← Back to context

Comment by junebash

5 hours ago

This honestly just reads as “this model failed exactly where the company said it would but I’m very special and deserve special treatment rather than the same overactive guardrails I and everyone else were told we would get.”

I just think that Anthropic's usage of the word "classifier", which implies a minimum level of intelligence, was very misleading. Fact is, you cannot use Fable for anything remotely connected to even elementary school biology or medical topics. There is no attempt whatsoever to distinguish between legitimate and dangerous tasks, except an extremely broad and non-specific rejection of anything related to security or biology.

When did Anthropic say you couldn't use it for math?

  • If you feed their "pure math" question to Fable, in its reasoning it rightly determines that it is the sort of thing you find in phylogenetics / algebraic-combinatorics complexity papers. That is what triggers the classifier.

    Anthropic is 100% to blame for fear-mongering, but they said it would be blocked from any biology questions -- even high school level -- and they meant it. If the classifier sees anything related to biology, even in its own reasoning about the question, it blocks it.

    Saying it's therefore not useful generally is of course ridiculous. Is it annoying? Of course it is.