We all need cyborg cats to hunt cyborg mice. There's no other compromise unless you want a rat infestation.

this doesn't mean it cannot leak but it would be a major undertaking.

this is why anthropic isn't that worried about having Elon service their models. the workflow would be something like handshaking with the nvidia TEE, provisioning it with your keys and then uploading encrypted weights. there is probably also a timer in there so you can't continue operating the nvidia box with the stolen weights without a heartbeat signal.

This worked fine before. I love Claude, I have stuck with it even through people saying Codex is better but this is definitely getting to be the last straw.

It's completely absurd I am paying them $200+ per month along with pushing them when I do contracts and they can't even deliver a baseline respectful service.

In 6 months I am sure they'll only allow me to talk about Easybake recipes and after someone gets burned on the lightbulb, they'll downgrade it to discussing wildflower meadows.

That's enshittification for ya I guess

https://cognition.com/blog/devin-fusion

I’m not falling over myself to test out Sonnet 5, but I am very interested in Fable.

Anthropic provides a service and they can stop offering it regardless of export ban or not, same goes for any other AI company in any country. If you really wants a trusted LLM, then run your own open weight model.

> 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. Learn more about using usage credits.

I'm not sure what this means in the long run. Either Fable 5 might become part of the subscription again once stronger models become available or Anthropic's compute capacity increases, or this is the start of the subscription being phased out. It doesn't really make sense to pay for a subscription that's stuck on Opus 4.8 when other providers are continually pushing out better models.

  Dynamic workflow "Multi-lens review of docs/membership-and-friends-model.md with adversarial verification" completed · 25m 59s

  You've reached your Fable 5 limit

  You've used your included Fable 5 usage for this week. Continuing on Fable 5 uses usage credits

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.

For now... You never know with these companies.

> 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.

https://x.com/AnthropicAI/status/2072163884430229756

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTTP_451

Why would you EVER think this is a positive thing? When have customers ever be happy about UI changes? UI changes are stupid. Animations are stupid. If it works, then just leave it and don't hop onto the next shiny rounded corner design. Constant design changes are annoying as hell and it sounds like you are the reason why the internet is so incredibly frustrating to use

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?

Fable 5's safeguards flagged this message (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.

I guess? If you squint? DSP code could look a little like AI training code? ... Er. No. Not really I'm pretty lost on this one.

The task was literally just to compare against the "make a beautiful voice" plan, see what we've implemented, see what's left to do, and to make recommendations for low-hanging fruit, anything we've done wrong so far? (aaaaand ... downgrade. At least it wasn't silent.

[0]: https://github.com/ctoth/qlatt

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”.

https://x.com/AnthropicAI/status/2072163884430229756

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.

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.

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.