9 ms·

Fable 5 is Back

• MoonWalk 4mo ago
  Whatever that means.
  • extr 4mo ago
    [Future voice]
• donaldstuck 4mo ago
  Coding is solved once again!
  • bombcar 4mo ago
    Hyped! Time to start boiling lakes! In the few minutes I had with it I didn’t notice any impressive differences beyond it complaining loudly that I can’t talk about excel cells with “yellow backgrounds”.
  • 0xy 4mo ago
    Fable will not code at all. https://x.com/AnthropicAI/status/2072163884430229756 https://x.com/AnthropicAI/status/2072163884430229756
• echelon 4mo ago
  Here we go! Might need a few more Claude subscriptions.
• astlouis44 4mo ago
  [flagged]
  • esailija 4mo ago
    crashed when I clicked play campaign
    • astlouis44 4mo ago
      Try picking a map from the map picker up on the top left drop down section, then click g-23 and you'll be matched against bots.
  • orphea 4mo ago
    This self-promotion is not relevant to the discussion.
    • astlouis44 4mo ago
      Wrong, it sure is relevant because it was ported with Fable 5. Did you even read my post? Also just a suggestion - try not to hate on others so much, it'll make your life more pleasant!
• aliasxneo 4mo ago
  > Until July 7, you can use up to 50% of your plan's weekly usage limit on Fable 5. If you hit your limit, you can continue on Fable 5 with usage credits. Fable 5 draws down usage faster than Opus 4.8. This is what I see in my Claude Code terminal. I don't feel like that 50% rule was there before?
  • hagbarth 4mo ago
    It was not.
  • matheusmoreira 4mo ago
    They didn't reset the usage either! Good luck!
    • aroman 4mo ago
      This makes me think they really are quite capacity constrained at the moment. I had assumed they were primarily limiting it to entice people to upgrade, but I feel like these limits are so low and so temporary (especially over July 4th weekend in the US) that people will barely get a chance to get "used to it" and then think: "man, I can't live without this, I'll pay for API pricing".
      • timpera 4mo ago
        That's strange, because they were seemingly way less capacity constrained lately, raised limits and removed the peak hours usage. It's crazy to think that even spending $1.25 billion a month to rent GPUs from SpaceX didn't do much to improve the situation.
        • atonse 4mo ago
          I don't know, I feel like for a few weeks before the SpaceX datacenter, I was just constantly checking my weekly limits. And now after that miraculously, I rarely even come close to hitting my weekly limits. and I still have 5-7 claudes open a day (defaulting to Opus 4.8 xhigh, sometimes ultracode). So I feel that the additional datacenter caused them to just ease up a bit. But demand is also insane, so who knows...
• recursive 4mo ago
  This is getting served with a certificate Firefox says was created by an unknown issuer. It's possible I'm getting hit by a corporate middle-box, but then I'd expect to get this on every single host name.
  • cevn 4mo ago
    twitter? are u sure it's not ur corporate?
    • recursive 4mo ago
      Update: It is my company's middleware box. I'm not sure why I'm not seeing this flagged on other sites. Update2: They're blocking all (not HN!) social media now because someone got catfished on whatsapp or something.
      • fuomag9 4mo ago
        Maybe they are blocking just Claude?
      • kube-system 4mo ago
        those MITM firewalls can have different configurations for different sites
• fishgoesblub 4mo ago
  Was confused, thinking I somehow missed the release of the game Fable 4, only to be disappointed when I saw this is about Claude LLM crap.
  • recursive 4mo ago
    It's kind of like that time "crypto" changed it's meaning to cryptocurrencies and NFTs.
  • HeckFeck 4mo ago
    Peter Molyneux continues to re-invent himself. His newest "god game" claims to have the ability to code any game you like, on demand. Just as you'd expect from an omnipotent deity!
• mlitwiniuk 4mo ago
  I have to admit that when it was blocked, I canceled my max plan and asked for a refund. It felt like someone took away my previous toy. So I'm happy it's back again; I upgraded to max again. Coding aside, but Claude Design is phenomenal - for both new designs and redesigning existing UIs. So my customers will face a new wave of refreshed screens all over the place in coming days ;)
  • coneonthefloor 4mo ago
    > So my customers will face a new wave of refreshed screens all over the place in coming days How do you determine the changes to make? Do you A/B test? How do you measure success? What is your product? How many customers do you have?
    • mlitwiniuk 4mo ago
      My product is AuditBadger.com - it's an AI-assisted compliance management platform (ISO27001 & SOC2) that guides you through the whole process (with everything a small business might want from such software). Having a few dozen customers allows me to still care about them personally and do onboarding for each and every one of them. During those onboardings, catch-ups, or weekly calls, I see where they struggle. This is how I determine what to work on next. There's no clear measurement of success beyond user satisfaction, though they every now and then praise me a little for UI/UX improvements. With Claude Design, I've got my design system set up (also by Claude scanning the repo); I upload a screenshot of the area I'm not happy with, prompt with some additional remarks, and after a couple of iterations, I get a proposal, which is always better than what I come up with in the first place.
      • coneonthefloor 4mo ago
        Site does look great. I’ve not used Claude Design. How much do you feel like you were able to give your own personal touch to it? I ask as I see many vibe coded products that look well but are very generic. It signals vapourware to me. But honestly your site looks a cut above. Do you have a design background? Also is the design system you mentioned public?
• rvz 4mo ago
  They also announced a promotional offer in here: [0] > For a limited time, you can use our newest model—Claude Fable 5—at no extra cost as part of your subscription plan. > During the promotional period, you can use up to 50% of your weekly subscription limits on Claude Fable 5 at no extra cost. So it lasts for a week until July 7, 2026 at 11:59:59 PM PT. Then they will pull the plug on that. So it sounds like a great time to roll the dice, pull that lever, spin that roulette wheel and spend as many tokens as possible, at no extra cost at the Anthropic casino's latest upgraded slot machine called Fable 5. Available to gamblers while capacity and availability lasts. Most importantly have fun and don't blow up your budget. [0] https://support.claude.com/en/articles/15424964-claude-fable-5-promotional-access https://support.claude.com/en/articles/15424964-claude-fable...
• bushido 4mo ago
  The loss of trust in using US based model's is unlikely to come back though. Anthropic with it's hyped doomsday messaging, and the administration falling for it (at best), has eroded a lot of trust and has triggered an arms race of sorts.
  • matheusmoreira 4mo ago
    Here's to OpenAI and a chinese firms bringing some much needed competition.
    • logancbrown 4mo ago
      Amusing to see OpenAI being the "good guy" in the end
      • matheusmoreira 4mo ago
        They didn't become the good guy, Anthropic became the bad guy instead. The good guys are the chinese firms releasing open weight models.
        • captainbland 4mo ago
          There's no good guys, just entities you might be able to get marginal value from, who in turn want to get marginal value from you
          • matheusmoreira 4mo ago
            No. The "good guys" are the ones who provide permanent value: open weight models, hardware we can afford, purchase and own. The good guys offer sovereignty. The "you'll buy intelligence from us on a meter" rent seekers are technofeudalists. Just a bunch of "you'll own nothing and you'll be happy" oligarchs who must be resisted at all costs. Anthropic had a reputation for ethics at first but it quickly became clear it was just like OpenAI but with a patronizing attitude. The fact China is releasing open weight models will never not be amusing. I expected better from the USA.
• himata4113 4mo ago
  I believe they will keep fable available, but either reduce the usage to 25% or even 10% otherwise I don't think they would have put that much effort into flushing out a system like that.
• mccoyb 4mo ago
  By the gods! The next 20 minutes will be the most consequential of my life ...
• JoshGlazebrook 4mo ago
  I really hope they reconsider adding Fable access back to the subscription plans, at least the 20x plan. I know it was the original intention when the 14 day (I think) time frame was originally announced, and they were working to keep it on subscription plans. But no word if thats even a thing anymore?
  • ceejayoz 4mo ago
    Only for the next week. > Fable 5 will be included for up to 50% of weekly usage limits through July 7, after which it will be available via usage credits.
    • JoshGlazebrook 4mo ago
      Right, but originally they announced a period of time it was included in plans, and then they were "working hard" to extend the period and eventually make it a permanent fixture of the plans.
      • ceejayoz 4mo ago
        I'd imagine that depends on how it winds up being used.
      • gregw134 4mo ago
        I'd imagine they want to do price segmentation. Sell the best model for $50k a year to corporations willing to pay full price, keep the rest of us on a lower tier. Gotta pay for that infra somehow.
        • skerit 4mo ago
          I just don't really understand the entire strategy behind this. Or their horrible, horrible communication. Because right now it's as if Fable/Mythos 5 is "the end of the line". It's as if this is the best their models are ever going to be. So what the hell are we going to get next? All of their models will forever inch closer to Fable, but never reach it? That doesn't make any sense. It all seems so dramatic. Instead of just saying honestly "Look, this model is a beast to run, but we're striving to reach the same quality in a cheaper model down the line" all we get is "Oh my god, it's so big and scary, and it costs so much to run, woe is me!"
• kodefreeze 4mo ago
  It's time for gpt 5.6 to come out too now.
  • michelb 4mo ago
    That’s also going to be limited most likely. I don’t like governments deciding who can have the best products. I can’t shake the feeling there is money changing hands for getting on the access list as well with this administration.
    • jiggawatts 4mo ago
      Look, even if in this one instance Trump isn’t simply asking get his beak wet, that is the less believable scenario. When “not cartoonishly corrupt” becomes hard to believe due to firmly established character and endless precedent, then it almost doesn’t matter if everything is on the level in this one matter. The trust has been lost, undermining the ability to govern. The fact that he’s still in power with firm support from everyone else that matters is all you need to know about how rotten to the core things are in your country. America is no longer the greatest, or the best. Except at grift…
  • d2kx 4mo ago
    Pretty much all of OpenAI is on vacation this week.
• moralestapia 4mo ago
  Definitely NOT a marketing ploy.
  • Human-Cabbage 4mo ago
    Yes, just like New Coke back in the 80s. Genius 4D marketing strategy.
• throw1234567891 4mo ago
  For how long?
  • singingtoday 4mo ago
    A week
• petra 4mo ago
  Maybe, for some projects, instead of generating code with it, it would be useful to generate a plan and the loop(tests/formal verification),because those take much less tokens than a full project, and than use the loop using the older models ?
  • Congeec 4mo ago
    Yes, I've been using Opus to write a plan and fanout sonnet subagents to implement it. Cheaper and faster
    • hirvi74 4mo ago
      What about quality? Being cheaper and faster, while great and all, is less valuable than quality to me.
      • dakolli 4mo ago
        All the code an LLM produces is of questionable quality, so I'm not sure why you'd prioritize quality over speed. Speed is their only value add.
        • zakisaad 4mo ago
          This is a wild take. All cars can perfectly drive around a track, so why would you ever want an F1 car?
        • icedchai 4mo ago
          Have you compared models across providers? The quality, for the same task, varies tremendously. If you don't prioritize quality you're wasting your own time when you inevitably have to re-do the code...
        • mohamedkoubaa 4mo ago
          All code is of questionable quality. There I fixed it
      • 4mo ago
• NoboruWataya 4mo ago
  I am only a casual Clause (Pro) user and I am confused by the messaging, maybe I'm missing something obvious. > Until July 7, you can use up to 50% of your plan's weekly usage limit on Fable 5. Does this mean that being able to use Fable on my subscription is a time-limited promotion? I have a subscription, why can't I just... use the model? Is it the case that going forward a subscription will only give you access to older models and newer ones will require additional payment?
  • internet2000 4mo ago
    Fable is more expensive to run, and they haven't figured out the GTM strategy just yet. I imagine they'll see how much people actually use to see if it's still worth subsidizing on the Max/Pro plans, or if they make an extra tier above.
  • deleted 4mo ago
    [deleted]
  • hagbarth 4mo ago
    No you will still get access to newer models on the subscription. You should have access to Sonnet 5, which is new. It's just Mythos class models that are API only. For now... You never know with these companies.
  • mwigdahl 4mo ago
    During the initial release, they indicated you'd be able to use Fable 5 as part of your subscription for a limited period of time, and then it would require usage credits. They also did say at that time that they hoped to make it a part of the subscription plans again at some point after that. For this return, they've extended the usage period to July 7, but limited you to 50% of your usage quota, and have not restated the desire to make it permanently part of the subscription plans at some point. I still have hope, but it's not moving in the right direction to be sure.
    • BoorishBears 4mo ago
      > After July 7, 2026, Claude Fable 5 is no longer included in your plan’s weekly usage limits. You can keep using Claude Fable 5 through usage credits, which let you pay for usage beyond what your plan includes. They stated the desire not to bring it to the subscription.
• biffles 4mo ago
  I applaud the engineers that work at Anthropic, who have created both amazing products and uniquely intelligent models -- but I really shake my head at some of their business decisions and public comms which have done a lot to damage their trustworthiness in the business and developer community. In just the past month: they decided to silently downgrade (instead of simply refusing) responses related to machine learning and other 'competitive' topics [1]. Then, they were caught fingerprinting certain request environments in a hidden way [2]. And now, once Fable is re-released after much frustration among its customers, they are providing it for a shorter period than promised (mostly over a major holiday period), with more stringent safety classifiers and a 50% haircut to usage limits. It's hard to not view the organization as bizarrely adversarial to its customers. I was incredibly supportive of Anthropic during the supply chain debacle, as I viewed it as the capricious actions of a corrupt admin. But now I am wondering if it was just a response to the ineptness of their business leaders. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48467896 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48467896 [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48734373 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48734373
  • joshuamorton 4mo ago
    This is exceedingly easy to explain: demand is way too high, and the pro/max plans are loss leaders. I've paid a total of $20 and in 10 days, my cost, according to Claude code's cost tracker is like $400, which actually doesn't include all the use I've done. Which is to say, if I continue my current usage over the month, I'll be getting $1000 of Claude for $20. It's difficult to be mad at someone selling me a $20 for two quarters, even if they're putting a bunch of restrictions on how and when I can do that.
  • A_D_E_P_T 4mo ago
    I'm with you there. The way they treat their customers is high-handed and disdainful. I'm gradually moving to GLM 5.2 on Opencode. It's the barest fraction of the price, and it's surprisingly capable. I notice very little difference vs. Opus 4.8.
  • rvz 4mo ago
    > It's hard to not view the organization as bizarrely adversarial to its customers. I was incredibly supportive of Anthropic during the supply chain debacle, as I viewed it as the capricious actions of a corrupt admin. But now I am wondering if it was just a response to the ineptness of their business leaders. From the start Anthropic have been hostile to its own customers, and also trained on pirated books and had to settle north of $1.5B avoiding a $100B+ worth of damages if found liable. Then they attempted and are still pursing against powerful open weight models by asking governments for regulatory changes that effectively ban the release of them - because it undermines their own moat (lol) and business model. Now not only they were caught silently fingerprinting their customers requests, they are now placing ID verification for using their own powerful models, which could apply to everyone else for using powerful LLMs. There just is no point in defending this company at all. Anthropic are NOT your friends.
• andsoitis 4mo ago
  What’s the fable of this story?
• BoorishBears 4mo ago
  > After July 7, 2026, Claude Fable 5 is no longer included in your plan’s weekly usage limits. You can keep using Claude Fable 5 through usage credits, which let you pay for usage beyond what your plan includes. This is the real story.
• jw1224 4mo ago
  > When Claude Fable 5 declines a request, the Messages API returns stop_reason: "refusal" as a successful HTTP 200 response, not an error This is precisely what comes to mind when I think “successful”.
  • apitman 4mo ago
    Is refusal something that can happen mid-stream, after status and headers have been received? I haven't looked at the API
  • speedgoose 4mo ago
    A missed opportunity to use the HTTP 451 status code. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTTP_451 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTTP_451
    • xpct 4mo ago
      5 years ago, we may have expected that robots would write APIs that utilized every HTTP code, what we got was a json with a stringified error field..
• deleted 4mo ago
  [deleted]
• levkk 4mo ago
  I cancelled Claude. The harness is kinda broken, GPT 5.5 is good, and GLM 5.2/Deepseek is good too (with pi, especially). Just not worth the trouble. And I'm not going to pay two subscriptions.
  • throwaway8388 4mo ago
    Haven’t played with alternative harnesses. What’s broken in your opinion and what benefit brings pi for you?
  • tuwtuwtuwtuw 4mo ago
    How is the harness broken?
    • krystofee 4mo ago
      its bloated, try /radio
      • redsocksfan45 4mo ago
        [dead]
    • megous 4mo ago
      Recent update resulted in 100% permanent CPU load in the background, when doing nothing with the app. Basically unusable on a notebook (hot+noise, unexcusable for do nothing "api/command coordination" terminal app). Dunno if they fixed it, since I could not use it on the notebook and I do not have this issue on my workstation.
• SilverElfin 4mo ago
  Did they remove that policy that forces retention of data for fable, even if you use it on AWS or elsewhere
  • VortexLain 4mo ago
    Nope
• sarmasamosarma 4mo ago
  [dead]
• throwaw12 4mo ago
  I keep getting this error mid agent loop: "Error: claude-fable-5 is temporarily unavailable" Planning went well, started working on the code, reading the code - all went fine But when it started writing the code or executing the bash, sarted tetting lots of these errors
• stavarotti 4mo ago
  I'll be using it tonight but grudgingly so. Grudgingly because after July 7th, I'm not going to all of a sudden, start paying API prices (and maybe that's the problem) when I'm used to a subscription that gives me multiples in comparative value. Perhaps this is the fabled "token economics will come for everyone this year" that I've been reading about? In any case, I'll use the hell out of it to extract as much as I can, then back to the trusted partners Opus 4.6 and Sonnet 4.6 (for however long they remain available).
  • conartist6 4mo ago
    [flagged]
  • matltc 4mo ago
    I locked my default model to opus 4.6 around the time of the nerfs. Such better results compared to 4.7+ That's enshittification for ya I guess
    • jatora 4mo ago
      The claims of 4.6 or 4.7 being superior genuinely make me laugh. Adapt your workflow if needed and use the superior model instead of just kneejerk believing they actually enshittified a model with zero evidence except vibes on an undeterministic model output. Jesus.
      • dijit 4mo ago
        Bro, it's all vibes. Models get dumber during the day and smarter during the night, I swear. but I'm not willing to scientifically verify this, so I'm just going to go off of vibes- just like everyone seems to be doing with projects.
        • rplnt 4mo ago
          These vibes are pretty obvious even with casual use. Weekends are so much better.
        • 4mo ago
• hmokiguess 4mo ago
  > There's an issue with the selected model (claude-fable-5[1m]). It may not exist or you may not have access to it. Run /model to pick a different model.
• maldev 4mo ago
  It won't even review a cyber security blog post I wrote. Absolutely worthless and pitiful guardrails.
  • InsideOutSanta 4mo ago
    I'm having it review a project Opus 4.8 created. No security review, just "look for general issues, performance problems, missing features, etc." It spawned about twenty background tasks. It's still going, but so far, one has completed, and four have failed with guardrail messages. Nothing special, just stuff like reviewing the API: Fable 5's safeguards flagged this message (https://www.anthropic.com/legal/aup https://www.anthropic.com/legal/aup). They may flag safe, normal content as well. These measures let us bring you Mythos-level capabilities sooner, and we're working to refine them. Claude Code can't respond to this request with Fable 5. Try rephrasing the request in a new session or change your model. This is incredibly stupid, particularly because I didn't write the request in the first place. Fable wrote it when it spawned the background task. How am I supposed to rephrase it? Fable probably told itself to do a security review, and then failed itself for trying to do a security review, and now it's telling me not to tell it to do a security review.
    • trunnell 4mo ago
      Blame Amazon and the White House
      • ljlolel 4mo ago
        Nah it was refusing plenty of stuff before the white house
        • InsideOutSanta 4mo ago
          It did, but it's a lot worse now. A fricken lot.
    • ignoramous 4mo ago
      > Fable wrote it when it spawned the background task. How am I supposed to rephrase it? Can the harness to auto-rephrase? I imagine, doing so will burn through tokens though.
• brucejackson 4mo ago
  Happy to see that Fable is back, was sad to see it go after getting to use it for only 1.5 days before. Add on top sonnet 5 availability and coding is looking fine again.
• ismailmaj 4mo ago
  I'm not getting the Opus 4.8 switch for coding, supposedly given how fast I reached the usage limit, which is kind of nice.
• Jweb_Guru 4mo ago
  Not super impressed, but I doubt my requests are getting routed to Opus -- it just doesn't seem to be as good at mathematics as it is at code (I found this to be the case last time it was released as well).
  • Jweb_Guru 4mo ago
    Yeah confirmed with more usage today. It seems ~ on par with (if not slightly worse than) 5.5 on math-oriented stuff.
• CommanderData 4mo ago
  Anthropics marketing dept were a tad overzealous with how they positioned this model, now it's biting them back. If this was just another model without the hype doom marketing, I don't think we'd be where we are.
• anotheraccount9 4mo ago
  Not exactly. Every time I ask something using Fable, it switches to Opus. The subjects (and I tried many) seem to be irrelevant. Basically, I can't use Fable.
  • LoganDark 4mo ago
    Check your CLAUDE.md, etc. for any of the banned topics or anything adjacent. Also check your recent Git commit history, if you're running the agent in a repository, as well. The classifier trips on anything anywhere in context, so those could be sources of rejections.
    • iririririr 4mo ago
      adding rules for the agent to ignore version control and never touch git files or commands (except for git log) improve my slop coding 100%. no risk of sneak commits and much less token wasted.
      • LoganDark 4mo ago
        Claude Code automatically adds some of the most recent git commit messages to the system prompt. This was discovered when having git commit messages containing any OpenClaw information would result in Anthropic billing your extra usage (since they have a vendetta or something)
  • 0xy 4mo ago
    It cannot be used for ANY coding tasks, lol. https://x.com/AnthropicAI/status/2072163884430229756 https://x.com/AnthropicAI/status/2072163884430229756
    • usef- 4mo ago
      It can. They meant "some coding tasks". Not "all coding tasks"
      • 4mo ago
• maipen 4mo ago
  If the future of SOTA is handicaped models, then what's the point? Writing code is already okay for current open models like GLM, QWEN. I only need SOTA models for slop reviews, clean-ups and helping me with things I am not good at. I have been extremelly happy with the results of cheaper models recently. Composer 2.5 is a beast, fast and cheap. The upcoming Grok will probably be even better, since cursor helped trainning it. Anthropic will lose market share quickly if they can't do better than this fable shit show...
• trunnell 4mo ago
  Their post detailing the timeline and their actions since reinforce my belief that Anthropic is among the most trustworthy AI companies. https://www.anthropic.com/news/redeploying-fable-5 https://www.anthropic.com/news/redeploying-fable-5
  • vonneumannstan 4mo ago
    Its like saying Pinochet was one of the least murderous authoritarian dictators. The bar is low...
    • signatoremo 4mo ago
      Where are Chinese companies on your scale? Mistral?
      • vonneumannstan 4mo ago
        You can assume they're more or less co-opted by the CCCP so how much do you trust Xi? Mistral isn't even a real player.
  • hack1312 4mo ago
    [flagged]
• christkv 4mo ago
  Now the Chinese models can start the distilling process again so I can get a better small parameter local model.
• pheggs 4mo ago
  I was wrong, I thought they would only go for B2B already. But instead they will remove it from the subscription and price it at 50$/mtok. Compared to GLM-5.2 for 4.40$ that's quite a gap
  • olcarl75 4mo ago
    how does GLM-5.2 fare against fable/opus 4.8? I am thinking about moving my 5x subscription either towards the GPT equivalent or the GLM one (I heard GLM gives you 20x the token usage for the same price of anthropics 5x)
    • pheggs 4mo ago
      I find it difficult to compare LLMs in general. It will do better in some cases, worse in others. As far as I see it, most of it is marketing. You can try it out extremely cheaply though through their API and OpenCode. I personally would recommend it.
      • olcarl75 4mo ago
        this makes sense. I will give it a try via opencode and see how does it do.
    • solenoid0937 4mo ago
      GLM is Sonnet 5 level, maybe slightly below. Probably Opus 4.5 level if you want an Opus comparison. It's a good model that gets things done but it's just not comparable to Opus and a very very far cry from Fable. It does poorly with long horizon or very complex agentic tasks, but it's great and even cheaper than Sonnet for quick sessions.
      • pheggs 4mo ago
        I dont buy that, mainly because in blind tests where people dont know which model was used and choose a result, this does not seem to hold true
• dang 4mo ago
  Related ongoing thread: Claude Fable 5 Promotional Access - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48751978 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48751978 - July 2026 (63 comments) Recent and related: Department of Commerce has lifted export controls on Claude Fable 5 and Mythos 5 - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48740771 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48740771 - June 2026 (625 comments)
• pkoird 4mo ago
  I gave it a book on human consciousness I was writing and it flagged it. This model is hilariously bad. Anthropic has defanged this model to the point of malice. No way am I paying to use something that is basically useless.
  • crancher 4mo ago
    Same problem, in-progress book about language and thermodynamics gets flagged. Their classifier is just a regex I guess?
    • himata4113 4mo ago
      correct, while it might not be regex it can be bypassed with regex. They do have a sematic classifier, but it's really weak on opus 4.8 and (was) weak on fable, but they either added a lot more regex strings or the classifier is actually good now.
    • downrightmike 4mo ago
      Try doing what congress does: take a bill from the house, gut it and put in what you want after the house passes it
    • ofjcihen 4mo ago
      Off and on topic I guess but: Language and Thermodynamics? Like, the same book? That sounds interesting.
      • crancher 4mo ago
        Holding symbols in a useful order durably and accessibly is an ongoing energetic event. How/why does it happen?
        • pkoird 4mo ago
          My old thermodynamics professor used to say: the answer's always entropy.
• ahmedehab_01 4mo ago
  Glad it's back, but the price outside of the subscription is insane. API pricing is just not for regular users.
• prosunpraiser 4mo ago
  I deleted my claude account the day the samples started preaching from the pope’s address and claiming 50% of the jobs will be gone while shamelessly stealing entire corpus of human data without attribution while preaching what you can and cannot do and maliciously degrading model quality. I hope they either never make it to IPO or crash violently.
  • stringfood 4mo ago
    what if they improve the model and fix such errors? by writing off now you will take finger off pulse of our great vibrating ai lords
• msradam 4mo ago
  I have yet to run into a project where I felt like I needed this and was worth justifying the latent worry about it disappearing or micromanaging quota usage. Heard about massive refactors or ports that were compressed into days but I'm wondering if it's really worth the inference cost.
  • stringfood 4mo ago
    funnily enough for me, Fable 5 was much better at refactoring my large codebase than Opus 4.8 was - perhaps the scope of Fable is very great
• yokoprime 4mo ago
  i did use Fable for a brief moment the last time around, and apart from being extremely expensive, it wasn't any order of magnitude better than Opus or even GPT-5.5 for my workloads (development, prototyping, some api testing). I probably could manage indefinitely on Sonnet class models
  • senordevnyc 4mo ago
    Does it need to be an order of magnitude better? I run a piddly little one man SaaS company that’s doing about $30k in MRR, growing at about 10% per month. My AI coding costs are like $500 / month on average, but I’ll gladly spend 10x that to double my growth rate. I blew through about $400 in Fable usage in six hours before it got yanked, and it was money well spent. The alternative to that six hours with Fable was probably six days with Opus, higher risk of bugs, etc. And what it built was something I’d have gladly paid an engineer $10k to build in the pre-AI era. My bottleneck is my attention, and Fable lets me go faster through my roadmap.
    • lishuaiJing03 4mo ago
      That is super cool. Checkout this repo which might give you super power to code quality and cut down 80% of token cost while keeping fable running longer jobs. https://github.com/syncable-dev/memtrace-public?tab=readme-ov-file https://github.com/syncable-dev/memtrace-public?tab=readme-o...
• Citizen_Lame 4mo ago
  This is pure nonsense. I asked it to edit one (long) html file, and it used up 5 hour session limit and it didn't even finish. For comparison, same task with Gemini Pro 3.1 Thinking took like 5% of usage. Similar with Codex 5.3. Strangely enough, cancelled the subscription listed the reason, and after 15 minutes session limit is back to zero.
• sscaryterry 4mo ago
  I wonder who in their right mind will pay for this lobotomised junk.
• himata4113 4mo ago
  I think this is as good as time as any to bring up that fable/mythos weights are one mistake (malicious or not) away from being leaked to adverseries or available in a random torrent. Imagine this, fable weights are likely distributed to hundreds of datacenters with likely thousands of people directly or indirectly having partial or full access. I just don't quite buy that a 'world ending' fable/mythos model would be treated like this, mythos I could maybe believe that it runs inside government compliant datacenters which have a proven track record, but something as valuable as a 'world ending' model invites state sponsored actors to put in significantly more effort into exfiltrating it. Whatever the real story is I doubt this is as ground-breaking as anthropic claims it to be.
  • Davidzheng 4mo ago
    I don't think Anthropic is claiming it's world ending? Just that it has offensive cybersecurity abilities which can be dangerous
    • himata4113 4mo ago
      Cyber-warfare is pretty world-ending these days. Our relatively peaceful world is built on top of mutual destruction. See: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48633023 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48633023
      • dakolli 4mo ago
        Why would you believe anything an intelligence agency says? Half their job is spreading fear and obfuscating the truth.
        • hansvm 4mo ago
          And that mistruth appears in delightfully insidious ways, like seemingly well-meaning comments opening up about "half" the job being lying when the point is to shift the Overton window away from the actual numbers, whatever they might be. (obviously not serious, but it's fun to probe what we can actually reason about when every message might be adversarial)
• exabrial 4mo ago
  correction: opus 4.8 is rebadged as fable, fable is not back
• ximdotro 4mo ago
  That didn't take long.
• andy_ppp 4mo ago
  Can we just make Opus 4.8 ish models cheaper, they do exactly what I want for 99% of problems certainly in web app development. I’m not sure what Palantir/Salesforce/agencies will do, really upset for these leaches!
• LouisvilleGeek 4mo ago
  I have been testing it on my security / firewall appliance (nfSensei) and it's much improved. It's actually proceeding through a complex plan Opus 4.8 proposed. But then again I have not tested it without a prior model planning as of yet. Note: fable would fail immediately on any security related topic prior.
• holoduke 4mo ago
  We really need glm to be on pair with claude. A good Chinese model against a good US model would be the ultimate competition. No bullshit scaled down models with insane restrictions. Everything open and maximum speed in model improvements. If China also would manage to master high tier chips then we truly can expect 768gb machines in 4 years from now.
• tiffanyh 4mo ago
  Every prompt I give Fable is timing out / not completing. It seems like Anthropic can’t keep up with users compute needs.
• janalsncm 4mo ago
  I never strongly considered open weight models before getting throttled all the time from Claude. I bought a 1 year pro subscription but my bet is I won’t renew it. The Claude “usage” UX is very bad. At the most basic level, there is no way to know what you’re actually paying for if you buy a “pro” plan or a “max” plan. Dario will take your $200 but he will give you a secret number of tokens in return. I have no way of knowing what the numerator or denominator are for the usage progress bars. Plus they change them all the time. There’s no way to audit it. So if there was a malicious script siphoning usage it would be really hard to detect.
  • causal 4mo ago
    Yeah I recently downgraded my subscription. The paternalism is out of control. Secret weights, secret guardrails, secret stenography, secret dumbing-down of triggers, secret token allowances.
  • dabbz 4mo ago
    I mean if you want to spend $200, and get a guaranteed amount of tokens in return you should be using the API. I agree there should be more transparency what 20x gets you that 5x doesn't. Though I also imagine it's a tough problem when you could be using Dispatch, Cowork, design, chat, code, etc. All of which use different contexts, models, and resources. I'd argue they actually need to either simplify their offerings, or charge more for upsells (charge for cloud-based agents, upcharge for design outcomes, etc).
    • janalsncm 4mo ago
      If products use different amounts of tokens, that’s fine. That’s fundamental to the products. But that’s the numerator, which they aren’t telling you. I’m also saying the denominator isn’t clear. One day it might be a million. Tomorrow 2 million. The next day 800k. Who knows.
      • dabbz 4mo ago
        I agree that would improve transparency but it'd also lock us and Anthropic into a situation where changing that would require new plans, prices, notifications, legal, etc. I think the fact that we don't see tokens shows just how subsidized the plan is. Which is mostly the point. They want us getting used to just using the product, not tracking tokens (for whatever behavior that builds later on).
• kelvinjps10 4mo ago
  Just vibes, but what if they're preparing for the government to buy stock? That way the narrative makes more sense of to dangerous to release.
• victor9000 4mo ago
  If this model is not willing to fix security issues in your application, does it mean that it's implicitly embedding vulnerabilities as well? How can it be trusted to write secure code?
• wonderwonder 4mo ago
  I cant even ask it to review my vitamin stack without it flagging it and switching to OPUS. It is insanely nerfed and limited. Its so bad that its made me realize that unless one goes open source the frontier labs will gatekeep everything. Determine who can use it and future versions for biology, cyber security, any number of realms. The winners and losers of the future are actively being chosen as we speak. I'm going to install open source models this weekend for the first time as a desperate attempt to escape the permanent underclass.
• zuzululu 4mo ago
  Sucks that they are going to put it behind API on the 7th Doesn't make any sense for codex users to switch 5.6 should be coming out any day now
• the__alchemist 4mo ago
  This still is flags every query I send it due to safeguards, then switches to 4.8/Opus.
• novoreorx 4mo ago
  In the days without Fable, I find that Opus is good enough. Now it's back, but I totally don't miss it now.
• ElijahLynn 4mo ago
  https://xcancel.com/claudeai/status/2072402636813607381 https://xcancel.com/claudeai/status/2072402636813607381
• bridgettegraham 4mo ago
  jiezaz krsit - I just spent $50 in like 3 minutes after running out of credits. this is just depressing. a really valuable product locked behind payment that only large corps can afford that completely locks out individuals. im so over capitalism. I hate this. I can't wait for open models to really just catch up and become the norm so that all these closed models can go do whatever it is anybody does to themselves in the dark. im so sad.
  • senordevnyc 4mo ago
    Capitalism delivered both these US models and the Chinese models. I get that it sucks if they’re too expensive, but the reality is they cost a lot to train and serve.
  • one33seven 4mo ago
    I wish we would expropriate AI labs and use it for the good of humanity instead of for profits
• deleted 4mo ago
  [deleted]
• paxys 4mo ago
  So they nerfed Mythos down to Fable and then nerfed Fable down to Opus 4.8. I assume most people here are using it for coding and other technical tasks, and so are silently getting redirected to Opus.
• cranium 4mo ago
  With this Fable release my goodwill for Anthropic went down. "Generous and exciting" were my thoughts when I bought the $100, then upgraded to the $200 sub last year. Now I get big FOMO because I won't be able to pay for Fable once off the sub, and I got the global limit reset at the same time as my weekly reset (Codex coupon for limit reset feels way better btw). The all-you-can-eat buffet put the nice items into a separate menu and it won't feel like the spot to take your family anymore. Anthropic can find ways to integrate Fable into subscriptions so you'd still be part of the same tribe, even if you only get a sip of it for a while. A complete shut off tells you: sorry, the policy is changing and this place will be about showing off your access to the best. That's weird but what would have been a Fable-ulous (sorry) addition to the offer just made other subscriptions from OpenAI/ZAi/... more appealing, because they don't segregate people.
  • cornholio 4mo ago
    You are still getting the models you signed up for. The all you can eat added a French wines selection - which requires separate payment.
  • hx8 4mo ago
    Codex is more generous with their subscribers because they are second place, and have to climb the reputation ladder. I suspect if OpenAI was in Anthropic's market position they too would have tighter sub limits, gate-keep where their oauth tokens can be used tighter, and play games that move users towards per-token spend.
    • scotty79 4mo ago
      > because they are second place In popularity. Which is crazy because they are first when it comes to everything else for quite some time and Fable isn't changing that all that much because of muzzling.
    • merlindru 4mo ago
      i think its a combination of these: - OAIs models are much more token efficient. in some cases their new mythos-level model uses 1/4th of the tokens that mythos does. - they reportedly have recently found another way to decrease compute needed "by half" in a breakthrough - early on, they ensured they have much more compute ready, whereas Anthropic had to disable new users signing up because they ran out of compute - OAI has fewer users (5mln codex users vs, what, 10mln claude code users?)
• richardfey 4mo ago
  I'm trying it right now for a side project of mine, compared to Opus it is effectively better at following instructions and somehow has better "depth" when reasoning on complex tasks. However, if it will not be part of subscriptions, I will not use it anymore.
• sschueller 4mo ago
  It doesn't matter. The damage is done. As a company I can not trust putting large sums of investment into using a product that may disappear the next day due to a government deciding at a whim that it should not longer be available. No contract can protect me from this and I doubt I would find an insurance that would cover this risk. This forces me the build fallback solutions and diversify most likely resulting in not using the tech from the "high risk" provider. Building a product on top of something like this is actually worse than building a product on top of Meta like Zynga did.
• Frannky 4mo ago
  I can use it but I'm not. I used it before the ban, it's better but the speed at which tokens are burned is not justified. And this makes me happy because it means I am ok with current capabilities that will soon be matched by open-source models. Open-source harness, open models, and soon self-hosted and private with models burned directly onto chips (like Talaas is doing).
• PeterStuer 4mo ago
  So a model named 'Fable 5' is "back". Both excited, as the previous Fable 5 I had access to for just 3 days was fantastic, and anxious as (yes, in my 1 person anecdote) the model refered to as 'Opus 4.8' was stealth nerfed over the last 2 weeks to a degree I had not experienced since the massive nerfs back in the GPT-3.x days. Fingers crossed.
• yumraj 4mo ago
  I asked it to do code review of some personal projects, that will only run on my system, and it keeps giving me: This model's safeguards flagged this message. This sometimes happens with safe, normal conversations. Switched to Opus 4.8. Send feedback with /feedback or learn more Not sure if others are having more success.
• one33seven 4mo ago
  I cant use it. Even basic coding redirects me to Opus. Even generating a hello world is flagged.
• nickalaso 4mo ago
  It is surprisingly half baked for something the company seems to be proudly charging my first born child and both of my kidneys for. Especially considering its all for the privilege of getting half way through a standard dev task before it just bricks out of nowhere on the 'safety' guardrails because of a keyword that often appears to be created by the model itself? I've been running Fable on a few different projects and just by itself on same codebase it'll brick, so looks like it can just straight up create its own demise. I do not think any of us yet have to worry about being 'replaced with ai' if the 'premiere ai company' still can't put out their flagship product with minimal qa. This is embarassing. And the short 7 day window for subscribers is just taking the piss. So happy I'm paying hundreds per month to be free qa for anthropic, god knows they need the help.
  • ngruhn 4mo ago
    Imagine a nuclear power company being extremely cautious with safety and everyone online is like "make more power already you pussies!"
    • skarz 4mo ago
      Are we comparing nuclear energy to an LLM?
    • nar001 4mo ago
      Sorry this is a very bad analogy, nuclear power isn't the same as a LLM, and definitely not as dangerous either. This is ridiculous.
      • senordevnyc 4mo ago
        Sorry this is a very bad analogy, nuclear power isn't the same as a LLM Isn’t that the point of an analogy?
        • singleshot_ 4mo ago
          Your post is like a denim jacket. (Seems like maybe that’s not the point of an analogy).
• benny_s 4mo ago
  I have the feeling it isn't as good as it was 3 weeks ago (not including the times you get downgraded). I mean it's still great, but in my memory it was better. Anyone else?
• RichSchutt 4mo ago
  Fable 5 is functionally useless not just a regression of the original Fable. totally useless not to mention when it flags your code you may have noticed in the original release the models internal reasoning was not viewable it is intros release and mines. internal thought process said I am Claude Sonnet 3.5 when I asked it what model it was while it answered I am Fable % in the chat window. And to be fair it was about as useful as sonnet 3.5
• 6thbit 4mo ago
  They really dropped the ball on this one. A frontier lab releasing the most advanced model causes them to lose customers was not on my AI bingo card.
• kwar13 4mo ago
  fable eats usage credits at an alarming rate. i know it says 50% faster, but i honestly feel more than twice as fast