meowface

6 ms·

61.
by meowface 3mo ago
It's going to be pretty crazy when GPT-6 comes out, since the rumors are it's quite a bit smarter and wiser than GPT-5.6.
62.
by meowface 3mo ago
This would seem to lead to absurd implications. What if in, say, 20 years, an AI is able to independently prove nearly everything important in under an hour, including the Riemann hypothesis, with no contamination from other proofs? (Let&#x
63.
by meowface 3mo ago
Hilariously absurd cope. They're still not very good at writing, but you've flipped the takeaway. The correct conclusion is writing style isn't very relevant to intelligence.
64.
by meowface 3mo ago
Hot take: even GPT-3 was not a parrot. Skeptics have never properly internalized that the fundamental operation is basically irrelevant to the gestalt. Humans are not parrots yet neurons likely also largely operate via predictive processing
65.
by meowface 3mo ago
You can use that retroactive logic about any hard problem though. Unsolved murder cases, math, theoretical physics. If tons of smart humans try for years and fail and then an LLM tries for a few weeks or hours and succeeds, the implications
66.
by meowface 3mo ago
It's so soon that it may be rational to delay certain math and software projects until smarter models arrive
67.
by meowface 3mo ago
I don't know why you're saying this, given this is not sycophancy and instead is an actual example of Claude Fable finding a real counterexample. I would get it if the mathematician had in fact posted something untrue or crankish,
68.
by meowface 3mo ago
The interesting thing about using Claude Fable 5 is it's nearly as irritatingly sycophantic as past Claudes while genuinely being smarter than the previous models. So you get a kind of yo-yoing of it glazing you as a creative genius an
69.
by meowface 3mo ago
The tweeter, Levent Alpöge, is a professional mathematician who works at Anthropic.
70.
Tweet claiming Claude Fable 5 has helped disprove the Jacobian conjecture(twitter.com)
12 points by meowface 3mo ago|1 comments
71.
by meowface 3mo ago
No offense but that seems like a...not good use of money. For the $100/month or $200/month tier you'd get way more out of Claude Fable 5, which is definitely a better model than K3 for coding.
72.
by meowface 3mo ago
This could also apply to deferring to an inaccurate textbook or professor, though. We know people are going to defer. The solution here is to make AI (including the free tiers) more reliable.
73.
by meowface 3mo ago
Oh yeah, I've noticed the same, for sure. But that's basically what I was expecting. The best model is not necessarily always going to be the most cost-effective/sensible model for a particular use case. Fable-class models wi
74.
by meowface 3mo ago
At this point I barely put any value in any of the benchmarks. I just use the models for coding (and related things like software product design/planning/ideation/etc.) tasks and judge them subjectively, and also see how othe
75.
by meowface 3mo ago
To summarize: the classifiers Anthropic puts in front of Fable are way, way too zealous and have way too many false positives. From my experience, the model itself is very useful when it isn't refusing any of your prompts.
76.
by meowface 3mo ago
- I agree that trying to hamfist a poorly-engineered game-like rendering engine into Claude Code was not wise - hence my agreement in my initial post that "Claude Code is seemingly currently not very well-engineered". - All of the
77.
by meowface 3mo ago
There are multiple levels to the irrelevance of your reply.
78.
by meowface 3mo ago
I agree Claude Code is seemingly (currently) not very well-engineered but I think you may be moderately underestimating how complicated it is/necessarily has to be.
79.
by meowface 3mo ago
I promise your post was already downvoted when I saw it. It is possible some people upvoted it afterwards, changing the net karma. It is possible you were not intentionally choosing to use an LLM to write/modify your posts, but they la
80.
by meowface 3mo ago
But just to be clear: you are absolutely, completely denying an LLM played any role in writing any of your comments on HN? You are certain? You're claiming you did not use an LLM in any way in the production of them? Not even to "
81.
by meowface 3mo ago
The number of LLMs (and possibly very odd humans) replying to this thread is unusual.
82.
by meowface 3mo ago
You did write the above comment with an LLM, though. Why are you now denying it?
83.
by meowface 3mo ago
Seek help.
84.
by meowface 3mo ago
I still prefer lossless over MP3
85.
by meowface 3mo ago
They don't have anything like that anymore
86.
by meowface 3mo ago
Because Dario is an ASI doomer and deeply fears the power and danger of hyperintelligent AI and it'd be extremely irresponsible to not warn people "hey, this thing can do things the past models couldn't, and the future models
87.
by meowface 3mo ago
Correct. I've paid for Tidal for a decade because I just like the peace of mind that it's closer to the original recording. I'm sure it's mostly placebo, but I like it.
88.
by meowface 3mo ago
I'm not sure what you're saying. They spent ages adding guardrails to Mythos. Then they spent ages creating a whole new even more guardrailed version of Mythos called Fable. Then they added tons of classifiers so API requests to F
89.
by meowface 3mo ago
I think there's basically zero chance of that. I also think a human likely either wrote the code or gave pretty specific instructions to the agent on how to write the code.
90.
by meowface 3mo ago
I can't roll my eyes hard enough at all the people who say this shit about Anthropic every day. I know I'll get downvoted. I know it's lame to complain about future downvotes. I don't care anymore. Anthropic was correct

More ›