monkpit

Have you used both? I’ve never experienced any seemingly greater level of intelligence from Fable 5 over Opus.

A bit more direct

Sigh, and I quietly closed the article as it was quietly written by AI.

That’s not just lazy — that’s uninteresting. And it’s more uninteresting than you think.

Look, I get where you’re going, but if you think about what would _actually_ happen, it would definitely be much worse if they suddenly had to rehire the majority of the force.

It’s implying “overtime is a function of staffing, staffing went up so overtime should go down”.

What if the population went up? What if there’s more work for 1 person to do for whatever reason, like some new process? What if crime rates changed? What if traffic beats were more demanding due to new roads or whatever?

The rest of the data in the article is more damning and directly correlated to the point they’re trying to make.

This specific data point just raises more questions than answers and feels like they’re trying to dogpile instead of being journalists, and it would have made their case stronger if they left it out, imo.

The data in this article is good, but this piece is really weak. They should have just left this blurb out.

The only observable side effect, as a user, is that the system does what you want more often than one without this prompt. Or, it stays more aligned with the provider’s guidelines. Or some combination of both.

If it was a 65k context window, then it might be a bigger deal. But it isn’t, so the comparison is moot.

EDIT: I see, the control vectors operate more directly upon the model, in a way embedding vectors don’t quite have access to.