Re:Anthropic apologizes for invisible Claude Fable guardrails
by solenoid0937 on Thursday June 11, 2026 @01:26PM
(#48493423)
Opus is nowhere close to Fable. Fable feels at least one generation ahead to me. https://x.com/hyperagentapp/status/2064396004032463157
Edit: OpenAI will launch a similar model soon and I can't wait. We are entering a new era of agents.
Re:Anthropic apologizes for invisible Claude Fable guardrails
by CuriouslyC on Thursday June 11, 2026 @02:54PM
(#48494822)
Models are spiky. In some narrow domains (cybersecurity, for instance) it will be a generation ahead. On the other hand a lot of people don't see a measurable difference between Opus ~4.5 and 4.6/7/8, because Anthropic taught it how to do some hard stuff better, but they didn't give it better taste or make it produce cleaner solutions to simpler problems.
Re:Anthropic apologizes for invisible Claude Fable guardrails
by zozbot234 on Thursday June 11, 2026 @01:51PM
(#48493881)
Fable is very much an incremental development over Opus, and even more incremental when properly compared to its existing counterparts GPT-Pro and Gemini Deep Research.
Re:Anthropic apologizes for invisible Claude Fable guardrails
by kolinko on Thursday June 11, 2026 @01:50PM
(#48493868)
ad
Re:Anthropic apologizes for invisible Claude Fable guardrails
by itintheory on Thursday June 11, 2026 @01:38PM
(#48493629)
Care to share any specifics?
Re:Anthropic apologizes for invisible Claude Fable guardrails
by noworriesnate on Thursday June 11, 2026 @02:13PM
(#48494238)
I have a design for a really complex software I want to build and there were gaps I knew of in the design. Opus couldn’t identify them but Fable did. I’m just talking about it reviewing the design, not coding. But yeah, it’s insanely expensive. It does spin off sub agents so I suspect it might be cheaper if you had it create a bunch of plan files and then pointed deepseek at this plan files or something like that
Re:Anthropic apologizes for invisible Claude Fable guardrails
by conjectures on Thursday June 11, 2026 @01:40PM
(#48493668)
What does this even mean?
Re:Anthropic apologizes for invisible Claude Fable guardrails
by beng-nl on Thursday June 11, 2026 @01:58PM
(#48493989)
Can you write a more specific question? I think the meaning of the comment is clear enough, but maybe you’re asking for more specifics? Ironically I can not understand what you are asking for with such a generic comment.
Re:Anthropic apologizes for invisible Claude Fable guardrails
by conjectures on Thursday June 11, 2026 @04:02PM
(#48495672)
> This is one awesome above a level.
> What does this even mean?
> What do you mean what does this mean?
...
Re:Anthropic apologizes for invisible Claude Fable guardrails
by solenoid0937 on Thursday June 11, 2026 @02:12PM
(#48494228)
I added a link.
[dead]
Re:Anthropic apologizes for invisible Claude Fable guardrails
by frereubu on Thursday June 11, 2026 @07:31PM
(#48497856)
Looking at the comment thread you linked, this kinda looks like harassment by you rather than anything "confirmed". You seem to have an unhealthy fixation on this user, who may just be a Claude enthusiast rather than a shill as such.
Especially after trying Fable yesterday for some benign projects and being unimpressive relative to opus.
Rolling it back is the right move, but I’m still not convinced that using them is in my best interest anymore, I’m investigating open source cloud providers now.