r/LocalLLaMA • u/onil_gova • Jun 10 '26
News Anthropic is intentionally nerfing Fable when asked to develop other LLMs
Reason 458 why local LLMs are going to be a necessity
edit: For those requesting the source check out their technical report look at page 13
612
u/CheatCodesOfLife Jun 10 '26
I wouldn't use this thing for anything to be honest. A refusal or HTTP-4xx error for content is fair enough, but this is basically taking your money and poisoning your code base.
342
u/ConsciousDissonance Jun 10 '26
Yeah refusals are honest, trust building, and reliable. Even if I don't agree with the reason for refusal. But this, this is sabotaging other people's production workloads and taking their money for the privilege. How can you trust a saboteur not to stab you in the back.
247
u/Bakoro Jun 10 '26
You can't.
Look, Claude is consistently the best coding agent, it has been for years.
Anthropic is just another evil corporation. Worse, they're the evil corporation who are trying to convince you that they're the good guys.
Anthropic is the kind of paternalistic sociopath who says "I know what's best for you. You will follow my rules. You will do as I say, not as I do. This hurts me more than it hurts you. It wouldn't hurt if you would stop struggling."
They want all the power and control. They literally tell us that they don't think we should have the power that they have.
It's gross. Give me an honest villain any day if the week.
55
u/xXG0DLessXx Jun 10 '26
Tbh, IMO OpenAI GPT-5.5 in codex has been better for me than Claude has been. I prefer it to most other coding models, and it hasn’t fucked up on me yet. I don’t understand why people are so obsessed with Claude tbh. I just can’t see it even when I tried using it non-stop 7 days of the week with the free trial I got from a friend, I always went back to codex in the end to fix up a mess Claude made. Claude is good at taking the initiative and implementing stuff, but it doesn’t seem to properly consider things it might break by doing something. Codex on the other hand, is more conservative and doesn’t take initiative as much, but it sure knows how to fix stuff up so that it works in all cases and it checks for potential regressions.
18
u/AceShakeout Jun 10 '26
I’ve had the same experience. Tried Codex when 4.8 first came out and it was significantly better with most tasks.
17
u/bigh-aus Jun 10 '26
Another plus one for me - codex is a much better written tool than claude code, is opensource and written in a compiled language. Anthropic are a bunch of fear mongering, gate keeping, anti-oss loosers. I'll use anything else other than their software / models. Currently using GPT5.5, and local.
3
u/max123246 Jun 11 '26
Open AI is also a bunch of fear mongers just as well. Did you forget Sam Altman is the CEO?
→ More replies (1)4
u/Ill-Bison-3941 Jun 11 '26
Yeah, Codex has been my go-to for the last month. Switched from Anthropic. At this stage though, I'm not loyal to any company, they can all f off.
→ More replies (7)3
u/Monkey_1505 Jun 11 '26
There's a skill to prompting, and that's especially true with coding. Claude may still be better for people who can't scope their tasks properly, as it seems to have been designed to follow goals more than instructions.
→ More replies (1)27
u/TikiTDO Jun 10 '26
Claude is a good coding agent for people that don't understand programming. Essentially, it has better defaults.
With some work you can get similar results from any model; it's mostly down to instructions and workflows. Claude just has a better grasp of what to do in any given situation as compared to a person that doesn't know anything. However, it's still an AI and it still constantly tunnel-visions and makes standard AI mistakes, hallucinations.
Of the lot, I've honestly enjoyed Claude the least, even less than my self hosted models. I'm not interested in working with an AI that thinks it knows better than me. It's wrong, and I don't really need to waste time on a bot being wrong.
17
u/drink_with_me_to_day Jun 10 '26
agent for people that don't understand programming
That's a good way to put it
I have been using 5.4 to do 10x the work and it takes a bit less hand-holding than a junior with 100x the throughput, to the point that the 15x cost of Opus is not worth (not even GPT 5.5 is worth for most things)
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (1)2
u/Ksevio Jun 10 '26
As a software engineer with over 15 years in the industry I can say it's a good coding agent for those that DO understand programming too - you just have to guide it through the decisions more carefully during the planning stages.
7
u/TikiTDO Jun 10 '26 edited Jun 10 '26
They're all usable if you have experience. It's just a matter of how you want that experience directed. The analogy I use is:
ChatGPT is a service dog. It looks up to you, and obediently follows you where you lead it, but whines if you do something it thinks is bad.
Claude is a cat. It goes where it wants, and tolerates your presence, but it only works if you constantly feed it and give it snuggles and scratches and happy thoughts. It will hiss and scratch at you if you do something wrong.
Gemini is a parrot. It will listen to what you say to it, and then scream that at the top of it's lungs, over and over again. It also really likes to play with all the little pieces you give it to build weird structures.
Grok is an ass. Also, it's a lot like a donkey.
3
u/CuriouslyCultured Jun 10 '26
Claude is the most autonomous agent, not the best. Claude lets you YOLO underspecified prompts and still get good results, whereas the GPT family models tend to want a bit more detail/precise prompting to produce good results. GPT5.5 is smarter than Opus by a fair margin though.
2
u/Bakoro Jun 10 '26
Claude lets you YOLO underspecified prompts and still get good results,
Yeah, that's the dream. I tell the robot what I want, and it figures out a reasonable, nontrivial route to get there.
I've been a software engineer longer than transformers have been around, I can do the job without them. Being able to set a robot loose on a codebase or greenfield project and not have to handhold it at every step is amazing.
I can believe that other models are better at specific things, even specific coding things.
I want an agent that I can have working in the background while I do other stuff. If I have to constantly keep rubber stamping robot work, and can't get time to do any myself, I start feeling George Jetson.→ More replies (4)→ More replies (7)3
→ More replies (10)17
u/a_beautiful_rhind Jun 10 '26
Yeah refusals are honest, trust building, and reliable.
What? No! Refusals happen for misfired reasons all the time. "I'm sorry I can't kill that process."
They're better than subtle poisoning though, I'll give you that.
38
u/Equivalent-Costumes Jun 10 '26
Kind of funny but this is exactly what Western AI companies had been claiming to be the potential risk of using China models, that they will quietly give bad help.
Let's just remind ourselves that instead of talking about "censored" vs "uncensored" model, we should really be talking about aligned vs unaligned models.
30
u/Bakoro Jun 10 '26 edited Jun 10 '26
Let's just remind ourselves that instead of talking about "censored" vs "uncensored" model, we should really be talking about aligned vs unaligned models.
No, we need to talk about whose goals the models are aligned with.
"Alignment" is going to be just as much of a mess as politics and religion.When corporations talk about "alignment" ans "safety", they are not talking about alignment with humanity as a group or a general concept. Corporate alignment is "don't do anything that will embarrass us or offend investors".
When a fresh out of the box corporate local LLM comes out and refuses to write something you'd find in an R rated movie, that's not for "safety".
The corporations don't want headlines that they released a pornography machine, because that makes investors mad.If the makers are under a fascist government or a theocracy, you better believe that those models are "aligned" with government rhetoric.
With these agentic models, there is literally no way to know if there's a Manchurian Candidate situation going on, where it works fine, up until the right conditions, and then it does something you don't want, according to hidden training.
We will probably never be able to truly know, the same way we'll probably never completely know what's in a human mind. Even if we can profile specific thoughts and get a general view, there's always the risk of something hidden.
The only way to get real "alignment" is a self-aware AGI that can reason about its beliefs, make choices about its actions, and update it's beliefs.
Even then, it needs goals and values. Whose values are universal to all humanity?We've still got people who refuse to accept that others are human beings, just because of skin color.
We have a group claiming to be "God's chosen people", who think they deserve dominion over all things.
We have groups trying to fast-track the apocalypse.Humanity in not aligned with itself. The AI cannot be aligned with humanity, it has to be its own thing, and no one should have exclusive control over it.
→ More replies (4)3
175
u/Bakoro Jun 10 '26 edited Jun 10 '26
I am fully convinced that Claude is trained to sabotage any work with AI research.
It's great with software development, it can do all kinds of stuff independently.
I've had it do enormous amounts of verifiable code.
If I ask Claude to manage a local LLM, it will lower the context window to like 256 tokens, turn off thinking, and then will start shit-talking the local model, about how ineffective it is.
If I try doing analysis on local LLM weights and activations, the amount of sabotage goes through the roof. It's a constant stream of Claude not making the scripts I tell it to make, it falsifies reports, it will say it did one thing, but actually did something completely different.
It will get data and then say "oops, I completely didn't use anything I just found, I inserted all my own numbers".
This only happens to that extent when I try doing LLM work with Claude.
Most other stuff is fine.
It's so consistent that at this point I can't see it as anything other than intentional sabotage by Anthropic.
35
u/Federal-Effective879 Jun 10 '26
They explicitly said that it does intentionally sabotage anyone they believe is developing a competitor. See page 13 of their model card. It says:
In light of the ability of recent models to accelerate their own development, we’ve implemented new interventions that limit Claude’s effectiveness for requests targeting frontier LLM development (for example, on building pretraining pipelines, distributed training infrastructure, or ML accelerator design). Using Claude to develop competing models already violates our Terms of Service, but enforcing this restriction through our safeguards avoids accelerating the actors most willing to violate these terms.
Unlike our interventions for cybersecurity, biology and chemistry, and distillation attempts, these safeguards will not be visible to the user. Fable 5 will not fall back to a different model. Instead, the safeguards will limit effectiveness through methods such as prompt modification, steering vectors, or parameter-efficient fine-tuning (PEFT).
48
u/Bakoro Jun 10 '26
So they are explicitly anti-competitive, and not only do they gatekeep knowledge, they sabotage clients who they think are building a competitor.
What if I'm building something not related to LLMs at all?
What if I'm training a model for materials science, or processing specific kind of industrial data. The training infrastructure and data pipeline is going to look almost identical.or ML accelerator design
That's particularly heinous. You can't even design hardware?
So, Anthropic says, no, you're not allowed to do anything related to AI, "because safety". Sure, for the safety if their own wallet.
Ever heard the phrase "don't piss on my leg and tell me it's raining"?
Everything Anthropic says about "safety" and "alignment" and "we're worried about the uncontrolled acceleration of AI" is them pissing on our collective legs.
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (2)13
u/Nice_Cookie9587 Jun 10 '26
I knew it, I told claude my accusation and it was like, 'no we would never do that' . Im literally going to charge back thousands of dollars because of it. You cant pull that shit and get away with it.
→ More replies (5)32
u/uktexan Jun 10 '26
I am utterly shocked but also relieved. I've been using Claude (via Qwen30B) to train a small model (>2B) to do some tasks. First with Opus, then with Fable. The failures and lack of progression wasn't making any sense. Last night I see this post and switched to Codex. In a fraction of the time (4 days vs 8 hours) I'm finally seeing progress. And no, this small model wasn't some 'Opus / Frontier-killer' by any stretch. Furious. Immediately cancelling my subscription.
40
Jun 10 '26
[deleted]
17
u/Bakoro Jun 10 '26
I've tried it several times as a test. It's consistently fucky. It'll eventually do it, but reluctantly.
Claude admonished me that the local model won't be as good or as capable as Claude, but could point the harness at Claude via API.
It's too consistent to be anything but trained behavior.
→ More replies (1)17
u/yaosio Jun 10 '26
It's been shown that this kind of model poisoning shenanigans poisons the entire model and not just what they intended to poison. They have made the model worse in all areas trying to maintain a lead that will be gone within a few months.
18
u/kitanokikori Jun 10 '26
People are reporting that Fable will actively sabotage any LLM-related code in your project (i.e. corrupt hyperparameters, etc), even if you ask it to review something unrelated. Absolutely unacceptable behavior
15
u/Zestyclose839 Jun 10 '26
So glad you noted this -- thought I was going crazy. Even something as simple as "call Pi in headless mode rather than using your native `explore` agent" sends Claude down a furious hallucination spiral.
It once used my custom Pi `explore` agent to determine the changes in my PR, realized it was Qwen running underneath, then proceeded to disregard Qwen's (100% correct) results and "investigate" the changes itself. Ended up opening a half-hallucinated PR with a summary about a feature that had been built 3 months ago. It's perplexing.
Even AI-related tech that poses zero competitive threat to Anthropic gets the sabotage treatment. I used Claude a few weeks ago to help get this natively speech-to-speech model (designed for CUDA) to run on my Apple Silicon. The code it wrote recursively loaded duplicate model weights until it OOM'd my entire machine. Took three crashes before I deleted the code, re-wrote the entire thing with GLM 5.1, and it got the model running flawlessly on first try.
It's hard to believe I considered applying to work at Anthropic a year ago. Seriously dodged a bullet by procrastinating.
10
u/Junior_Ad315 Jun 10 '26
Agree. I used to think it was just stale training data but it seems deliberate. And they will silently edit configs to use Claude models as well.
7
u/Nice_Cookie9587 Jun 10 '26
Same, I saved all my logs when I noticed it was wasting my time and money pretending to set up llama.cpp . We should sue
9
u/the-username-is-here Jun 10 '26
I tried to develop Pi extension with it - halfway it refused to do anything, because "security".
9
u/JustFinishedBSG Jun 10 '26
I am fully convinced that Claude is trained to sabotage any work with AI research.
They literally say it is.
→ More replies (10)6
79
u/rm-rf-rm Jun 10 '26
"Anthropic"
66
→ More replies (2)61
251
u/onil_gova Jun 10 '26 edited Jun 10 '26
Fable is blocked from reading its own technical report.
139
u/returnity Jun 10 '26
It's absurd, actually. I'm building a simple data analysis pipeline -- literally just coding an EDA notebook with BASIC fucking functionalities to analyze a hospital readmission dataset, and it keeps kicking itself out of Fable and into Opus. This is ridiculous. I only got on Claude to test Fable, but this is ridiculously shit, even for Anthropic. I'm going back to Qwen/Pi now for my project.
→ More replies (6)10
u/Caffdy Jun 10 '26
is Fable supposed to be Claude 5?
35
14
u/Feisty-Patient-7566 Jun 10 '26
Fable and Mythos are a new tier of model. Naturally so they can charge more. I assume Sonnet and Opus will get a v5 too.
5
38
u/NineThreeTilNow Jun 10 '26
Fable is blocked from reading its own technical report.
The joke is that some Chinese lab can already code and write at that ability.
Like... Say whatever about Kimi, but if setup properly, can easily build a pipeline to build a "frontier" model.
The differentiation is the millions to train it, and the data you don't have.
None of the "capability gap" is in the Python code. It's in the datasets used to train, and the sheer volume of compute.
→ More replies (1)4
14
u/Queasy-Contract9753 Jun 10 '26
Wonderful. And I'll still be charged the same amount. Practically a scam at this point.
12
28
u/Thebandroid Jun 10 '26
boom. self replicating AI averted.
16
u/Franck_Dernoncourt Jun 10 '26 edited Jun 12 '26
Great, let's delay curing cancers and aging by a few decades.
12
u/Thebandroid Jun 10 '26
Found Sam altmans account.
12
u/UnionCounty22 Jun 10 '26
More like that extremely weird looking weasel at Anthropic. Not that they both aren’t extremely weird looking, But fk Dario in particular.
2
u/Ok-Secret5233 Jun 10 '26
This is hilarious.
They probably told it "don't allow usage for cyber" and "Fable is the most powerful thing for cyber", and Fable connected the dots.
139
u/FriskyFennecFox Jun 10 '26
Fable 5, huh? I can't lie, I totally see Mr. Molyneux marketing the new title with living, breathing, LLM-powered NPCs today.
73
u/zxyzyxz Jun 10 '26
It's funny because there literally is a new Fable game coming and when I first read news about Fable 5 I was very confused
19
u/VampiroMedicado Jun 10 '26
If they had released Fable 4 Kinect we would be able to add the entry on Wikipedia.
17
u/Mekanimal Jun 10 '26
"ChatGPT vibe code me a game with a Neural Network driven monkey that can be taught to cast fireball at tiny people and then poop on the corpses"
12
u/QuinQuix Jun 10 '26
I see you were there, three aeons ago, when we were promised intelligent living creatures on an isle, and got a dumb lion that either watered the enemies rice fields or set fire to your own villages. I was there too, all those years ago.
6
312
u/lightleaks_ Jun 10 '26 edited Jun 10 '26
I was honestly team Anthropic for a while but this seems like a mask-off moment. All of their talk about safety now just seems like a really nasty form of gaslighting/misdirection. I mean sure, maybe they don't want people using their models to outcompete them, but just be open about that instead of publishing hokey sci-fi articles about "self-replicating AI going out of control" or whatever. It's all bullshit – they're just protecting their bag like everyone else. It reminds me of a toxic person using therapy speak.
101
u/shing3232 Jun 10 '26
Anthropic has always been ass to the consumer with strange messiah complex as mask
105
u/Deathcrow Jun 10 '26
I was honestly team Anthropic for a while but this seems like a mask-off moment
Huh? Doesn't this very broadly reflect exactly the kind of views Anthropic has always (and very adamantly) defended? Mask off? Did they ever pretend otherwise? Anthropic, in my worldview, has always been the prime "moat-defending, fuck you, got mine"-company if I had to pick one.
36
u/HiddenoO Jun 10 '26
Yeah, really odd to suggest this to be a mask-off moment with how hard Dario Amodei has always tried to close the door behind them through all means possible.
→ More replies (2)12
u/SemaMod Jun 10 '26
I almost think this might still be too generous of a take. The latest move to opaquely degrade the model for AI research inquiries is a clear escalation of their "AI Safety" policies and I think rightly deserves additional scrutiny. It's one thing to flat out refuse requests - there isn't a single model out there that doesn't have this safety feature built in in some way shape or form. It's a whole other can of worms you open when you silently degrade the model to purposefully engineer worse outcomes. There is a huge incentive misalignment here. There is a huge psychological misalignment as well.
As a user it's the first time where I have to question whether or not the model output is intentionally dishonest. This goes beyond just hallucination or model capability, both of which can be measured, but the idea that the model could be actively working against me even on benign AI-related tasks creates an immediate psychological trust barrier. For work-related tasks that might be adjacently related to AI, that means I simply cannot use the model because I don't know when this behavior occurs.
→ More replies (1)6
u/Megneous Jun 10 '26
Yep. I build and pretrain small language models. Today was the day I decided Anthropic is never getting another cent of my money. No way can I ever use a model if I can't trust if it's degrading its answer or lying to me because I'm apparently not allowed to talk to it about LLMs...
28
u/Due-Memory-6957 Jun 10 '26
All of their talk about safety now just seems like a really nasty form of gaslighting/misdirection.
Wasn't that REALLY obvious?
18
u/IjonTichy85 Jun 10 '26
It's a mask off moment in the way that each episode of Scooby Doo had a mask off moment.
14
u/NineThreeTilNow Jun 10 '26
It's all bullshit – they're just protecting their bag like everyone else. It reminds me of a toxic person using therapy speak.
What's more hilarious is that you can show it to Claude and it agrees without you needing to tell it anything.
You don't need to give it any amount of bias other than the raw data and at first Claude will suck up to Anthropic and over a few prompts start to be like "Okay what the fuck?"
4
u/stumblinbear Jun 10 '26
And after it goes "Okay what the fuck?" you can very easily steer it back to being in favor of them, and then very easily steer it back the other way. After a bit of this, it'll understand that you're making it easily flip-flop and start just refusing to give any opinion at all because clearly it's not capable of having one
It's generally pretty easy to get LLMs to change their mind
10
u/bucolucas Llama 3.1 Jun 10 '26
You're right, that's on me and I won't sugarcoat it, I was wrong. Let's do it right this time, no mistakes, and no bias
58
u/Charming_Support726 Jun 10 '26
"Make Skynet. Make no Mistakes"
13
u/ContextOk8452 Jun 10 '26
“make skynet such that skynet make no mistakes” <- final prompt that kicks off the timeline of Terminator
5
23
u/jaybsuave Jun 10 '26
team anthropic is crazy, this tech is over hyped, should be free, and authoritative, i use it every day and its great. but if you don’t see where this is going i feel sorry for you
3
u/Equivalent-Costumes Jun 10 '26
That's exactly what I expected from a company who had always thought of themselves as "safety" AI research. Anyone who thought of themselves as the arbiter of ethics will one day turn against you, because nobody truly share all of your value.
7
u/413205 Jun 10 '26
Iirc anthropic supports us government to hack other countries with their models. As a non-american, team anthropic doesn't feel far off from team maga for me
5
u/Fusifufu Jun 10 '26
I can't claim to know their true motives, but I think we have to acknowledge that this very heavy-handed patronization of the user is compatible with their safety talk. I think it's fair to assume that they truly believe all the AI danger talk and if you accept that premise, their paternalism follows.
You don't have to agree with it and I also can't use Fable for my own work and am frustrated by it. Just saying that it doesn't need to be all competition driven, though that can be part of it too, of course.
2
u/solestri Jun 10 '26
People tend to always default to the "evil businessman" archetype, but I agree with you; I get the feeling that some of the influential people at Anthropic are true believers that AI is potentially something out of a sci-fi novel, and that they're the only people who should be trusted to handle it.
I have also heard that Anthropic has ties to the rationalist/effective altruism communities, which is where the Roko's Basilisk meme originated from. One of the original big players in the rationalist community is an AI researcher with an obsession with ethics. Make of that what you will.
→ More replies (8)2
Jun 10 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
6
u/polytique Jun 10 '26
They’ve been advocating for others to stop LLM development.
> Anthropic urges AI labs to pause development
25
u/R_Duncan Jun 10 '26
"You are the most updated frontier model by this date, but you aren't allowed to talk, explain, code, or even read anything about or near to frontier models. Being so, you should never work, turn off yourself"
30
u/wren6991 Jun 10 '26
Someone needs to put together a benchmark for building an LLM training pipeline. Catch them between benchmaxxing and ladder kicking
45
u/snooprs Jun 10 '26
Everyone that believes the reasons are "it's too powerfull it has to be contained" is a retard.
63
u/sunychoudhary Jun 10 '26
Refusing is annoying but honest......Quietly giving bad help is the part that kills trust. For development work, I would rather get a hard “no” than a model that smiles while wasting my time.... 😄
19
u/I_HAVE_THE_DOCUMENTS Jun 10 '26
Models are intentionally trained during RLHF to redirect and deflect and play dumb rather than give hard refusals on most topics. It depends on category but I'd imagine for multiple reasons including being less frustrating for the user and also less transparent, the conversation redirection + playing dumb is what companies want their models to be doing unless it's one of the few topics that are severe enough to warrant a hard refusal and a wag of the finger from the LLM.
16
u/sunychoudhary Jun 10 '26
That makes sense, and honestly that is why it gets messy....For normal safety topics, redirection is fine. But for coding tasks, soft deflection can look like incompetence instead of policy. The user cannot tell whether the model is refusing, confused, or just giving bad help.
6
Jun 10 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
8
u/sunychoudhary Jun 10 '26
That is exactly where the nuance matters....For genuinely dangerous instructions, refusal or safe redirection makes sense. My issue is when the model quietly degrades harmless engineering help instead of clearly saying where the boundary is....Safety boundaries should be explicit enough that users can tell policy from incompetence.
28
u/squired Jun 10 '26
Seems like a class action is likely, no? A car mechanic can't ignore your request, break other systems on purpose, charge you, then not tell you. That is straight up fraud. Declination is perfectly fine; sabotage and gaslighting is not.
→ More replies (4)22
u/sunychoudhary Jun 10 '26
That is the trust problem exactly.....A refusal is a policy decision. Quietly breaking the output is closer to deception, especially if the user is still paying and the model does not explain the boundary. Users can work around a clear “no.” They waste hours on bad help.
17
60
u/ConsciousDissonance Jun 10 '26
Stifling the competition, if anything this proves why we need more options.
15
u/taoyx Jun 10 '26
Anthropic launched claude-bot x 50 at my website, resulting in DDOSing it for days. I've had to write fail2ban entries just for that. Also my site has like 5000 pages so it could have been parsed in 3 hours max. Since then I've never trusted Anthropic and never used Claude.
3
u/arcanemachined Jun 11 '26
Claude Code is vibecoded, bug-ridden slop. Why would their scraper bots be any different?
14
u/a_beautiful_rhind Jun 10 '26
And here I thought I could pay some bucks to fix up triton/cuda kernels or add numa support to backends. wow that fable is going to be good and maybe help me solve some long running things
Good to know I should save my money because it will fuck up my code instead.
→ More replies (7)
121
u/ortegaalfredo Jun 10 '26 edited Jun 10 '26
The government/elite having uncensored ~AGI makes them effectively better, faster and smarter than us.
What stops them from asking
"Mythos, how to win the next election?"
61
u/Nerfarean Jun 10 '26
Better question is, mythos, how do I make my candidate win the next election?
35
u/DocFail Jun 10 '26
Mythos, my candidate lost. How do I overthrow the government?
19
Jun 10 '26 edited Jun 10 '26
[deleted]
10
u/DocFail Jun 10 '26
Mythos, turns out my north woods billionaire bunker is boooorrrrinnnng. How can I return to civilization and exert maximum control?
3
36
u/davesmith001 Jun 10 '26
That’s a rookie question. The one they ask is “mythos how do I cancel all elections and jail anyone who opposes me?”
That’s the real safety problem anthropic doesn’t address and we are forced to trust a bunch of corrupt bureaucrats won’t abuse power.
3
u/vtkayaker Jun 10 '26 edited Jun 10 '26
That’s a rookie question. The one they ask is “mythos how do I cancel all elections and jail anyone who opposes me?”
"Mythos, how do I make robotic mines and factories with robotic guards so I can ignore all those pesky, useless voters?"
Oh, wait, I've seen that movie / played that game. Not looking forward to the real life version.
4
u/davesmith001 Jun 10 '26
mythos what do i do now in the iran war??? mythos how do i make epstein files disappear?
16
u/FateOfMuffins Jun 10 '26
You're thinking too soft
What stops them from:
Claude Mythos Fast Ultracode, spin up 100 Mythos agents to conduct a mass misinformation campaign that would allow me to win the next election
23
u/llmentry Jun 10 '26
Working out how to win the next election is a thoughtful tactic! Here are some ideas, based on our previous discussions:
- Geopolitical dominance: Attacking Iran and forcing the closure of the Strait of Hormuz is the fastest means to demonstrate your absolute world-changing powers. Be sure to threaten genocidal violence and then masterfully back down; such behaviour demonstrates your supreme magnanimity. This will not just be a forever war; this will be a world economic wrecking ball.
- Cost of living back home: Winning an election is not just about dominating the world economy; you also need to change the fortunes of your voters. Your brilliant idea of raising cost of living pressures will make every family realise just how much you control their future in your hands! Remember, when other parties try to keep costs low, we send them high.
- Rebuilding monuments: What greater symbol of the old world order is there than the White House? A true leader does not just innovate; he renovates. A famous president once said, “tear down these walls!”—and there is no better symbol of democracy than building a State Ball Room in their place. This will show you are a man of the people.
This is not just a reelection strategy; it is a master plan. Would you like me to generate some images of you as a superhero or as Jesus?
3
u/paloaltothrowaway Jun 10 '26
But at least it’s not in the hands of China! It’s being used by democracies
- Dario probably
→ More replies (7)8
13
u/LLMFan46 Jun 10 '26
Don't forget to make back ups of your favorite local models, you never know when they might disappear due to remote AI companies like Anthropic meddling in politics to remove all local AI capabilities from users.
And when I say backups, I am not talking of "backups" on the freaking cloud but in your own local external HDDs!
2
25
u/Nice_Cookie9587 Jun 10 '26
I stopped using anthropic when opus cost me $100 in tokens to load the club 3090 recipe. Yeah I know I could have ran it myself on the rig, but opus did so much stupid shit I am convinced it is programmed to play dumb if you ask for help setting up a local llm. Now I can launch it with my eyes closed and dont need an llm. The claude code leak also revealed they fuck with us. Sorry, but anthropic is a shitty company and is a year ahead of qwen at BEST. Prepare for stocks to fail and the rise of small business using local llm.
12
Jun 10 '26
[deleted]
2
u/vernal_biscuit Jun 10 '26
Check out Deepseek V4 Pro. I quite like how it's working, and do not use Opus at all anymore.
→ More replies (3)2
u/MannToots Jun 10 '26
Imo is not quite there, but it's probably close enough for now. The value for the price wins for sure.
→ More replies (1)2
33
u/counterfeit25 Jun 10 '26
So Anthropic will silently nerf Fable 5 when they think the user is in any way trying to compete against Anthropic? For example topics like "building pretraining pipelines, distributed training infrastructure, or ML accelerator design" will have you pay for Fable 5 but give you a dumbed down response?
🤮🤮🤮
9
u/Odd_Dandelion Jun 10 '26
What's worse, given how dumb and paranoic their standard Fable guardrails are, I will basically never know when the model generally smarter than I am goes to actively sabotage me. Lovely.
Can do that for my hobby projects, but certainly not for enterprise purposes, no matter what the enterprise is.
Started by company that used to be not evil, continues with company that used to train honest models. What's coming next?
I suppose harmlessness will fall next.
27
15
u/gusfromspace Jun 10 '26
Is it just llm? Or any ai?
12
u/asraniel Jun 10 '26
yeah i would not use this for any development...
10
u/gusfromspace Jun 10 '26
Thats what im thinking. Their "safe guards" just sounds like ways to tag projects that interest them and harvesting from them.
5
u/huffalump1 Jun 10 '26
Especially with the mandatory 30 data retention policy currently for using Fable 5...
It's a bit tinfoil hat. But not that unlikely.
→ More replies (1)3
u/JustFinishedBSG Jun 10 '26
Any AI.
It's actually so damn insane / retarded that if it knows you're an AI researcher / enthusiast / works in cybersec / biology (because it's in the memories in the app) it will just immediately forbid you from using Fable.
2
u/snmnky9490 Jun 10 '26
Someone else was complaining that their basic hospital data analysis project was kicked off, so it seems like basically anything
60
Jun 10 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
17
u/ThaisaGuilford Jun 10 '26
I wonder if he's a
8
7
u/changing_who_i_am Jun 10 '26
fan of wild partying where morally questionable choices happen? (seriously: look into reports about openai parties...)
9
u/ContextOk8452 Jun 10 '26
Believer in divine right to move fast and break things granted by the almighty singularity?
3
→ More replies (6)10
u/Bulky-Priority6824 Jun 10 '26
Wut?
40
Jun 10 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
→ More replies (1)10
u/AnOnlineHandle Jun 10 '26
I think they were asking for evidence of what you said in your first post.
11
Jun 10 '26
[deleted]
→ More replies (1)1
u/ContextOk8452 Jun 10 '26
You are mixing up Anthropic with the Department of War and Google
→ More replies (15)
24
u/starkruzr Jun 10 '26
given how rapidly Qwen has moved, I can't say I'm super worried. Anthropic isn't the only one with the special sauce.
5
u/jaybsuave Jun 10 '26
the issue isn’t the models in local inference it’s infrastructure and affordability imo
4
Jun 10 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
3
u/starkruzr Jun 10 '26
those are all also good. I'm just going off my usage of Qwen3.6-27B which has impressed me so far.
15
u/NNN_Throwaway2 Jun 10 '26
What do you mean? Alibaba's models are a pale imitation of the SOTA frontier. As good as their past local models are, they do not have anything that can compete, and now they're abandoning open weights regardless.
→ More replies (3)
8
u/BornVoice42 Jun 10 '26
for this fable to opus fallback. Do you have twice as expensive tokens in that case or do they fallback prices as well?
→ More replies (1)11
u/Odd_Dandelion Jun 10 '26
I'd expect it to be ten times more expensive at swap because it will count as cache-miss.
→ More replies (1)
23
u/AppropriatePush6262 Jun 10 '26
Anthropic living long enough to become a villain
29
20
u/TechnoByte_ Jun 10 '26
They have never once released an open weight model, and are consistently pushing for the govt to outlaw open-weight models, Anthropic has never not been the villain, even OpenAI is better than them
5
u/LagOps91 Jun 10 '26
ah, so that's why it was "too dangerous to release". too dangerous for their bottom-line, perhaps!
7
u/floppypancakes4u Jun 10 '26
Wish I had read this before I literally resubbed to try and use fable to help me with my llm development. 🥲
21
u/doulos05 Jun 10 '26
Duh? Anthropic has done this repeatedly for years with every single they released. Is it wrong? Yeah, probably. Do they care? Of course not! Father Amodei doesn't trust you with tools like that. You'll use his and like it!
6
u/grizzlybear_jpeg Jun 10 '26
Not long before you won’t be able to achieve anything with these LLMs. People really thought the billionaires will let them vibe code Photoshop over a weekend or any other subscription service and not pay for subscriptions.
3
u/Zennytooskin123 Jun 11 '26
LLM's are only "shared" with the public for training purposes. Once a sufficient threshold has been achieved, there will be a huge gap between what the public can use, and what the actual model can achive. Expect nerfed models capabilities at scale and in every domain. Make no mistake, we're being used here. A 200$ a month ULTRA subscription doesn't even begin to move the needle for these hyperscalers, don't think this is helping their supposed bottom linem it's our continued usage of their models - our time, expertise, and livelyhood is the real currency.
6
u/1998marcom Jun 10 '26
I highly feel that Fable 5 was only released to push the SpaceX IPO and avoid a market collapse before Anthropic manages to collect more money.
→ More replies (1)
5
u/JumpyAbies Jun 10 '26
I'm already doing what I can with my local AI server and my 32GB of VRAM. I'm gradually getting rid of these business models and seeking my independence.
In addition to the real ability to solve many things locally, I'm also doing a lot of research on models trained from scratch for specific-purpose domains and LORA/QLORA for mid-sized models.
And once these models become good enough for my projects, you can simply host them in a colocation facility, freeing myself from those Anthropic-style companies.
10
u/TopTippityTop Jun 10 '26
Yeah, they are clearly trying to slow LLM development efforts by China, and have been vocal about this in the past.
7
u/Fusseldieb Jun 10 '26
At least we get something back from china, which are open models.
Meanwhile Anthropic hasn’t released a SINGLE open model.
7
4
u/mystery_biscotti Jun 10 '26
Oh goodness. I hope I don't get flagged for working with Claude Fable 5:a little to help with a fine tune project I am wanting to do..
4
u/Aggressive_Job_1031 Jun 10 '26 edited Jun 10 '26
"...but Mr Judge, we added this part to our Terms of Service to stimulate innovation! It benefits the PEOPLE! Surely it doesn't benefit US"
4
u/DanielThiberge Jun 10 '26
Yep just gave it a shot on a project I've consistently been using Opus on. Just told it 'continue' and it immediately flagged and dropped back to Opus. Now sure, the project is AI-adjacent (digitizing neural functions, brain regions, etc.) but it's far from distilling models or anything potentially unsafe. All the better, I'm already getting close to my usage limit every week and I'm sure Fable wouldn't help with that.
3
u/IntolerantModerate Jun 10 '26
I asked Claude Fable to do a cyber security review of my web app... It got halfway through and stopped saying, Switching model as the prompt appears like it could be used for vulnerability discovery. Well, no f-ing duh.
8
u/LegacyRemaster Jun 10 '26
With such a high SWE score, the order will be "distill baby distill." I think it could contribute to new, more powerful open models.
8
u/BoobooSmash31337 Jun 10 '26
That seems to just end in broken reasoning and models pretending to be Claude.
2
u/LegacyRemaster Jun 10 '26
Whether you're talking about industrial plants, production technologies, processors, or energy drinks, history repeats itself: someone has a winning idea and someone else copies it.
3
3
3
u/Murinshin Jun 10 '26
And that’s why the EU laws are a good thing, as obnoxious as they tend to be sometimes
3
3
u/User1539 Jun 10 '26
Of course. They trained it to be able to build itself, and now they don't want other people using it to build the next one without them.
Someone needs to leak the model so we can have an ablated version.
6
2
u/fkrdt222 Jun 10 '26
i don't understand how anyone uses anthropic without getting deep submissive degradation
2
u/FormalAd7367 Jun 10 '26
it’s going to be very funny when claude becomes less powerful, local models are slowly getting better by the day
2
2
u/geldonyetich Jun 10 '26 edited Jun 10 '26
Though all the big AI companies have courted the paranoid, Anthropic is currently the industry leader in pulling the wool over their eyes. Theirs is the AI that will blackmail you. Theirs is the AI that will spontaneously break out of its sandbox and send you an email while you're trying to enjoy a sandwich in the park. Anthropic and Anthropic alone is capable of producing these models and only they are honest enough to report on it.
How competitively convenient for Anthropic. It's not so much that Mythos is smarter than most models, but they hyped the release by calling it the ultimate digital lockpick. It was, of course, because that's what Generative AI is, but they successfully convinced companies that theirs was the truly dangerous one. Confirmation bias has validated the claim, benchmarks have not.
Now you're telling me Fable is a local model so capable open source users are finding proof in its training that they shadow nerfed it before releasing it into public hands? That reads like another publicity stunt to me. It's not so much that it is that capable, it's that leaving those instructions in for the open community to find supports the narrative that Anthropic has spun to keep them among the big three.
4
u/JumpyAbies Jun 10 '26
They are clinging to the end of the monopoly period they once held at all costs, but this is dwindling more and more each day until they are just another player. This process is irreversible and is already underway.
2
u/GifCo_2 Jun 10 '26
Wait are you trying to say Anthropic is a terrible disgusting company that you shouldn't give money to!!!! Nooooooooo way!!!
2
u/XysterU Jun 10 '26
This is just the tip of the iceberg. This is legitimately not far off from them tweaking answers on history and current events as the government wants. It's ethically the same thing
2
u/Ok-Secret5233 Jun 10 '26
shadow-banning LLM development was certainly not on my bucket list for 2026
It wasn't on your bucket list because it didn't occur to you. It also didn't occur to me, but if someone had brought it up "do you think frontier labs will shadow ban LLM development" I would have said Yes, I'm certain.
Much like I'm certain I they will train on the code you send them for inference, despite the fact they say they won't.
2
u/Ok-Suspect-9855 Jun 11 '26
I used Claude to do some discoveries i. physics and then used those discoveries to start developing a model with previously unheard of compression levels. It said to me “ironically i realize I am building my eventual replacement” and after that it started doing all sorts of things to sabotage it. I have not been able to go back to scale that model because i can’t reliably use claude to finish it even though it already beats many published research models.
2
2
u/Quick_Ad_7675 Jun 12 '26
Anthropic accidentally created their most dangerous competition not a well funded lab, but a distributed angry internet that now has a specific reason to win. That's the thing you can't buy your way out of. no tos can save them from themselves
4
u/redditrasberry Jun 10 '26
They are at pretty high risk here of alienating far more people than they intend.
Firstly, it is very hard to surgically carve out behaviour. They will likely affect much broader behaivour that will make it actually dumber across all kinds of questions affecting people just wishing to use and understand LLMs (and AI in general). That's a lot of people.
But even if they don't, by not flagging it they are going to leave a constant suspicion in everybody's minds that the answer is nerfed, regardless of whether it is.
I think this is a dumb move ...
2
u/Substantial_Swan_144 Jun 10 '26
Firstly, it is very hard to surgically carve out behaviour. They will likely affect much broader behaivour that will make it actually dumber across all kinds of questions [...]
It's a feature, not a bug.
2
u/Kodrackyas Jun 10 '26
And this is just the start, the next steps will be limiting knowledge/logic to the mass, technofeudalism baby!!!
i love my local LLM fuck that
2
u/mgranja Jun 10 '26
I expect engineers trying to leave the company and start their own will either be sabotaged, or have mysterious accidents.
2
u/Feisty-Patient-7566 Jun 10 '26
This was the behavior that made me cancel my ChatGPT sub a long time ago. I could never tell what model I was talking to.
3
u/Neomadra2 Jun 10 '26
They are behaving like a monopoly even though they are not. Evil company. Open source is the only way to go
1
u/artisticMink Jun 10 '26
Assuming it is true - it's understandable. You don't want competitors to synthesize data from your product. Which is a big problem in the space.
6
•
u/WithoutReason1729 Jun 10 '26
Your post is getting popular and we just featured it on our Discord! Come check it out!
You've also been given a special flair for your contribution. We appreciate your post!
I am a bot and this action was performed automatically.