Europe. Too late now. They wouldn't be allowed to relocate in the name of national security.
• FrustratedMonky 4mo ago
  Occam's Razor. This is more about a vindictive government, than the model capabilities. And, on other side of coin, it is more great publicity.
• resters 4mo ago
  [flagged]
  • zhoBEENG 4mo ago
    To be clear, the restriction is not to native-born citizens of the US but citizens of the US in general. David Sacks is a US citizen.
    • resters 4mo ago
      Sacks fraudulently obtained citizenship papers but the next administration will likely review the case and revoke his citizenship, which will make him eligible for deportation. Sacks can choose to self-deport on his own, which will help his chances if he ever decides to re-apply for citizenship or entry into the US.
      • zhoBEENG 4mo ago
        I am almost afraid to ask, but do you have a source? When I put your claim in a couple of search engines all I get is your comment here.
        • resters 4mo ago
          I'm referring to the process described here: https://www.dhs.gov/cbphome https://www.dhs.gov/cbphome
          • zhoBEENG 4mo ago
            Sorry, I mean about David Sacks fraudulently obtaining citizenship.
  • dgellow 4mo ago
    That wouldn't have helped, the US government would still ban the model
• IAmGraydon 4mo ago
  While I agree with much of this, the author seems to continually ignore one little detail: Fable was cut off for foreign nationals, not for everyone.
• ethagnawl 4mo ago
  > Some people over on HN and Reddit are already talking about how this represents the high water mark for what the government will ‘allow’ people to access. You can have all the demand in the world, and it won’t matter a lick if the government just won’t let you have it. Black market LLMs are straight out of a William Gibson story.
  • Avicebron 4mo ago
    Welcome to Hacker News
    • ethagnawl 4mo ago
      Thanks! I've really enjoyed my first sixteen years here!
• fmdv 4mo ago
  [flagged]
• ergl 4mo ago
  A summary of HN comments, posted on HN to generate even more comments. Very meta.
  • nijave 4mo ago
    Hopefully compiled, analyzed, and written with AI
• fallinditch 4mo ago
  I'm looking forward to Opus 4.9
• softwaredoug 4mo ago
  The problem is it’s arbitrary executive action It’s not a question of regulate or not regulate. It’s whether it’s ok for the president to not like your company and screw with you. It’s fun to point out all the Schadenfreude around Anthropic here. But that missed the dangerous precedent of the administration using export controls to punish political enemies. Tech companies should see this as an existential threat. Not just point at Anthropic and laugh.
• kator 4mo ago
  Next up, you must login to ID.me to use AI and providers will be required to retain every session for analysis.
• shul 4mo ago
  this will end up helping Antropic
• eldude 4mo ago
  Lots of sophistry here. Trump’s reputation as a 1st class negotiator is the lens through which to understand. This is simultaneously many things and it’s best to view them as a negotiated package: - No foreign nationals: not subject to US law (locality notwithstanding) -> bolsters America First which is the primary role of the government, accountability to its citizens - Part of a US citizen AI dividend (not cash but access). Yes Nationals are not always citizens but that’s just why it’s defensible bc it bolsters the former under the guise of the DoD’s purview on the latter. Primary point here is leverage. Nationals can have their visas revoked. - Semi-legit defense concern that bypasses regulation: stays in the executive, no 5y drawn out deliberations by congressional committees where many are clearly influenced by foreign interests (logistically Trump would be a fool to pursue the latter over the former) - Anthropic receives the greatest marketing stamp of approval in AI history (the DoD fears the power of what we’ve created) - Anthropic avoids truly punitive government action. FAFO. Not defending the govt here, but Trump has done nothing historically novel here. - Within the next month or probably the next week (save this post), Anthropic reenables Fable access gated by drivers license verification (no fly lists will exist, which we effectively surrendered awhile ago, legality notwithstanding) - Anthropic IPOs with the only DoD grade model (OpenAI doesn’t have this, yet) & firmly acquiesces as an American company first and foremost - America firmly establishes itself as the AI world leader (both PR wise and going forward from a gating perspective). - Corporations will nationalize for access, taxes will flow, AI dividends will flourish - Both Trump & Anthropic will come out looking like titans battling and winning their own respective victories and it’s all pre-negotiated theater (Anthropic’s hand will have been coerced but not forced. They will come out ahead, US govt maintains is legal supremacy, Anthropic maintains its technical supremacy, this is the repeated lens from which all of this has flowed going back at least the last year, probably much longer) Everyone comes out looking awesome in the long run. The only matter in which they look bad is through the lens of public opinion, not in real measurable outcomes. This is PR laundering with real existential stakes for both parties.
• torstenvl 4mo ago
  This is an extremely low quality, profanity-laden, ideologically compromised whinefest, and it doesn't belong on Hacker News.
• giardini 4mo ago
  Yet another bitchfest about "the current administration", i.e., Donald Trump.
• dudeinhawaii 4mo ago
  I don't want to pile onto the conspiracy thinking but I was just wondering how Anthropic was going to foot the bill for the clearly larger and more expensive model being run on millions of Claude Code subscriptions, subsidized until the 22nd. I thought for sure they'd turn it off sooner rather than later because the deadline would create a rush to get as much Fable usage as possible. So, it would be logical to utilize any number of approaches to turn off usage... It would be massively beneficial to Anthropic to have the government be the big baddie here. I'll withhold judgement until Fable comes back online - because it will. Will it come back online "unfortunately" just after the 22nd and, shucks, everyone will have to pay for token usage now?
• robeym 4mo ago
  Having used and watched others use Fable, it's clear to me that the standard of care for these models done by Anthropic pre-release was nothing like their previous releases. It seemed like shortcuts were taken to get it released. Maybe the models are changing faster than their team can adapt, and maybe the government responded as quickly as they did because of their relationship with Anthropic. Regardless, I think regulation was appropriate here. Anthropic can take the time to refine and improve their internal models to have a more successful release next time. It is normal for the government to restrict potentially dangerous companies if the level of care seems below what is acceptable in the US. We've seen it a lot recently with FAA grounding rocket companies. I don't feel it is cruel treatment just cause it's Anthropic
  • reasonableklout 4mo ago
    How was this release more rushed than previous ones? I have the opposite impression using Fable, behavior-wise it is much more polished than Opus 4.7 was at launch.
    • robeym 4mo ago
      I think it felt more polished, otherwise they wouldn't have released it. Fable took more shortcuts, lied more, had stabilizing safeguards removed, and just did what it wanted more than other models.