3 ms·

I never hit Anthropic's safety filter when I'm doing something illegal, only when I'm not.

by andai 1mo ago

NewsaHackO 1mo ago
Honestly, unless what you are doing is frankly illegal, it usually is possible for you to get around most safeguards for coding things if you also know how to write code. Most problems have a separable completely innocuous core that Fable would gladly do. Then you can implement the problematic parts yourself. Particularly things like copyright issues, web scraping etc.
- glub 1mo ago
  > Then you can implement the problematic parts yourself. Or with another LLM, but yeah. The only issue is when it's a monorepo and fable does ls/grep. I've got a file named `system_prompt` in a completely innocent project and as soon as fable accidentally stumbled upon it - cyber. Hacked together something with omp and sandbox-exec so that only whitelisted models can see some parts of the project. Works pretty well.
- nonethewiser 1mo ago
  If it doesnt have a context (what you are using it for) then it's happy to do it. If you have X amount of code you can ask it to generate (X/5)5 and there is no problem. Like you said, you have to know what you are doing. You have to know what it needs to write so that you can tell it to write the parts.
epistasis 1mo ago
I hit the safety feature when I ask something I saw that blocked other biologists: "why did the chicken cross the road?" Due to my standard cancer research work I'm blocked from Fable. That said, with how execrable all the 5 models have been, I can't imagine I'm missing much. It's impossible to get an intelligible explanation in text out of the 5 models, and the mistakes are just comically bad on anything that's not code. Cancelled my subscription, and can't imagine going back since OpenRouter gives me a consistent model that I can trust won't change underneath me.
- tyre 1mo ago
  Why would cancer work be safeguarded? Are they afraid some cartel is going to, like, invent a stronger cancer?
  - denverllc 1mo ago
    My theory is that they’re pretending it’s about biological weapons but really they want to charge pharmaceutical companies $$$ to help with research. (Essentially a Mythos type segmentation for biology)
    - _puk 1mo ago
      Theory? Given they have now moved into "science" I'd say it's a given
    - deleted 1mo ago
      [deleted]
    - qlte 1mo ago
      Okay, finally a plausible explanation for why Anthropic has stubbornly appeared to be self-sabotaging their model with the overly broad yet somehow also overly specific biology filter. The fear of Trump Admin retaliation excuse made superficial sense except for the fact that it missed all sorts of non-bio stuff a punitive state actor might find objectionable to use against them.
  - roywiggins 1mo ago
    Fable zaps anything that seems even vaguely biological.
    - seidleroni 1mo ago
      It refused to answer anything about pickling for me. Always kicked me down to Opus which is comical.
  - aenis 1mo ago
    The safeguard filter is comically unintelligent. One of my side projects is a strategy game, and in that strategy game one player has a set of jokes, one of them referring to "biological minds". Whenever Fable reads this asset it immediately stops - because of the use of word 'biological', there is nothing else biological about that codebase. And there is a bug to this bug, if the downgrade happens at close to full context window, there is no taking over this session with Opus -- happened to me twice: it throws some context window exceeded error, suggesting what fits in Fable context, may not fit in Opus's around the maximum. And then and there, an entire session is lost. In fact, there are two bugs, as /resuming such broken session attempts to resume with Fable, burning through tokens. Oh well, I learned to be careful with the jokes around Fable.
wetoastfood 1mo ago
This makes me wonder how often you are doing illegal things!
PennRobotics 1mo ago
Mere mention of "reverse engineering" gets me kicked back to Opus. Where I reside, reverse engineering for interoperability is generally legal, and interoperability (e.g. getting a USB HID and USB MIDI devices or DOS programs to work in Linux/Android) is essentially what I'm interested in.

I never hit Anthropic's safety filter when I'm doing something illegal, only when I'm not.

by andai 1mo ago

I never hit Anthropic's safety filter when I'm doing something illegal, only when I'm not.

Honestly, unless what you are doing is frankly illegal, it usually is possible for you to get around most safeguards for coding things if you also know how to write code. Most problems have a separable completely innocuous core that Fable would gladly do. Then you can implement the problematic parts yourself. Particularly things like copyright issues, web scraping etc.

glub 1mo ago
> Then you can implement the problematic parts yourself. Or with another LLM, but yeah. The only issue is when it's a monorepo and fable does ls/grep. I've got a file named `system_prompt` in a completely innocent project and as soon as fable accidentally stumbled upon it - cyber. Hacked together something with omp and sandbox-exec so that only whitelisted models can see some parts of the project. Works pretty well.
nonethewiser 1mo ago
If it doesnt have a context (what you are using it for) then it's happy to do it. If you have X amount of code you can ask it to generate (X/5)5 and there is no problem. Like you said, you have to know what you are doing. You have to know what it needs to write so that you can tell it to write the parts.

epistasis 1mo ago

I hit the safety feature when I ask something I saw that blocked other biologists: "why did the chicken cross the road?" Due to my standard cancer research work I'm blocked from Fable. That said, with how execrable all the 5 models have been, I can't imagine I'm missing much. It's impossible to get an intelligible explanation in text out of the 5 models, and the mistakes are just comically bad on anything that's not code. Cancelled my subscription, and can't imagine going back since OpenRouter gives me a consistent model that I can trust won't change underneath me.

tyre 1mo ago
Why would cancer work be safeguarded? Are they afraid some cartel is going to, like, invent a stronger cancer?
- denverllc 1mo ago
  My theory is that they’re pretending it’s about biological weapons but really they want to charge pharmaceutical companies $$$ to help with research. (Essentially a Mythos type segmentation for biology)
  - _puk 1mo ago
    Theory? Given they have now moved into "science" I'd say it's a given
  - deleted 1mo ago
    [deleted]
  - qlte 1mo ago
    Okay, finally a plausible explanation for why Anthropic has stubbornly appeared to be self-sabotaging their model with the overly broad yet somehow also overly specific biology filter. The fear of Trump Admin retaliation excuse made superficial sense except for the fact that it missed all sorts of non-bio stuff a punitive state actor might find objectionable to use against them.
- roywiggins 1mo ago
  Fable zaps anything that seems even vaguely biological.
  - seidleroni 1mo ago
    It refused to answer anything about pickling for me. Always kicked me down to Opus which is comical.
- aenis 1mo ago
  The safeguard filter is comically unintelligent. One of my side projects is a strategy game, and in that strategy game one player has a set of jokes, one of them referring to "biological minds". Whenever Fable reads this asset it immediately stops - because of the use of word 'biological', there is nothing else biological about that codebase. And there is a bug to this bug, if the downgrade happens at close to full context window, there is no taking over this session with Opus -- happened to me twice: it throws some context window exceeded error, suggesting what fits in Fable context, may not fit in Opus's around the maximum. And then and there, an entire session is lost. In fact, there are two bugs, as /resuming such broken session attempts to resume with Fable, burning through tokens. Oh well, I learned to be careful with the jokes around Fable.

wetoastfood 1mo ago

This makes me wonder how often you are doing illegal things!

PennRobotics 1mo ago

Mere mention of "reverse engineering" gets me kicked back to Opus. Where I reside, reverse engineering for interoperability is generally legal, and interoperability (e.g. getting a USB HID and USB MIDI devices or DOS programs to work in Linux/Android) is essentially what I'm interested in.