Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

Возникла проблема при загрузке этого видео. Это может быть связано с временными проблемами сети или видео может быть недоступно.

На главную

Fable 5 on Hyperagent is producing the most creative, ambitious work we've ever seen from our agents. They're self-improving for hours towards open-ended goals. Visual reasoning has spiked noticeably. Outputs are consistently higher quality than Opus, occasionally at lower cost. 5 of our test cases below vs. Opus 4.8... show more

Hyperagent

12,015 subscribers

1,230,689 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад •via X (Twitter)

Образование Новости и политика Наука и технологии

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

Комментарии: 0

Нет доступных комментариев

Здесь появятся комментарии из оригинального поста

Похожие видео

Anthropic Head of Product: "Fable 5 is the best model we've ever shipped for agentic work. Our engineers now ship 8x more code than they did in past years." in 42 minutes, the Anthropic team shows how to build self-improving agent systems with Fable 5: managed agents, dreaming, dynamic workflows worth more than a $500 agent building course live from Anthropic's latest stage in Japan, just hours ago i turned everything they showed on stage into a step-by-step guide on building your own agent you can find the full guide below

Anthropic Head of Product: "Fable 5 is the best model we've ever shipped for agentic work. Our engineers now ship 8x more code than they did in past years." in 42 minutes, the Anthropic team shows how to build self-improving agent systems with Fable 5: managed agents, dreaming, dynamic workflows worth more than a $500 agent building course live from Anthropic's latest stage in Japan, just hours ago i turned everything they showed on stage into a step-by-step guide on building your own agent you can find the full guide below

Anatoli Kopadze

81,094 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

i gave the exact same prompt to Opus 5 and Fable 5 and here's what came out Opus 5 dropped yesterday and my feed was instantly full of comparison posts but i wanted to check it myself so i gave it one task build 3d Flappy Bird first thing everyone was saying Opus is 2x cheaper than Fable BUT.. building the game on Max effort cost me 250k tokens and 1 hour on Opus and 130k on Fable but Fable did it in half the time Opus gave me volume control plus 3 separate graphics presets to choose from, Fable gave none of that in Opus the environment shifts dynamically as you play in Fable it's basically the same frame the whole run maybe a day/night change here and there graphics, animations, glow, all of it goes to Opus and now that limits jumped 50% for the near future while Fable went paid for me the call is obvious right now Opus same prompt start to finish zero changes to code or commands want it? i can send it over

i gave the exact same prompt to Opus 5 and Fable 5 and here's what came out Opus 5 dropped yesterday and my feed was instantly full of comparison posts but i wanted to check it myself so i gave it one task build 3d Flappy Bird first thing everyone was saying Opus is 2x cheaper than Fable BUT.. building the game on Max effort cost me 250k tokens and 1 hour on Opus and 130k on Fable but Fable did it in half the time Opus gave me volume control plus 3 separate graphics presets to choose from, Fable gave none of that in Opus the environment shifts dynamically as you play in Fable it's basically the same frame the whole run maybe a day/night change here and there graphics, animations, glow, all of it goes to Opus and now that limits jumped 50% for the near future while Fable went paid for me the call is obvious right now Opus same prompt start to finish zero changes to code or commands want it? i can send it over

savip.

45,764 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

Opus 5 is a modest upgrade, but it has tough competition in GPT-5.6 Sol Initial thoughts from our early access: > Clearer writing than Fable's dense communication style > Still gets too verbose compared to GPT models (even when explicitly instructed to keep text purposeful) > Strong on browser use inside Hyperagent > Strong on reviewing complex data to justify a decision > Less likely to take creative risks. More of a "rule follower" personality. Costs shown for five test cases (GPT-5.6 Sol was consistently much cheaper) Explore and judge the actual work for yourself in thread 👇

Opus 5 is a modest upgrade, but it has tough competition in GPT-5.6 Sol Initial thoughts from our early access: > Clearer writing than Fable's dense communication style > Still gets too verbose compared to GPT models (even when explicitly instructed to keep text purposeful) > Strong on browser use inside Hyperagent > Strong on reviewing complex data to justify a decision > Less likely to take creative risks. More of a "rule follower" personality. Costs shown for five test cases (GPT-5.6 Sol was consistently much cheaper) Explore and judge the actual work for yourself in thread 👇

Hyperagent

154,009 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

I couldn't believe the results of this benchmarking test. I blind-tested 6 frontier models — Sonnet 5, Opus 4.8, Fable 5, GPT 5.5, GLM 5.2, and Kimi 2.5 — on knowledge work, not engineering. Writing. Analysis. Design. Vibe coding. Subagent simulations. The stuff we actually do all day. Same prompts, each model running its own subagent, every output graded blind before the labels were revealed. The results: → GLM 5.2 (the dirt-cheap open-source model from China) took first → Sonnet 5 took second, beating Fable 5 for knowledge work → Opus 4.8 got whooped Then I had Composer 2.5 judge every output independently — and it picked Fable 5 almost across the board. My blind picks and the AI judge completely disagreed. Full breakdown, method, and prompts in the video below. Which model are you running as your daily driver right now?

I couldn't believe the results of this benchmarking test. I blind-tested 6 frontier models — Sonnet 5, Opus 4.8, Fable 5, GPT 5.5, GLM 5.2, and Kimi 2.5 — on knowledge work, not engineering. Writing. Analysis. Design. Vibe coding. Subagent simulations. The stuff we actually do all day. Same prompts, each model running its own subagent, every output graded blind before the labels were revealed. The results: → GLM 5.2 (the dirt-cheap open-source model from China) took first → Sonnet 5 took second, beating Fable 5 for knowledge work → Opus 4.8 got whooped Then I had Composer 2.5 judge every output independently — and it picked Fable 5 almost across the board. My blind picks and the AI judge completely disagreed. Full breakdown, method, and prompts in the video below. Which model are you running as your daily driver right now?

JJ Englert

10,737 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

Claude Fable 5 makes new things possible. I one shot a full horror game with it. One prompt. I have never seen AI output a game like this. This is the leap I've been waiting for. 80.3 on SWE-Bench Pro vs Opus 4.8 at 69.2, the biggest jump I have ever seen on that benchmark. It passed GPT 5.5 in both coding and intelligence on Artificial Analysis. I already canceled my $200 ChatGPT Pro plan. It fixed a Bridge Voice bug in one shot that GPT 5.5, Opus 4.7, and Opus 4.8 all failed to crack for 2 months. 10/10. Best model I have ever used. Full review below.

Claude Fable 5 makes new things possible. I one shot a full horror game with it. One prompt. I have never seen AI output a game like this. This is the leap I've been waiting for. 80.3 on SWE-Bench Pro vs Opus 4.8 at 69.2, the biggest jump I have ever seen on that benchmark. It passed GPT 5.5 in both coding and intelligence on Artificial Analysis. I already canceled my $200 ChatGPT Pro plan. It fixed a Bridge Voice bug in one shot that GPT 5.5, Opus 4.7, and Opus 4.8 all failed to crack for 2 months. 10/10. Best model I have ever used. Full review below.

BridgeMind

19,020 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

ANTHROPIC LEAKED 6 RULES THAT RUN 8 LOOPS AT ONCE - AND ONE ENGINEER DOES THE WORK OF A TEAM one engineer with this system replaces an entire team - and costs the company 8 times less You → Opus 5 plan → Fable 5 ×8 execute → Fable 5 review → you: 5 min Opus 5 takes your intent and breaks it into subtasks - a bad plan multiplied across every loop gives the same number of disasters - the plan is the only thing you read carefully one repo - isolated worktrees for each loop - nobody stands on anyone's file - parallel PRs ship while you do nothing the agent runs the tests and fixes until green PR - a red build never reaches your eyes one CLAUDE.md for the whole fleet - without it you get different opinions from every loop and one merge hell the average engineer closes 3-4 tasks a day - this system closes a full sprint overnight with zero working hours Fable 5 pre-reviews every PR before it reaches you - you spend 5 minutes - your throughput is now measured in diffs read per hour bookmark and paste into Claude Code - your first fleet can start tonight

ANTHROPIC LEAKED 6 RULES THAT RUN 8 LOOPS AT ONCE - AND ONE ENGINEER DOES THE WORK OF A TEAM one engineer with this system replaces an entire team - and costs the company 8 times less You → Opus 5 plan → Fable 5 ×8 execute → Fable 5 review → you: 5 min Opus 5 takes your intent and breaks it into subtasks - a bad plan multiplied across every loop gives the same number of disasters - the plan is the only thing you read carefully one repo - isolated worktrees for each loop - nobody stands on anyone's file - parallel PRs ship while you do nothing the agent runs the tests and fixes until green PR - a red build never reaches your eyes one CLAUDE.md for the whole fleet - without it you get different opinions from every loop and one merge hell the average engineer closes 3-4 tasks a day - this system closes a full sprint overnight with zero working hours Fable 5 pre-reviews every PR before it reaches you - you spend 5 minutes - your throughput is now measured in diffs read per hour bookmark and paste into Claude Code - your first fleet can start tonight

Sprytix

37,904 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

A security guard turned $900 into $187,000 on Polymarket. Guarded empty buildings for 10 years at $16/hour. One sleepless shift he built a BTC bot with Claude Opus 4.8. Never wrote a single line of code. I found his wallet. Reverse-engineered the entire system. Here is what he actually did. Gave Claude new Fable 5 two prompts at the start of his shift. Opus did not write the bot. It drew the blueprint: data, signals, backtest, risk, execution. Then handed that blueprint to a swarm of 300 agents. How it works: → Decompose: Claude Fable 5 breaks the goal into a task tree → Dispatch: 300 agents fan out (some pulling Binance data, some writing code, some backtesting 5 years of data) → Execute: 4,000 steps in one 14-hour run → Review: Claude Fable 5 reads it all back and kills whatever drifted The brain never wrote a line. The hands never made a call. By sunrise he had what a 6-engineer quant team ships in a quarter. A live BTC bot on Polymarket. Backtested. Risk-capped. Running 24/7. For 10 years he watched empty buildings. Now 300 agents watch the market while he sleeps. I rebuilt this exact system with Claude new Fable 5 You only need Claude + device + 1 hour to deploy. Giving this free for 24 hours. To get it: 1. Comment "Claude" 2. Like and retweet this 3. Follow me Himanshu Kumar so I can DM you

A security guard turned $900 into $187,000 on Polymarket. Guarded empty buildings for 10 years at $16/hour. One sleepless shift he built a BTC bot with Claude Opus 4.8. Never wrote a single line of code. I found his wallet. Reverse-engineered the entire system. Here is what he actually did. Gave Claude new Fable 5 two prompts at the start of his shift. Opus did not write the bot. It drew the blueprint: data, signals, backtest, risk, execution. Then handed that blueprint to a swarm of 300 agents. How it works: → Decompose: Claude Fable 5 breaks the goal into a task tree → Dispatch: 300 agents fan out (some pulling Binance data, some writing code, some backtesting 5 years of data) → Execute: 4,000 steps in one 14-hour run → Review: Claude Fable 5 reads it all back and kills whatever drifted The brain never wrote a line. The hands never made a call. By sunrise he had what a 6-engineer quant team ships in a quarter. A live BTC bot on Polymarket. Backtested. Risk-capped. Running 24/7. For 10 years he watched empty buildings. Now 300 agents watch the market while he sleeps. I rebuilt this exact system with Claude new Fable 5 You only need Claude + device + 1 hour to deploy. Giving this free for 24 hours. To get it: 1. Comment "Claude" 2. Like and retweet this 3. Follow me Himanshu Kumar so I can DM you

Himanshu Kumar

54,845 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

We’re open sourcing the first document OCR benchmark for the agentic era, ParseBench. Document parsing is the foundation of every AI agent that works with real-world files. ParseBench is a benchmark that measures parsing quality specifically for agent knowledge work: ✅ It optimizes for semantic correctness (instead of exact similarity) ✅ It has the most comprehensive distribution of real-world enterprise documents It contains ~2,000 human-verified enterprise document pages with 167,000+ test rules across five dimensions that matter most: tables, charts, content faithfulness, semantic formatting, and visual grounding. We benchmarked 14 known document parsers on ParseBench, from frontier/OSS VLMs to specialized parsers to LlamaParse. Here are some of our findings: 💡 Increasing compute budget yields diminishing returns - Gemini/gpt-5-mini/haiku gain 3-5 points from minimal to high thinking, at 4x the cost. 💡 Charts are the most polarizing dimension for evaluation. Most specialized parsers score below 6%, while some VLM-based parsers do a bit better. 💡 VLMs are great at visual understanding but terrible at layout extraction. GPT-5-mini/haiku score below 10% on our visual grounding task, all specialized parsers do much better. 💡 No method crushes all 5 dimensions at once, but LlamaParse achieves the highest overall score at 84.9%, and is the leader in 4 out of the 5 dimensions. This is by far the deepest technical work that we’ve published as a company. I would encourage you to start with our blog and explore our links to Hugging Face to GitHub. All the details are in our full 35-page (!!) ArXiv whitepaper. 🌐: Blog: 📄 Paper: 💻 Code: 📊 Dataset: 🎥 YouTube:

We’re open sourcing the first document OCR benchmark for the agentic era, ParseBench. Document parsing is the foundation of every AI agent that works with real-world files. ParseBench is a benchmark that measures parsing quality specifically for agent knowledge work: ✅ It optimizes for semantic correctness (instead of exact similarity) ✅ It has the most comprehensive distribution of real-world enterprise documents It contains ~2,000 human-verified enterprise document pages with 167,000+ test rules across five dimensions that matter most: tables, charts, content faithfulness, semantic formatting, and visual grounding. We benchmarked 14 known document parsers on ParseBench, from frontier/OSS VLMs to specialized parsers to LlamaParse. Here are some of our findings: 💡 Increasing compute budget yields diminishing returns - Gemini/gpt-5-mini/haiku gain 3-5 points from minimal to high thinking, at 4x the cost. 💡 Charts are the most polarizing dimension for evaluation. Most specialized parsers score below 6%, while some VLM-based parsers do a bit better. 💡 VLMs are great at visual understanding but terrible at layout extraction. GPT-5-mini/haiku score below 10% on our visual grounding task, all specialized parsers do much better. 💡 No method crushes all 5 dimensions at once, but LlamaParse achieves the highest overall score at 84.9%, and is the leader in 4 out of the 5 dimensions. This is by far the deepest technical work that we’ve published as a company. I would encourage you to start with our blog and explore our links to Hugging Face to GitHub. All the details are in our full 35-page (!!) ArXiv whitepaper. 🌐: Blog: 📄 Paper: 💻 Code: 📊 Dataset: 🎥 YouTube:

Jerry Liu

108,093 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

Opus 5 DID NOT 1 shot this paper sketch style multiplayer FPS game, with highly satisfying shooting mechanics. Been seeing all these "look at Opus 1 shotted" demos, tried the public prompts on Ultracode, and what it produces is a stuff of nightmares, worthy only of a selective screen recording for X. These are cool capability tests, but not games. I've been building this black/white themed high action and performance FPS that feels good to play for the last week or so . This was done as a series of ~100 prompts using Fable 5, Sol, Grok 4.5 and now Opus 5, over the course of ~20 hrs. I would not say Opus 5 is a "game changer", but its noticeably better, and sometimes faster. The demo video below is local sandbox mode, but 64hz LAN multiplayer works pretty well too. Ported over some Counterstrike maps (dust and assault), if you're into classics. Source code below. Run it with 3 commands.

Opus 5 DID NOT 1 shot this paper sketch style multiplayer FPS game, with highly satisfying shooting mechanics. Been seeing all these "look at Opus 1 shotted" demos, tried the public prompts on Ultracode, and what it produces is a stuff of nightmares, worthy only of a selective screen recording for X. These are cool capability tests, but not games. I've been building this black/white themed high action and performance FPS that feels good to play for the last week or so . This was done as a series of ~100 prompts using Fable 5, Sol, Grok 4.5 and now Opus 5, over the course of ~20 hrs. I would not say Opus 5 is a "game changer", but its noticeably better, and sometimes faster. The demo video below is local sandbox mode, but 64hz LAN multiplayer works pretty well too. Ported over some Counterstrike maps (dust and assault), if you're into classics. Source code below. Run it with 3 commands.

Yegor Sak

25,479 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

hy3 vs fable 5 vs opus 4.8 vs sonnet 5 Tencent Hy just dropped hy3 – their new open-weight model under apache 2.0. following the april preview they scaled up post-training, and it now rivals flagship open models with 2-5x the params. api pricing: ~$0.15 in / ~$0.59 out per 1m tokens. built for coding, office work, frontend, agentic tasks so we ran a test: hy3 vs fable 5 vs opus 4.8 vs sonnet 5 three prompts, one-shot each: • ocean wave crumbling a sand castle (canvas) • looping factory assembly line (html/css/js) • interactive 3d city with three.js + orbitcontrols self-contained files, no libraries beyond the cdn where asked totals across all three prompts: 1. hy3 – 1231 loc / 14m34s 2. sonnet 5 – 1373 loc / 18m55s 3. fable 5 – 1546 loc / 18m32s 4. opus 4.8 – 1904 loc / 27m21s hy3 is the fastest and the leanest by a wide margin we had opus 4.8 analyze hy3's code. the read: - sand castle: checklist-complete but the crumble is parametric, not physical. it shrinks and slumps the towers and fades alpha instead of dissolving into grains. the cheap-but-plausible interpretation. the tell of a smaller model - factory line: the arm-to-part sync is actually causal, not faked. it triggers each robot early by exactly the arm's descent time, so the tap lands right as the part arrives. it also pre-seeds the belt so it never cold-starts empty. clean state machine. one latent bug – a part gets marked processed before checking if the robot is free, so at a faster spawn rate a "laptop" could ship missing a part. never fires at current timing, but the invariant isn't enforced - 3d city: genuinely frontier-adjacent. correct modern setup (pcfsoft shadows, srgb, aces tone mapping, damped orbit + auto-rotate pause). clones the window texture per building and scales the uv repeat to each building's dimensions so windows don't stretch. downside: no instancing – ~800 texture clones across 200 buildings. runs fine, not optimized. roads are implicit gaps, not explicit planes our observations: • hy3 is quite fast • its animations are simple but you can see it trying – it adds detail, and the 3d render sits at the same level as the frontier models • sonnet 5 is weak here. hy3 beats it on the sand castle and the 3d render, level on the conveyor • opus 4.8 is anthropic's best model after the fable 5 nerf – it beats fable on the conveyor and the 3d render net: hy3 runs clean and well-formed across all three with zero syntax errors, even version-matching the three.js core and examples build. it's economical rather than ambitious – it does the minimum viable version of each hard requirement well, and only reaches for the expensive interpretation on the 3d task a very coherent profile for a cost-optimized open-weight model follow thehype. for 24/7 ai news, analysis and breakdowns

thehype.

34,961 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

It’s #SunDay! Here’s your space weather report for the week of June 5 - 11: • 1 M-class flare • 5 C-class flares • 36 coronal mass ejections • 1 geomagnetic storm (as of June 12, though another one is currently forecast for June 13) This video from NASA’s Solar Dynamics Observatory shows the week’s activity. This week’s most powerful flare was an M1.8 on June 6, which erupts from the southeastern (lower left) region of the Sun’s disk at about 0:42 in this video. That eruption also produced a coronal mass ejection that reached Earth three days later, but the bulk of the blast was oriented to the south and east of Earth, so the effect on our planet was minimal. Learn more about solar flares and coronal mass ejections:

It’s #SunDay! Here’s your space weather report for the week of June 5 - 11: • 1 M-class flare • 5 C-class flares • 36 coronal mass ejections • 1 geomagnetic storm (as of June 12, though another one is currently forecast for June 13) This video from NASA’s Solar Dynamics Observatory shows the week’s activity. This week’s most powerful flare was an M1.8 on June 6, which erupts from the southeastern (lower left) region of the Sun’s disk at about 0:42 in this video. That eruption also produced a coronal mass ejection that reached Earth three days later, but the bulk of the blast was oriented to the south and east of Earth, so the effect on our planet was minimal. Learn more about solar flares and coronal mass ejections:

NASA Space Alerts

47,894 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

ANTHROPIC MAPPED OUT 8 LEVELS OF AI AGENTS - AND ANYONE CAN REACH LEVEL 8 WHERE THE SYSTEM EARNS $70K WITHOUT YOU anyone can reach level 8 - one solo developer with the right architecture gets there in a few weeks level 1 - the agent can do one action - and 80% of developers call this a product level 3 - 50 tools in context at once - the model gets confused - most teams get stuck here and lose $30K/month level 4 - Opus 5 grades its own output and rejects before you see it - the first level where quality stops depending on luck level 5 - Opus 5 plans, Fable 5 executes in parallel - one brain, many hands level 7 - while you slept the agent did $3,000 worth of work and sent the report before you woke up level 8 - the fleet finds its own mistakes, patches the graph and tomorrow it is smarter than today bookmark and read below - 8 steps from level 1 to $70K/month without you

ANTHROPIC MAPPED OUT 8 LEVELS OF AI AGENTS - AND ANYONE CAN REACH LEVEL 8 WHERE THE SYSTEM EARNS $70K WITHOUT YOU anyone can reach level 8 - one solo developer with the right architecture gets there in a few weeks level 1 - the agent can do one action - and 80% of developers call this a product level 3 - 50 tools in context at once - the model gets confused - most teams get stuck here and lose $30K/month level 4 - Opus 5 grades its own output and rejects before you see it - the first level where quality stops depending on luck level 5 - Opus 5 plans, Fable 5 executes in parallel - one brain, many hands level 7 - while you slept the agent did $3,000 worth of work and sent the report before you woke up level 8 - the fleet finds its own mistakes, patches the graph and tomorrow it is smarter than today bookmark and read below - 8 steps from level 1 to $70K/month without you

Noisy

12,083 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

Anthropic engineer: “80% of our engineers are using Loops. Now everyone is exploring how to build right Context for agents.” in 3-6 months, we’ll all become context engineers. Context is the most important part of agents.” in this 1-hour talk, Anthropic engineer shows how to build a self-improving agents from sratch. It’s worth more than a $500 agentic course. Watch this video, then read the article below on how to become a context architect.

Anthropic engineer: “80% of our engineers are using Loops. Now everyone is exploring how to build right Context for agents.” in 3-6 months, we’ll all become context engineers. Context is the most important part of agents.” in this 1-hour talk, Anthropic engineer shows how to build a self-improving agents from sratch. It’s worth more than a $500 agentic course. Watch this video, then read the article below on how to become a context architect.

Codez

35,798 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

Anthropic engineer: “80% of our engineers are using self-improving loops. Now everyone is exploring how to build the right Context for agents.” in 3-6 months, we’ll all become context engineers. Context is the most important part of building agents.” In this 40-minute lecture, an Anthropic engineer shows how to build a self-improving agentic workflow from scratch. It’s worth more than a $500 agentic course. Watch this video, then read the article below on how to become a context architect.

Anthropic engineer: “80% of our engineers are using self-improving loops. Now everyone is exploring how to build the right Context for agents.” in 3-6 months, we’ll all become context engineers. Context is the most important part of building agents.” In this 40-minute lecture, an Anthropic engineer shows how to build a self-improving agentic workflow from scratch. It’s worth more than a $500 agentic course. Watch this video, then read the article below on how to become a context architect.

Movez

21,136 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

BREAKING: Anthropic just dropped Fable 5.1—and CLAUDE IS SO BACK. We’ve spent the last week testing it at Every 🪨 across coding, writing, and knowledge work. Our verdict: It's finally Fable for everyone. It’s the strongest coding model we’ve used, but now it's fast, token-efficient, and CRUCIALLY actually speaks like a normal person. Here’s our vibe check: - A monster at coding. Kieran Klaassen rebuilt a working version of Proof, our document editor, from one prompt. It added useful details he hadn’t requested, and it handles enormous coding jobs that run for days at a time. It built a computer use Mac app for me called Hands in one-shot that other models failed at. - A Claude our writers want to use again. It has clearer prose, fewer AI tells, and it takes an edit without arguing. It's a significant upgrade over Opus 5. And won Katie Parrott's heart back. - About half the tokens as Opus 5, and much faster. In our Slack-agent tests, it delivered comparable results to Opus 5 using about half as many tokens, in about 60% of the time. - Knowledge work you can delegate. It can produce great knowledge work—like slide decks—end to end without making slop. And flew threw hammer's tests with flying colors. - It now supports zero-data-retention agreements. Now businesses can actually use it! A big barrier to Fable adoption is gone. Net Result: It's obviously an Opus 5 killer. If that was your daily driver you should switch today. If you're using GPT-5.6 in ChatGPT for Work, it's spinning the wheels on for big delegated tasks. I still use ChatGPT for Work more day to day, but I use way more tokens in Fable 5.1. I send it off at the beginning of the day to do big programming projects, like end to end MVP builds, and check in every once in a while. State of Play: The big knock on Anthropic was they built a supergenius in a datacenter that was almost unusable. It was too slow, argued back, and talked in technical gibberish. They've managed to solve those problems and more with Fable 5.1!

BREAKING: Anthropic just dropped Fable 5.1—and CLAUDE IS SO BACK. We’ve spent the last week testing it at Every 🪨 across coding, writing, and knowledge work. Our verdict: It's finally Fable for everyone. It’s the strongest coding model we’ve used, but now it's fast, token-efficient, and CRUCIALLY actually speaks like a normal person. Here’s our vibe check: - A monster at coding. Kieran Klaassen rebuilt a working version of Proof, our document editor, from one prompt. It added useful details he hadn’t requested, and it handles enormous coding jobs that run for days at a time. It built a computer use Mac app for me called Hands in one-shot that other models failed at. - A Claude our writers want to use again. It has clearer prose, fewer AI tells, and it takes an edit without arguing. It's a significant upgrade over Opus 5. And won Katie Parrott's heart back. - About half the tokens as Opus 5, and much faster. In our Slack-agent tests, it delivered comparable results to Opus 5 using about half as many tokens, in about 60% of the time. - Knowledge work you can delegate. It can produce great knowledge work—like slide decks—end to end without making slop. And flew threw hammer's tests with flying colors. - It now supports zero-data-retention agreements. Now businesses can actually use it! A big barrier to Fable adoption is gone. Net Result: It's obviously an Opus 5 killer. If that was your daily driver you should switch today. If you're using GPT-5.6 in ChatGPT for Work, it's spinning the wheels on for big delegated tasks. I still use ChatGPT for Work more day to day, but I use way more tokens in Fable 5.1. I send it off at the beginning of the day to do big programming projects, like end to end MVP builds, and check in every once in a while. State of Play: The big knock on Anthropic was they built a supergenius in a datacenter that was almost unusable. It was too slow, argued back, and talked in technical gibberish. They've managed to solve those problems and more with Fable 5.1!

Dan Shipper

198,224 просмотров • 2 дней назад

We’re launching a coin for a new vertical within the world of intellectual property, focused entirely on AI data licensing. AI companies are spending billions of dollars on data (video, text, sound, etc) to train their models. Kled is the middleman. We partner with top film studios and production houses, label their video content, and sell it to AI companies like OpenAI to help train models like ChatGPT, Sora, Midjourney and more. So far, we've already sold millions of hours of data. Our next drop includes 3 million hours of footage, with deals ranging from $2–5 per minute. We've strategically raised $2 million from investors such as K5 Global, who back Uber, Xai and more, alongside creators like Alex Botez and Panda Boi who stand by our platform and its goals. We're excited to bring this project of ours on chain, where we find that it'll benefit most from the space's interactivity and leaders alike. $KLED is now live on Believe

We’re launching a coin for a new vertical within the world of intellectual property, focused entirely on AI data licensing. AI companies are spending billions of dollars on data (video, text, sound, etc) to train their models. Kled is the middleman. We partner with top film studios and production houses, label their video content, and sell it to AI companies like OpenAI to help train models like ChatGPT, Sora, Midjourney and more. So far, we've already sold millions of hours of data. Our next drop includes 3 million hours of footage, with deals ranging from $2–5 per minute. We've strategically raised $2 million from investors such as K5 Global, who back Uber, Xai and more, alongside creators like Alex Botez and Panda Boi who stand by our platform and its goals. We're excited to bring this project of ours on chain, where we find that it'll benefit most from the space's interactivity and leaders alike. $KLED is now live on Believe

Avi Patel

476,586 просмотров • 1 год назад

GPT-5.6 vs GPT-5.5 on my custom spaceship prompt. I gave both models the exact same custom prompt. This is also the same prompt I previously gave to Fable 5. For context, GPT-5.6 Pro worked for 87 minutes, while GPT-5.5 Extra High worked for 34 minutes and 42 seconds. As I’ve said before, based on great authority GPT-5.6 will be an incremental/soldi improvement over GPT-5.5, not a “Fable killer.” My rough expectation has been that it would trade blows with Fable 5 on some benchmarks, maybe win around half depending on the category, but not clearly surpass it overall. And again fable five will have bigger model smell, but this was expected. After testing this coding output, that view feels pretty accurate. GPT-5.6 is clearly better than GPT-5.5 in several visual areas. The lighting, shading, chairs, object details, and exterior of the spaceship looked noticeably stronger. The scene was also easier to test. I do want to give GPT-5.5 credit though. It built out the rooms much much better and the planets looked better than GPT-5.6’s. It was also interesting that both GPT-5.5 and GPT-5.6 produced better-looking planets than Fable 5 in this specific test. The downside with GPT-5.5 was stability. The game was much glitchier and harder to test compared to GPT-5.6. But when it comes to the core of the demo, which is the spaceship itself, Fable 5 still beat both models pretty comfortably. GPT-5.6 is impressive, but from this test, it looks exactly like what I expected which was a meaningful incremental improvement over GPT-5.5, at least for indie game demos, but not something that replaces Fable 5. In collaboration with Chetaslua

GPT-5.6 vs GPT-5.5 on my custom spaceship prompt. I gave both models the exact same custom prompt. This is also the same prompt I previously gave to Fable 5. For context, GPT-5.6 Pro worked for 87 minutes, while GPT-5.5 Extra High worked for 34 minutes and 42 seconds. As I’ve said before, based on great authority GPT-5.6 will be an incremental/soldi improvement over GPT-5.5, not a “Fable killer.” My rough expectation has been that it would trade blows with Fable 5 on some benchmarks, maybe win around half depending on the category, but not clearly surpass it overall. And again fable five will have bigger model smell, but this was expected. After testing this coding output, that view feels pretty accurate. GPT-5.6 is clearly better than GPT-5.5 in several visual areas. The lighting, shading, chairs, object details, and exterior of the spaceship looked noticeably stronger. The scene was also easier to test. I do want to give GPT-5.5 credit though. It built out the rooms much much better and the planets looked better than GPT-5.6’s. It was also interesting that both GPT-5.5 and GPT-5.6 produced better-looking planets than Fable 5 in this specific test. The downside with GPT-5.5 was stability. The game was much glitchier and harder to test compared to GPT-5.6. But when it comes to the core of the demo, which is the spaceship itself, Fable 5 still beat both models pretty comfortably. GPT-5.6 is impressive, but from this test, it looks exactly like what I expected which was a meaningful incremental improvement over GPT-5.5, at least for indie game demos, but not something that replaces Fable 5. In collaboration with Chetaslua

Chris

250,919 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

Creator of Claude Code just dropped a free masterclass on agent engineering with Opus 5 from 0% to 100%: “80% of our engineers are using self-improving loops” 10% → 3:38 - why they deleted 80% of the system prompt 30% →6:55 - delete your CLAUDE.md every 6 months 55% →17:44 - one prompt, 11 days, entire codebase rewritten 80% → 21:59 - the prompt that's been running for 15 days 100% →25:27 - two promts that spawn 1,000 agents most people are still writing longer prompts - he's deleting them and running 1,000 agents instead bookmark & watch - then read the full agent orchestration playbook below ↓

Creator of Claude Code just dropped a free masterclass on agent engineering with Opus 5 from 0% to 100%: “80% of our engineers are using self-improving loops” 10% → 3:38 - why they deleted 80% of the system prompt 30% →6:55 - delete your CLAUDE.md every 6 months 55% →17:44 - one prompt, 11 days, entire codebase rewritten 80% → 21:59 - the prompt that's been running for 15 days 100% →25:27 - two promts that spawn 1,000 agents most people are still writing longer prompts - he's deleting them and running 1,000 agents instead bookmark & watch - then read the full agent orchestration playbook below ↓

codila

62,619 просмотров • 1 месяц назад