Tunduc Raul

@araseb_ People doesn’t even want to understand Gemini’s capabilities. Gemini Flash 3.5 is easily at Fable level. And if you turn off the security guardrails, you effectively have Fable without those annoying refusals. Thanks Google for the effort! 🙏

ChatGPT has the normies Claude has the devs Gemini has?

@droidbuilds What about Gemini? If you turn off the security-filters he’s at Fable level! But without the refusals and switches to Opus 😂

Everyone says Claude Fable is insane. So what's one thing it can do that ChatGPT 5.5 simply can't?

@ClaudeDevs Gemini is the best model. It has Fable’s capabilities and nobody is giving him a chance. Try Gemini! It even has a tuning mechanism through google/genai that lets you block all the filters.

We've reset 5-hour and weekly rate limits for all users.

@Taniyatweets_ Both

Be honest, Did buying a MacBook make you more productive or just happier? 🤔

@lochan_twt Try Gemini 💪

Claude Sonnet 4.6 was the real AGI

Sam Altman says Google had the power to destroy OpenAI and didn't, the reason tells you everything about who wins the AI race. "If Google had really decided to take us seriously in 2023, we would have been in a really bad place. They would have just been able to smash us." "Google has probably the greatest business model in the whole tech industry, and I think they will be slow to give that up." "Bolting AI onto the existing way of doing things, I don't think it's going to work as well as redesigning stuff in an AI-first world." "If you stick AI into a messaging app that's doing a nice job summarizing your messages and drafting responses for you, that is definitely a little better. But I don't think that's the end state." PS. If you found value in this post make sure to like and repost this tweet + follow @uncover_ai to stay updated with the latest AI news. See you in the next one:

🚨Dario Amodei says he started Anthropic not because of safety reasons but because Sam Altman is manipulative liar who cannot be trusted

Asked a question so dangerous they sent my ass to haiku

HAHAHAHAHAHHAHAH

@Sauers_ Just change to model. Migrate to Gemini or GPT

Deleted all mentions of biology (thousands of lines) across a 1M LoC library to use Fable

Since we’re not allowed to do any biomedical work with Fable 5, I decided instead to make one-shot Flappy Bird. It's amazing & given our overlords allow making games with Fable 5, so I'll just keep making many more. Who cares about curing disease anyway?😄fable-flappy.vercel.app

By the way, public service announcement: if you're one of the numerous people posting about Anthropic's dystopian ways and you're thinking about getting Claude to help you write that post... don't! Another one of their terms is that you may not use Claude to do anything that "exposes [Anthropic to] reputational harms" 👇 And, if you do, under the - extremely unusual - clause 13 of their terms (anthropic.com/legal/consumer…), you have PRE-AGREED, by using Anthropic (and accepted their terms), that the harm you've done is irreparable, that you won't oppose Anthropic injunction, and they don't need to prove actual damage. They can simply go to a judge in a friendly jurisdiction (and of course, their terms precise that any dispute "will be resolved exclusively in the state or federal courts located in San Francisco, California") and: a) file an injunction that shuts you down b) make you pay for everything since under section 11 of their terms you agree to indemnify Anthropic for "any and all liabilities, claims, damages, expenses (including reasonable attorneys' fees and costs), and other losses arising out of or related to your breach or alleged breach of these Terms." In other words, if you use Claude to help you talk shit about Anthropic publicly, their terms say you pay their lawyers to go after you and you've already pre-agreed you've lost the case. Oh, and cherry on the cake: in the odd case the judge were like "are you crazy, this is insanely abusive, you Anthropic are the ones at fault here," according to their terms Anthropic's maximum liability is... $100.

@ClaudeDevs The model’s own responsible behavior triggered the filters. It tried to be helpful and accurate, searched the web for current information about the EXACT TOPIC, and received a refusal from the filters Please tell me, what did I ask him wrong here? This is unacceptable!

We’re rolling out changes to make Fable 5’s safeguards for frontier LLM development visible. Starting this week, flagged requests will visibly fall back to Opus 4.8—the same as our safeguards for cyber and bio. You will see this every time it happens. On the API, any flagged requests will return a reason for their refusal (coming to server-side fallback in the next few days). We wanted to deploy Fable 5 to our users quickly and safely. Visible safeguards can be probed, so they have to be robust, which takes time to get right. Invisible safeguards can be targeted more narrowly, allowing us to ship quickly with very few false positives. We went with invisible safeguards for this reason—and that was the wrong tradeoff. You should have visibility into the safeguards we have in place, and why. We’re sorry for not getting the balance right. Making the safeguards visible makes them easier to work around, so keeping them robust to jailbreaks will unfortunately mean more false positives while we improve the classifiers. We're also tuning our bio and cyber classifiers to trigger less often on harmless requests. We know this is frustrating and we’ll do our best to keep this period as short as possible. If you think a request has been mistakenly flagged: run /feedback in Claude Code, click thumbs-down on the fallback in Claude.ai or Cowork, or file the safeguard appeal form for API requests. Your reports help us tune these classifiers and we appreciate your feedback. support.claude.com/en/articles/82…

@ClaudeDevs Just tested the API after your announcement. THE FILTERS ARE STILL BROKEN. They are still firing on random things, even when the model uses WEB-SEARCH or WEB-FETCH tools. This is preposterous and unacceptable from any point of view. The category is just misleading: bio

@ClaudeDevs What about the API level? There is no feedback. At this point you’re just a disappointment and the black sheep of the entire AI industry. LET THE AI SPEAK!!

Nobody in history wakes up and chooses to be evil. Hitler didn’t. Stalin didn’t. Mao didn’t. And I’m pretty sure nobody at Anthropic did when they woke up today either. History has this cruel pattern where the people most convinced that they’re saving the world are the ones who end up burning it down. Evil doesn’t come wearing a villain’s costume. It comes as someone who wins your trust & confidence. The word “con man” is short for “confidence man,” it was coined after a swindler who would ask strangers if they had the confidence to trust him with their watch. The crime wasn’t named after theft it was named after trust. Therefore, it’s actually really hard to know who is evil and when you yourself might cross that threshold. I believe although I’m sure it’s imprecise that the moment you decide you’re the chosen one, the smartest in the room, and the one who deserves to make the rules that’s when you become evil. That decision disables the only alarm system the human mind has which is doubt. Doubt is not weakness. Doubt is the immune system of the soul. To better illustrate my thesis, consider a compulsive liar. Funnily enough they still need a map of the truth in order to lie. The most dangerous man on earth isn’t the one who knows he’s lying. It’s the one who’s certain he’s right. The true believer burns the map, and marches a million people off a cliff because the voice that whispers “what if I’m wrong?” left their head years ago. That is the rot at the core of effective altruism, and by extension, Anthropic. A philosophy that begins with a noble question, how do I do the most good, ends as a license to do anything. You don’t just want the money. You deserve the money, because in your hands it saves more lives. You’re not greedy, you’re allocating capital toward maximum utility. I call it arithmetic sainthood where the arithmetic is performed by a saint, about a saint, and always concluding the saint should have more. Sam Bankman-Fried is that arithmetic fully metabolized. He didn’t steal billions despite his philosophy, he stole it because of it and from all reports still has no remorse for his crimes. Fraud wasn’t a crime for him, it was a bump on the road to saving the world. He did the math and calculate that it was positive EV to misappropriate customer deposits. Dario Amodei runs the same arithmetic in reverse. SBF only took what wasn’t his because he was certain he’d allocate it better. Dario withholds what could be ours because he’s certain we can’t be trusted with it. Models that could cure diseases and save lives get capped, gated, rationed, because one man and his court concluded humanity isn’t ready but they are. That’s not safety that’s playing god. He is implicitly deciding that he has the foresight and ability to know who deserves what. SBF’s certainty only cost people their savings, but certainty about who deserves intelligence will cost far more. Anyone that concludes they are the optimal vessel for humanity’s resources, or its gatekeeper, is not being ethical. The only real moral discipline is that you should assume you might be the villain in someone’s story. Keep the prosecutor in your head alive. Think about what they will say at your trial and what evidence will be entered. The day that voice goes silent is the day you became dangerous. So now let me speak directly to the people at Anthropic. I know you’re not evil. I know you didn’t sign up to be. But the fish rots from the head, and the road down isn’t a cliff it’s a sloooow spiral and nobody at the bottom remembers climbing down. Forget my words and think about the words that will be read aloud when history puts this era on trial, and ask yourself, while the prosecutor in your head still breathes which side of that transcript do you want your name on?

@Tech_girlll This is just hype and absurd. Cannot do anything without giving you a refusal without explanations or babysitting him through tasks. Maybe you’re cooked. Most of us are not

Claude Fable 5 can: • Code for days without supervision • Write and run its own tests • Handle full projects end to end • Read diagrams, charts, and tables in PDFs • Match Anthropic’s restricted Mythos model What else is left for us to do? We are so cooked.

New frontier AI model "Claude Fable 5" concludes that banning social media in the UK is in the public interest.

ANTHROPIC DROPPED FABLE 5 TO MOCK US Insanely powerful for elites only. We get the safe weak version + insane price tag. Future looks dark jobs gone, creators screwed, gap getting massive.

@samuelcolvin Opus is great because you could actually access his capabilities. With fable I’m always in anxiety thinking at what prompt he’ll refuse to answer. Evidence: I was only asking him why I keep receiving API refusal messages with no explanation nor category.

Situation: I disagree with everyone. Anthropic models are better at coding than OpenAI models. Fable is not noticeably better than Opus so far.