Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by krzyk | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

krzyk

And to the guardrails of Fable: https://x.com/cheatyyyy/status/2080693704290140330

View on HN

That tweet says:

> Opus 5 can silently fallback to Opus 4.8 (without any notice) on the serverside if you hit a guardrail

But https://support.claude.com/en/articles/16049681-why-claude-s... says (emphasis mine):

> These checks cause Claude to _visibly_ fallback from Opus 5 to Opus 4.8 [...] You'll see a notice explaining that the model switched, and the response will be labeled with the model that answered.

So who is right? I know for Fable I am visibly told, is this tweet trying to say it is silent against what Anthropic is saying?

Is some random guy on Twitter right, or official support docs that explicitly describe this scenario?

If it was Microsoft then definitely some random guy on Twitter.

For Anthropic, it's more a 50:50 toss-up.

Having a bit too much trust in AI companies have we ?

So, announcing the fallback is better than doing it silently, but the fact that Fable falls back frequently for the kind of work I do (a lot of security oriented stuff lately, but it falls back on seemingly random stuff, sometimes, too), means I reach for it less. Getting interrupted mid-task makes it much less valuable. If I have any suspicion I'm going to hit the guardrails, I'll use something else.

Same problem here, I seem to hit guardrails all the time when doing code audits. Does anyone have any insight over whether they're less annoying in Opus 5 than Fable? That is, is it better to start with Opus 5 than Fable because you'll get kicked backed to Opus 4.8 less often?

There also seems to be some cross-pollination across models, going Fable, Fable, Fable, guardrail, Opus 4.8, Opus 4.8, ... gives more Fable-like results from Opus than just Opus 4.8, Opus 4.8, Opus 4.8, ...

Played with it for a couple of hours now, I'd say it's slightly better than Fable for coding and so far I haven't hit any guardrails while I'd hit them all the time with Fable.

It's showing you're switched to 4.8, i just hit that while doing security research.

i wonder if anyone thinks im weird for still using 4.6 lmao it's my "good enough" model. im more than pleased at what i can whip up with 4.6, once local llm's get here with a decent sized context window and it feels like using 4.6, i shall depart the land of these dumb service subscriptions

And that one was funny: https://x.com/i/status/2080697793023483928

Reply on news.ycombinator.com