Hacker News Reader

Fable is by Anthropic, and this is too expensive, GLM 5.2 is roughly the same quality at a much cheaper price.

(I mantain a client with llama.cpp and 101 models across 14 companies by http)

As much as I like GLM 5.2 it's clearly a step below Opus (or even Fable) for more complicated tasks. I would place it at Opus 4.6/4.7 level.

Having said that, the safety system on Fable makes it an extremely unattractive model. It feels that half of the time you're paying double for Opus level performance.

Fable won’t even generate a jwt to test endpoints because it is security related. It is crazy capable but useless for real work

Unless your real work is outside the scope of one tiny niche of work.

Eh, it doesn't hit you until it hits you.

I finally bumped into a task that Codex would refuse to work on.

Was I attempting to reverse-engineer a GPU driver? Yes. Was I trying to hack into the DoD? No.

I wasn't doing anything wrong, but that's not what OpenAI's safety mechanisms thought.

GLM has issues with tool calls and nested JSON and it wastes tokens pretty often. I see it being a bit above half the price of Opus in a bit more complex eval tasks. With some RL you could probably get the tool calls sorted and the price down.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com