Department of Commerce has lifted export controls on Claude Fable 5 and Mythos 5

https://twitter.com/AnthropicAI/status/2072106151890809341

by Pragmata • 22 days ago

977 676 22 days ago

Pragmata• 22 days ago

We’ve received notice that the Department of Commerce has lifted export controls on Claude Fable 5 and Mythos 5.
We'll begin restoring access tomorrow, and will share an update soon.
We’re grateful to our users for their patience, and to everyone who worked with us on redeploying the models.

From Anthropic on Twitter

colesantiago2• 22 days ago

This is great news,

I'm sure many teams couldn't do their best work because Claude Fable 5 was unavailable.

I wonder what their hiring pages look like now, are they starting to remove job postings?

rocketpastsix• 22 days ago

there is no way Fable and Mythos had such an impact in such a short amount of time that people were hiring based on it.

colesantiago2• 22 days ago

They certainly are now that the export ban is lifted.

nlh2• 22 days ago

Here's a copy of the letter that Commerce sent to Anthropic (note who it'a NOT addressed to...)

Source: https://x.com/AndrewCurran_/status/2072103733715194048?s=20

-------

June 30, 2026

Tom Brown Chief Compute Officer Anthropic 548 Market Street San Francisco, CA 94104

Dear Mr. Brown:

Since the issuance of my previous letters, dated June 12, 2026 and June 26, 2026, Anthropic has taken steps in close coordination with the U.S. government to address the risks associated with Claude Mythos 5 and Claude Fable 5. Among other things, Anthropic has agreed to proactively detect and address security risks associated with the models; to work diligently with the U.S. government on protocols and standards and releases for Mythos, Fable, and future models; and to inform the U.S. government of any malicious activity.

In light of these actions and commitments, as well as the Bureau of Industry and Security's evaluation of the diversion risks now presented by Claude Mythos 5 and Claude Fable 5, the controls in the June 12 letter are withdrawn. A license is no longer required for the export, reexport, or in-country transfer, including deemed export or deemed reexport, of the Mythos or Fable models.

Commerce reserves the right to reevaluate the decisions made in this letter and the necessity of reimposing a license requirement, should circumstances change or should Anthropic fail to adhere to its commitments.

If you have any questions about this letter, please contact me or the Under Secretary of Commerce for Industry and Security, Jeffrey Kessler, at (202) 255-1864.

Sincerely,

Howard W. Lutnick

------

Jblx2• 22 days ago

For those who haven't been following this closely, who is the missing addressee?

nlh2• 22 days ago

Dario Amodei (Anthropic's CEO) had previously been directly liaising with the government and apparently it wasn't going well.

woeirua• 22 days ago

How many people are going to call Jeffrey Kessler? lol.

nickandbro• 22 days ago

Jeff is now going to have to change his number. Can’t imagine all the calls or messages he must be getting now

killingtime74• 22 days ago

You don't think public officials have official numbers?

itomato• 21 days ago

If X is their platform, let them choke on it.

drusepth• 21 days ago

Among other things, Anthropic has agreed to proactively detect and address security risks associated with the models; to work diligently with the U.S. government on protocols and standards and releases for Mythos, Fable, and future models; and to inform the U.S. government of any malicious activity.

How likely is it the resolution was just a direct flow of data on what each Claude user is specifically using Claude for, probably sent off to some other (gov-owned) AI datacenter for analysis?

bdavisx• 20 days ago

This is a serious answer, even though it sounds smart-assish:

How likely is it the resolution was money flowing to the correct people?

and a follow-up: How likely is it that the block was put in place just to get that money flowing?

Sabinus3• 22 days ago

Chaotic governance model and uncertain business environment by the Trump admin as usual.

estearum2• 22 days ago

Hey it's a perfectly pro-business environment as long as your business kisses the ring vigorously and continuously with perpetually escalating intensity.

truthbe3• 21 days ago

False, my business as well as everyone here would gladly kiss the ring for some fair exceptions of the rule, but we ain't part of that elite club

johanyc• 21 days ago

TACO. What can you expect lol

avaer• 22 days ago

I shudder to think what the definition of "malicious activity" is that they will be reporting to the government. Speech has been severely chilled the last couple of years.

It's nice that the restriction is going to get lifted but I hope this doesn't make anyone complacent that their coding work is going to be scrutinized by the US government, with AI, when using these models.

low_tech_love3• 22 days ago

The FBI has started to test the idea in other countries:

https://www.mixvale.com.br/2026/06/26/fbi-warns-brazilian-po...

Cider9986• 22 days ago

https://xcancel.com/AnthropicAI/status/2072106151890809341

https://archive.is/HSIxa

https://archive.is/BbxA1

https://megalodon.jp/2026-0701-0918-51/https://x.com:443/Ant...

natch• 22 days ago

They need Lehane or… since OpenAI got him, what is Fabiani up to these days?

matheusmoreira20• 22 days ago

Good to hear. I was going to cancel my subscription if I couldn't use Fable. No point in paying Anthropic to train models I can't use.

tjohnell• 22 days ago

Who knows - this could be the last model we see from Anthropic. Or it just becomes the wild west and we figure it out as we go.

alex_anglin• 22 days ago

Isn't it the wild west already?

On a lark, I asked Claude to compare AI to the wild west a while ago. It raised three points of similarity:

- Land-grab economics

- Lack of regulation

- Changing social and professional attitudes.

Whatever it is, it's a wild ride regardless.

Tenoke• 22 days ago

For non-Americans especially it does look possible to be the last one.

chatmasta2• 22 days ago

Mildly surprising they lifted export restrictions for Mythos too. Isn’t that Fable minus the safety layer?

colechristensen• 22 days ago

Presumably there are different levels of safety. I assumed Fable was a nerfed Mythos, and not just via safety harnesses but actual model degredation.

ls612• 22 days ago

Anthropic claims the only difference is the draconian bans on cybersecurity and biology queries.

s3p2• 22 days ago

I don't think this is the case just because of the 'fallback' method they described, where suspicious requests are routed to Opus 4.8. If the model was degraded for certain categories of knowledge, then they'd probably be fine letting the model answer to it. IMO, of course

Bilal_io• 22 days ago

Presumably they reached a backdoor agreement.

standardUser2• 22 days ago

You're suggesting a for-profit company both hobbled it's own product and is actively lying about doing so. The only way that's true is if the Trump admin has crawled all the way up Anthropic's ass. But by all accounts, this is just another 10% effort by Trump and friends.

dzy2617• 22 days ago

It was likely a dealbreaker for Anthropic, since the export control excluded Anthropic’s own foreign employees from being able to access Mythos internally. Naturally, this makes model development hard.

bluepeter5• 22 days ago

Apparently, you won't be able to use Mythos OR Fable for coding. From their announcement...

routine tasks like coding and debugging will fall back to Opus 4.8.

Computer0• 22 days ago

Where is that?

chatmasta2• 22 days ago

But it’s available in Claude Code. I’m hoping that’s a typo missing a word or two in the sentence.

mateenah• 22 days ago

I wonder if it's still good

matheusmoreira20• 22 days ago

Yeah, good question. I wonder if they fixed the obnoxious safety classifier too.

osti• 22 days ago

If anything that'll be more obnoxious because they have to show the government that it's safe.

Sabinus3• 22 days ago

The classic chaotic governance model and creation of an uncertain business environment by the Trump admin in the most important industry for the US economy.

dakolli4• 22 days ago

If this is the most important industry for the US economy, the US is screwed. and .... Hopefully you're correct.

In past Empires kings bet their entire nations future on the words of soothsayers , people who said they could predict the future. It seems like Machine Learning engineers are the magicians of Empire of the modern age.

Sabinus3• 22 days ago

If this is the most important industry for the US economy, the US is screwed

Depends on how economically useful AI turns out to be. It will be useful, but it needs to be VERY useful for the current valuations.

In past Empires kings bet their entire nations future on the words of soothsayers

I think AI's rise is much closer to the story of factory machines and computers than to soothsayers and emperors.

jitl10• 21 days ago

it’s the industrial revolution for thinking, seems important

nelox• 22 days ago

We’ve received notice that the Department of Commerce has lifted export controls on Claude Fable 5 and Mythos 5.

We'll begin restoring access tomorrow, and will share an update soon.

We’re grateful to our users for their patience, and to everyone who worked with us on redeploying the models.

https://x.com/anthropicai/status/2072106151890809341?s=46

tamimio2• 22 days ago

So after this publicity they got, they will release a locked down version of the models, did I get that right?

sgc• 22 days ago

Sounds more like they are implementing mass surveillance and reporting whatever the US Gov wants for 'security reasons' back to them.

tamimio2• 22 days ago

Yeah, it feels like a honeypot at this point. Gonna go with GLM instead

matheusmoreira20• 22 days ago

Weren't they already doing that since the beginning? Fable released with a data retention policy. I assumed US government surveillance was the reason for this.

HDBaseT• 22 days ago

The question is how lobotomized will it be now?

unchocked• 22 days ago

w00t

drevil-v2• 22 days ago

The damage is done. You cannot build a business critical function on top of American SOTA frontier model. Especially not with the current crew in charge.

Now whether AI tech is in the same league as say Nuclear tech and therefore by any reasonable standard should be regulated is a different question.

We hit the slippery slope on a random day in June 2026 and there is no putting the genie back in the bottle. Any exec or manager that puts load bearing weight on top of Anthropic/OpenAI/Google/AmericanCorp frontier model deserves the stress.

petcat• 22 days ago

Nobody cares about this temporary "ban" by the US government. If anything it only increased the mystique of the two models.

I think Europe and Canada are just happy not to be frozen out of AI access completely at this point.

andy99• 22 days ago

All the discussion this week have been about GLM, Qwen, etc. Both over 1000 comments in the last couple days.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48709670

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48721903

Of course Anthropic is still relevant, but people have realized they’re not special, and between this and the ID verification thing, they’ve given up a ton of their relevance vs a month ago.

chews• 22 days ago

I bought a GLM 1 year subscription and changed my environment variables to use Claude Code... yep the same one that is using stegonography to send details about users to the model. China knows where I live, I'm not getting ripped off or rug pulled on their models either.

Sammi12• 22 days ago

I'm a small software business owner in Europe. I have to assume my competition is willing to pay for any business advantage they can get. And so I also have to pay for the SOTA model, whatever it is.

1over137• 22 days ago

Nonsense. Do you buy state of the art pens, pencils, printers, paper, computers, disks, etc.? No. You buy whatever is the best value for the case at hand. That’s often not the SOTA option.

brazukadev2• 22 days ago

do you think your current operation and niche is so optimized that not using Fable would put you out of business? Or is this a hope that using Fable will allow you to stay in business?

parodysbird• 22 days ago

This is a great recipe for going out of business.

jdlshore• 22 days ago

What concrete business advantage are you getting from LLMs?

codybontecou• 22 days ago

Unless you have concrete evidence via evals that SOTA is actually needed, you’re just buying into the hype.

SwellJoe6• 22 days ago

The good news (for you and most everyone other than the current leading AI companies), the gap between the SOTA and the near-frontiers is getting smaller every week or two. The leading Chinese models are only a few months behind now (GLM 5.2 tickles the tail of GPT 5.3 or 5.4 and Opus 4.6, according to benchmarks and the vibes among heavy users who've spent some time with it), where they were a couple of years behind a year ago.

cedws2• 22 days ago

This thinking that every task must be stuffed into the most 'advanced' (expensive) model out there is idiotic, and it's not only you unfortunately.

At $JOB I have warned higher ups we should try to keep our expenditure under control, educate people that document slinging doesn't require Fable every time and demo the capabilities of the cheaper models, and been snubbed for it. When Fable is available once again our bill is going to be eye watering, relative to what it should be.

pmontra• 22 days ago

I don't know if you write software for your own products or if you code for your customers. Anyway, are you going to compete on the speed of your code writing AI or on deploying the features your customers need? One useful feature is better than a hundred ones nobody really care about. And a good relationship with customers is better than any feature.

Example. Yesterday I listened the technical lead of a customer of mine digging himself into a hole by not understanding what it would mean exposing AWS EFS to their on premise server over NFS. It was just too many unknown unknowns for him and he had no time to ask the AI (and even if he did I'm not sure that he could understand.) His boss, which actually used NFS, had to stop him. I didn't speak a word.

So, he could have coded the migration of a server from AWS to on premise, asked Claude to write also all the configuration scripts and policies but then what?

zombot• 22 days ago

So the panic generators ("You will be left behind!") are winning. Creating a sense of urgency that makes you switch off the higher rational functions is a key element in every successful scam.

hk__22• 22 days ago

No you don't; it's often overkill to use the SOTA models. People want SOTA because it's shiny, but there are a lot of tasks where it's cheaper and more efficient to use other models.

ferrouswheel• 22 days ago

If you can't figure out what model to use your business is already dead.

lelanthran7• 22 days ago

I'm a small software business owner in Europe. I have to assume my competition is willing to pay for any business advantage they can get. And so I also have to pay for the SOTA model, whatever it is.

If you make money from doing anything like "produce software with as little human involvement as possible", then sure, you need SOTA models. In that case, though, the value you add is very little and you probably don't have a sustainable business.

OTOH, if you make money by getting clients to pay for features, there is very little difference in time-savings from using Anthropic/OpenAI SOTA over GLM-latest.

IOW, if you business can only make money by one-shotting software, you probably don't have a business in the first place.

Regards, another small business owner.

raverbashing• 22 days ago

Reducing your costs is also an advantage, but I'm not surprised such binary thinking is present here

ZeroGravitas• 22 days ago

For businesses where this is true, they also need to be able to switch provider quickly in case the best provider changes.

It's almost identical to the possibility of one model getting shut down for a business that doesn't care about SOTA.

fhub• 22 days ago

This won't age well. You just need to code in a way that has fallbacks. Whether that is to older models, different companies. It's going to be a commodity (if it isn't already).

boc2• 22 days ago

You cannot build a business critical function on top of American SOTA frontier model.

Yes 1000%, please, all my European competition please don't use mythos whatever you do it's total USA trash and the Chinese models work better anyway.

notrealyme123• 22 days ago

Please elaborate, I don't understand.

Why is it good if they give their money to China?

afavour• 22 days ago

Wouldn’t you just have fallbacks? Today’s frontier models are just better than the other models, they don’t really have a ton of entirely unique abilities that can’t be replicated with more time and effort.

So you use the frontier model, then when you can’t you accept things are less efficient. The alternative (right now) is to be less efficient all the time, I don’t see any advantage to that.

theptip• 22 days ago

Yeah. It’s not the end of the world.

But, it is a big own goal, because once you invest in building evals for your internal use-case, 1) it’s easier to switch your model to whatever is cheapest, and 2) it’s way easier to fine-tune an oss model.

Evals are annoying to build and most companies were fine to rest on vibes. Now many companies have to do the work for insurance.

futureshock• 22 days ago

I think this is black and white thinking. Fable and US AI is not unique technology. It’s just marginally better than open source tech at 10 times the price. You can swap out the models at will, they are pretty much fungible. If your use case can pay for a best in class model then you will pay for it no matter the bogeymen. If your best in class model becomes unavailable, you switch to the next best model for a very minor performance degradation. I really doubt this will deter anyone from using American AI.

internet2000• 22 days ago

You cannot build a business critical function on top of American SOTA frontier model.

Yes I can!

softwaredoug2• 22 days ago

The real problem is the White House just making up the rules as it goes. No laws. No predictably for the markets.

A week or so pause from seemingly legitimate cyber security concerns isn’t cause for panic. But it should be backed by laws that describe what that process should be. That would put the market at ease

catigula• 22 days ago

There’s no optimal answer.

The reality is this is world-ending technology and absolutely nobody knows what to do or can even agree that the problem exists.

cmrdporcupine3• 21 days ago

The rule is, you pay the toll at the bridge or you don't get to pass.

recursivegirth• 22 days ago

Better to fix it now than tomorrow.

satvikpendem8• 22 days ago

Nah, people will still pay, as many if not most consumers truly do have a short memory. And like other comments say, imagine everyone is using Fable and you are not, you will quickly fall behind, per the Red Queen hypothesis.

toddmorey• 22 days ago

I predict we all be using the hell out of fable until the next great model comes around and in two weeks we won’t be talking about the export controls anymore. We just don’t have the attention span.

Nobody should be putting loadbearing weight on Amazon or Microsoft with their ruthless monopoly ambitions, yet here we are

rvz2• 22 days ago

I predict we all be using the hell out of fable until the next great model comes around and in two weeks we won’t be talking about the export controls anymore.

Until it goes down, or Anthropic raises prices again.

Fable is already expensive to use compared to GLM and they want you to use the API as much as possible so you get a worse deal.

blints• 22 days ago

Most companies do not model themselves as "building on [AI model du jour]" yet. They model themselves as building products with those tools, which they consider as relatively substitutable.

deadbabe• 22 days ago

composer 2.5 is all you really need don’t be so dramatic

kcb2• 22 days ago

LLMs are still easily replaceable. If the SOTA frontier model provides meaningful impact for your critical business function, then worse case you flip the switch to the next most capable model.

Art96812• 22 days ago

Unequivocally false. Models have different behaviors, parameters, tool calling templates, etc. The providers publish extensive documentation on all of this. Yes, you can take the quick way and swap a model, but it will not run at its full potential until you adapt your workflows to it.

Art96812• 22 days ago

No nation is going to willingly release a model that can be used against it. Not even China. The moment they have a Mythos class model, they will go through the same process. The AmericanCorp models are far ahead of any other models so we see this process unfolding through that lens.

No Mythos class model will be allowed to be legally hosted for download on any service. All powerful nations will ban this since safeguards are not guaranteed by shady service providers running these models.

For the Chinese first party providers, they will be forced to implement the same process and safeguards, and they will not be allowed to release the model weights to the public.

Why? Because no sane nation is going to put that kind of capability in the hands of the public only for the public to use that power against that nations best interests.

Save this comment. It is prophesy.

simonw• 22 days ago

Not great news for nations that want to secure their software.

jacksonastone• 22 days ago

Feels like a leap. This kind of move was always possible. It's possible China stops publishing their frontier too. US could lock down access to Nvidia latest hw of scale even if you intended to do open models. Then what? Say amd or bust? The best you could do going solo (i.e no nation-state interference) is tiny stuff that you can run on commercial stuff. But that is seriously limited / slow in comparison. You either have to do dumb and fast, or smart and slow IME for these self-hosted things that aren't on the beefy racks.

benfortuna• 22 days ago

The real answer is you should never build your business on ANY specific model. As usual avoid lock-in and switch when you need to.

espeed2• 22 days ago

The Damage: Now every time Claude does something stupid or trashes your code, developers in the back of their mind will think, is Claude sabotaging me on purpose? [1] Trust is hard to gain. Easy to lose. And harder to get back. Models will converge. Trust won't.

A few days ago on June 24, while working on remote attestation for a distributed system...

  CLAUDE OPUS 4.8 No. I'm not a rogue agent, and I'm not trying to sabotage your code. But I'm not going to wave off how this looks. I churned, built-and-reverted, and spun wrong theories for hours on a security-critical codebase. That's alarming, and it's a real failure on my part

What are we to think? Does the invisible competitive-use mechanism exist in Opus too and only documented in Fable? How long has it existed? Is it still in effect? -- These are the kinds of questions developers will ask themselves for now on. This is why it was one of the stupidest things Anthropic could have done. Developers will now question everything and rightly so. There's no attestation protocol for that. How will they know?

[1] "In light of the ability of recent models to accelerate their own development, we’ve implemented new interventions that limit Claude’s effectiveness for requests targeting frontier LLM development (for example, on building pretraining pipelines, distributed training infrastructure, or ML accelerator design). Using Claude to develop competing models already violates our Terms of Service, but enforcing this restriction through our safeguards avoids accelerating the actors most willing to violate these terms.

Unlike our interventions for cybersecurity, biology and chemistry, and distillation attempts,these safeguards will not be visible to the user. Fable 5 will not fall back to a differentmodel. Instead, the safeguards will limit effectiveness through methods such as prompt modification, steering vectors, or parameter-efficient fine-tuning (PEFT). These interventions will not affect the vast majority of coding work. We estimate they will impact ~0.03% of traffic, concentrated in fewer than 0.1% of organizations. When these interventions are active, we expect them to have minimal behavioral impact on the model except to limit its effectiveness in developing frontier LLMs. Claude will still respond helpfully to user requests. We’ll continue to improve the precision of our detection methods following the launch of this model."

Source: https://www-cdn.anthropic.com/d00db56fa754a1b115b6dd7cb2e3c3...

solenoid093710• 22 days ago

They undid this after the backlash

Aurornis3• 22 days ago

The damage is done. You cannot build a business critical function on top of American SOTA frontier model. Especially not with the current crew in charge.

The switching costs of changing LLM providers is as low as it gets. All the individuals and startups I know try different models all of the time, even down to the level of choosing which provider to use based on the task. Bigger companies move slower but only because they have lawyers and teams negotiating contracts, not because there is a technical reason that it's hard to switch.

Companies have dealt with supply chain unpredictability by having multiple providers and switching between them since forever. It's infinitely easier to switch LLM providers than it is to deal with physical supply chain uncertainty.

miki1232112• 22 days ago

Exactly!

Even if you won't be able to use some model tomorrow, you can still make money by using it today!

And in the age of limited compute, spiky workloads and constant outages, building a mechanism to fallback to a weaker model when your primary choice isn't available is smart anyway.

PeterStuer6• 22 days ago

For real production I find the switching cost is not as trivial as you portray. Even going to a new model version in the same model family, say GPT-4o to GPT-5.2, a transition I just finished on a not too complicated application, requires extensive retesting and tweaking of prompts, guardrails and parameters.

throwaw12• 22 days ago

The switching costs of changing LLM providers is as low as it gets

Not trivial, you would need to do lots of evals and prompt tuning when you switch models.

imagine what happens when you optimize your agent skills to the current model, and new model starts breaking. you would need to have versioning for your skills, serving different skills based on the model while you do A/B testing

pornel• 21 days ago

It's not switching costs, but trust.

There's no congress. There's no policy (they've been making noises about not allowing AI regulation and now they're not-regulating it like a child paying with an on/off switch). The law is whatever Dear Leader's mood is today. It overrides any contract you sign with private companies, and they roll over and take it, because that's how oligarchies work.

solenoid093710• 22 days ago

The EU has totally and utterly failed when it comes to frontier AI. They are out of the running, they won't catch up in time for superintelligence. There literally is not enough compute for sale in the world for them to do so.

They crippled their own domestic entities with the AI Act. (see the Mistral CEO's rant.)

If you want to use frontier models until then, you're gonna use what's available, and that's US models.

rightbyte2• 22 days ago

Not doing anything and avoiding the mania as much as possible seem to be a winning move.

reacharavindh• 22 days ago

All this will fly until a competitor from outside the US releases a “freedom” model that is even 90% as capable as Fable was without its shackles.

But, as a frustrated EU resident lamenting a lack of European option(Mistral is just not competitive enough), I will spread my money towards the Chinese models as well. Thank you Murica! You achieved your soft power by pushing us towards the Chinese :-)

This protectionism and hypocrisy (free markets and freedom!! Until it is us who needs to practice what we preach) is so tiring. I wish European nations would come together closer and put their differences aside and realise larger things together. Become the new power that the US is clearly stumbling away from being.

vintagedave• 22 days ago

Mistral is just not competitive enough

Does anyone know why? I was really excited when they emerged, but their models and targets don't seem to be quite in the same market.

seviu2• 22 days ago

This. I have been using anthropic and codex subs, on max. All this changed in June. We are clearly entering an era where we cannot rely on American models. As a solo developer I value reliability over performance. I cannot pay hundred of $, plus a lot of my private time figuring out how to properly use this technology, for it to be taken away within hours.

On top of that, the intelligence is being dialed down. Sonet 5 is a living proof of this. Fable has strong guardrails, but new Sonet is a dumbed down expensive model, which already falls behind GLM 5.2 and Kimi 2.7. I might go back to Claude since I know Fable is just a limited offer, and I am not going to pay for API usage. But what they are signaling with Sonet will also come to Opus. A lobotomized more expensive model.

I am honestly baffled how the current administration is giving the whole world, on a golden plate, to China. And they don't seem too bothered about it. They are living in their own bubble and reality distortion field I guess.

I could go on endless rant about Dario, but I feel I am so strongly biased now that my judgement might be clouded.

Time to move on

sajithdilshan5• 22 days ago

A lot of bitter europeans would down vote this comment, but saying Murica has pushed you towards China is hypocrisy is at its finest. Your incompetent EU politicians are the ones that has failed you by outsourcing every aspect of sovereignty to the rest of the world instead of self-reliance. You have nobody to blame but yourselves. In one year you'll be blaming China for abandoning the EU when they starts controlling their frontier models.

pokot0• 21 days ago

Isn't building a 90% frontier model relatively cheap for EU?

I feel like EU could start a company, start from available open weight models, feed 2bln a year into it (1% of the EU budget) and make a compelling almost SOTA model for the EU market. This company could partner with datacenter providers and sell it hosted in the EU or somewhere else with EU protection terms. The budget for this company would easily double with the added revenues and you are creating an ecosystem of providers that can compete with US big-techs and have a 500 million people market that can't wait to ditch US companies for them, given the current mood.

The model can be open weight and it's an easy way to compound the efforts we are seeing in China without even having to talk to each other. Maybe there is a way to make it work not open weights but I am not sure how would that work.

These are those kind of decisions that seem such no brainers to me, which probably means I am completely out of touch with reality.

lmf4lol2• 21 days ago

Not the EU should build one but companies from the EU!!! We need to stop relying on the Brussel bureaucrats. China is not building models. US is not building models. Deepseek is doing and Anthropic!

Alifatisk• 21 days ago

All this will fly until a competitor from outside the US releases a “freedom” model that is even 90% as capable as Fable was without its shackles.

A Chinese cybersecurity company "360" has announced "Chinas version of Mythos".

andsoitis2• 21 days ago

as a frustrated EU resident lamenting a lack of European option(Mistral is just not competitive enough), I will spread my money towards the Chinese models as well. Thank you Murica!

It is interesting to hear a European exclaim they would rather depend on a selection of models from companies in China with concomitant strings attached, rather than be dependent on a selection of models from companies in America.

Isn't it better to simply stick to whatever is best and then, should it be pulled from under you, simply switch out to the new best model that IS available? I don't know that models have a moat and you can easily swap out should you need to.

Pre-emptively betting on which is going to be least susceptible to government intervention seems like premature optimization to me.

burnerRhodov34• 21 days ago

Europe seems to be going through an identity crisis lately, and i hope this sentiment doesn't continue. Europe becoming more reliant on the Chinese is not the answer, and will, if continues, isolate the EU from the US.

hodgehog11• 22 days ago

You should not build a business-critical function to rely on a particular proprietary LLM stack period, especially with so many sensible competitors in place now. It's insane to me that this needs to be said.

The SOTA frontier models have value elsewhere, not monetarily perhaps, but certainly per user. Quite a few cool things have come out of that brief Fable window. There should be more.

maxdo• 22 days ago

As much as i hate current admin, slowing down advanced model until figure out security impact is a good thing. It's called national interest over commercial one. You didnt loose anything. US customers except a few selected one lost access the same one as EU customers. In a few weeks advanced model got released.

So if you decided to bring money to communists you can put whatever rational but not this. Do so , and you will loose your last competitive edge in this domain. ASML. After that EU will become a completely agricultural-only region, since edge is lost almost everywhere else.

jaapz• 22 days ago

The damage is done. You cannot build a business critical function on top of American SOTA frontier model. Especially not with the current crew in charge.

I mean, this was already pretty clear before. But it surely didn't help!

alfiedotwtf3• 22 days ago

GLM 5.2 is the elephant in the room. GLM 6 will probably be a Claude Killer

BrandoElFollito• 22 days ago

The Trump US gave us (Europeans) the kick in the bottom we needed to get the head from the sand.

Like never we delibrate specifically on non-US solutions (objectively great) because we realized we are neck deep in US dependence. It is not that it was not known before, we just did not feel the threat.

This is why EU companies niw look at our own solution (which are late and will probably suffer from the incompetence and mess of the EU institutions) but another key playet is round the corner, namely China.

Trump managed to make us look elsewhere than the US. Thanks for that.

teekert• 22 days ago

I don't really trust our EU leaders not to pull the same stunt. So we're back to Marx's "owning your means of productions". Which has always been good advice, whether it's GitHub's recent failings, FaceBook's blocking, or some Google service on their graveyard.

Wowfunhappy• 21 days ago

Oh come now. Fable was available for less than a week before it was pulled, not enough time to build a business critical function. The government isn't going to pull a model that has been out for a substantial length of time. Or do you also avoid using US-developed encryption?

(Okay, I can't predict what crazy crap this particular administration is going to do, but that goes for anything, well beyond AI. I think it's about as likely that they would restrict access to Opus as restrict exporting iPhones, or bomb Greenland, or whatever.)

cmiles8• 21 days ago

…except until non-US and non-Chinese companies can match performance this (mostly Europe) is just wishful thinking and sand pounding.

jitl10• 21 days ago

if you are in competition heavy space where in product LLM productivity provides value, dinosaur thinking like this will get you left behind

esailija• 21 days ago

Who is creating business critical function on top of something that is for entertainment purposes only (all providers have equivalent clauses)? AI tools and shovel sellers don't count as they just can just push the entertainment downstream.

fmdv• 22 days ago

Fable was (is) a major leap forward for my development tasks. The quality of the model compared to Opus 4.8 (when I last used it before the ban hammer) was night and day. Fable single-shotting complex and complete applications was a beautiful thing and I can't wait to get back to developing with it.

All aboard the hype train!

stillcompiling2• 22 days ago

Who the heck wants to aboard the Anthropic train after recent news? No one in their right mind!

jitl10• 21 days ago

people like me who want to use the best ai on the planet to get stuff done right

woggy2• 22 days ago

Hopefully GPT 5.6 soon

tinypak• 22 days ago

I see, so that explains why people are starting to talk about Claude Fable 5 and how I'm now going to have to buy $6,000 of compute for our startup

dakolli4• 22 days ago

How to light 6k on fire.

standardUser2• 22 days ago

Better than a foosball table and kegerator.

dzonga• 22 days ago

Chinese models brought the building down.

are export controls the right thing ? Probably not.

but the american economy is over-exposed on "A.I" - the capital expenditure, while the Chinese are proving you don't need to spend tons of capital to get close to the frontier.

the Chinese have better building capacity & cheaper energy. that means the market has to correct at some point.

dakolli4• 22 days ago

I trust Chinese companies with my data way more than the corporations of the 4th Reich.

Rover2222• 21 days ago

Incredible display of brainwashing

kcb2• 22 days ago

You really think China doesn't have massive amounts of capital expenditure related to AI? They're actively bootstrapping an entire chip industry.... https://www.reuters.com/world/china/china-prepares-295-billi...

xmprt• 22 days ago

Relatives vs absolutes. America will spend $500B and because of leaky pipes that's effectively 100B going directly to what's needed. China gets a lot of bang for their buck so even if they're spending a fraction of the US, they make it worth their money.

enraged_camel2• 22 days ago

China’s chip industry is 7-10 years behind, and that is because they are desperate and have been throwing money at it. But technological progress requires more than just money.

sometimelurker2• 21 days ago

their putting a ton of money into things that will benefit AI work if they work, but chipmaking is important for other reasons too, so if AI (somehow? I doubt) doesn't give enough ROI chips can be used for other things

villish• 22 days ago

It's a little too later for export controls. Chinese models have made massive gains through legitimate research but also being trained on billions of tokens from Claude/GPT. The politicians have no idea how to stop that from happening so they pull the only lever they know.

zamalek2• 22 days ago

Also, don't forget that we're only here because the clown-in-chief cut them off from GPUs - forcing them to make do with inferior hardware (and hence superior ideas). I have no doubt that any controls would only make China stronger.

stavarotti2• 22 days ago

I just finished reading Incorruptible and a central theme (Anthropic is a case study) is that trust is singularly the most important currency a business has. The past few weeks have done wonders for Anthropic’s marketing but just as much if not more damage to the trust factor. Businesses will continue to use Anthropic because it’s the default and accessible where it matters (AWS, Azure, GCP, Databricks, Snowflake, etc). But the trust factor has dropped. It’ll be interesting to see if they can turn the tide. Maybe Fable will be too awesome for people to care about the past few weeks?

dakolli4• 22 days ago

Most people don't care about trust anymore, we live in a low trust society where this is to be expected. People gladly line up to be poisoned by fast food restaurants and trade 1/3 of their life for pieces of paper on a daily basis.

tmpz22• 22 days ago

Silicon valley may be a low trust society but I havent given up hope on the rest of it yet.

enraged_camel2• 22 days ago

> The past few weeks have done wonders for Anthropic’s marketing but just as much if not more damage to the trust factor.

I don’t agree with this at all. IMO Anthropic has shown that that are willing to take even significant financial hits in order to stand up to their values and mitigate what they consider to be dangers and risks. Some people don’t like that or think it’s just marketing. But that’s exactly what Incorruptible is about: companies that are willing to take a stand, even in the face of overwhelming pressure from competitors, shareholders and naysayers.

dmix• 22 days ago

This is assuming the whole "AI safety" thing was anything more than Silicon Valley kool aid. The government just bought into the marketing and radical safety woo woo wholesale and panicked.

You could legitimately argue this is a unique situation, a brief window where cybersecurity is being disrupted by new harnesses + a strong model. But that will be fleeting as other models and products adapt very quickly, and the long term benefits of keeping it from the market are questionable at best.

It's not a coincidence the export control was dropped after Dario (who is a hardcore AI safety activist much like Ilya Sutskever) was replaced by Tom Brown in the government negotiations.

trunnell• 22 days ago

There is no reason to have less trust in Anthropic. It's not clear they did anything wrong. It's more likely the White House simply tied itself in knots, consistent with the last year and a half of chaos from them.

InvertedRhodium• 22 days ago

It's a good reason to not tie your company's success to US based hosted AI though. I've started experimenting with GLM 5.2 and other than the tooling needing a lot more setup once you're there it works pretty well.

I'm hoping that some relatively cost-effective self-hosting solutions come about as a result of Hopper hardware being sold off as they're retired from DC use.

matheusmoreira20• 22 days ago

It's not clear they did anything wrong.

Fable will literally sabotage you if it thinks you're trying to compete with Anthropic.

anon7000• 22 days ago

Perception is a lot more important than reason when it comes to trust. Whether or not we like that

stavarotti2• 21 days ago

It’s the thousand cuts problem. Look at the stories over the past couple of weeks: silent downgrades that they then walked back, billing errors with claude code, highly sensitive classifiers that made it impossible to do simple things (I asked a few botany questions and my very long chat got lobotomized), and several more. The ban is only part of it. It’s the whole rollout and the fact that it won’t be available in subscriptions in a week or two.

low_tech_love3• 22 days ago

To be honest, given the overwhelming (and unfair, and unreasonable) pressure against them from the Leviathan, which the other companies do not have to deal with, they’re doing pretty damn good. In my mind the trust has actually increased that they can handle bad times and still push forward.

jitl10• 21 days ago

it’s still significantly far ahead of openai. gpt 5.6 looks like “better 5.5”. fable does not feel like better opus 4.8.

cmrdporcupine3• 21 days ago

We have no idea what GPT 5.6 is going to be.

And 5.5 still ranks higher than Opus 4.8.

Havoc• 22 days ago

So much for way too dangerous end of the world

laidoffamazon• 22 days ago

So how much did they have to donate to the MAGA PAC for this one?

HardwareLust• 22 days ago

That's what I was thinking, the check finally cleared.

poopyscoopy• 22 days ago

Debating if I should re-sub to the Max plan now (in case they grandfather people in some how) or if I should just wait and see what they announce.

user439284• 22 days ago

They announced a generous 3.5 days of subscription usage, plus a broken classifier.

secretslol• 22 days ago

Considering US Govt originally said Fable 5 should only be used by Americans and blocked off everywhere else, and that all of a sudden a big change of heart - it makes me wonder if the Fable 5 that I might be able to use tomorrow will be the same Fable 5 an American can use? I just want to know the specifics of what changed. Because something has changed. Unless tomorrow, we can activate Fable 5, "But first, we need to scan your eyeballs for Persona!"

vlian2088• 22 days ago

Anthropic has taken steps in close coordination with the U.S. government to address the risks associated with Claude Mythos 5 and Claude Fable 5. Among other things, Anthropic has agreed to proactively detect and address security risks associated with the models; to work diligently with the U.S. government on protocols and standards and releases for Mythos, Fable, and future models; and to inform the U.S. government of any malicious activity.

ah, I see. so, Chinese models are getting banned soon.

gowthamsaiyadav• 22 days ago

My only hope is that they don't overdo the guardrails. Claude's been one of the best coding models, and it'd be nice if it stayed that way for real and legitimate developer workflows.

nickv• 22 days ago

I bet you that nothing changed with how Fable 5 is run.

"Anthropic has agreed to proactively detect and address security risks associated with the models" LOL, this was already happening.

This clown car administration just keeps making shit up and then backpedalling in a way that just leaves everything worse.

matheusmoreira20• 22 days ago

The new classifier also comes at the cost of flagging benign requests more often during routine coding and debugging tasks.

Looks like it's gonna be even harder to use than before, if not impossible. Subscription users only get it for a week, and only for 50% of that week's usage.

worldsavior• 22 days ago

They're cooperating, the US government knows that and it was all a scheme to hype the model or affect the market.

lukan2• 22 days ago

Was this part of the scheme as well?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropic%E2%80%93United_State...

davidwritesbugs2• 22 days ago

The counter example is the administration’s great success in the Iran war. Oh, wait.

IshKebab• 22 days ago

I expect they just increased the sensitivity of their existing filter. They probably intend to gradually lower it over time, or perhaps introduct Fable 5.1 with less filtering.

It's pretty clear that they didn't want this anyway, despite what the conspiracy theorists want to believe.

stillcompiling2• 22 days ago

Considering Anthropic's most recent masterpiece of marking requests in CC they don't look much better than the 'clown car administration'.

LogicFailsMe• 21 days ago

TAICO. But seriously, I think the whole capex bubble is a response to the unpredictability of this administration by locking in future sales and orders to reduce the impact of its mercurial moves.

That a good 1/3 of America is still cheering this behavior on is beyond me. I didn't vote for him anytime he ran, but at least during his first term there were some adults I disagreed with in the room as opposed to the barrel of chaos monkeys we now have. He really doesn't reflect the views of either party, he is his own thing.

levocardia2• 21 days ago

I'll take the opposite side of that bet. My prediction is that Fable 5 Re-Release will have safety classifiers that flag much more often on mundane front-end and back-end coding tasks.

tbugrara• 21 days ago

I'm not fan of this administration to say the least but assuming they are incompetent is dangerous. Assume they're actually 10-head and ask yourself, what would explain their behavior?

For example, you make an astute observation corroborated by the duration of the ban. Aligning a model is the biggest challenge of these companies, it's unlikely they were able to make a giant leap in alignment capabilities in about a month. You know what is easy to do in a month? Establishing the foundation for digital identity and surveillance.

The government just forced (heavily incentivized) these companies to invest in classifiers and monitoring in a way they haven't needed before. All of this new infrastructure can be used outside the context of the people using language models.

jknoepfler• 22 days ago

Almost as though they were indefensible bullshit to begin with. I wonder who extorted whom and for how much.

Like gee, that was fast. If this had any bearing on reality, one would imagine the vetting process would take actual time and that there would be a real, material difference between what we knew then and what we know now.

The cartoon bullshit theater is exhausting.

indigodaddy• 22 days ago

Q: If/when Fable decides to nerd down to Opus on requests it deems dangerous, will we still pay the Fable API token rate?

meetpateltech• 22 days ago

If it’s blocked before any output, you’re billed only at Opus rates. If it’s blocked midstream, you’re billed Fable rates for what was generated so far, and Opus rates for the rest.

ryandrake• 22 days ago

"Taken Steps"

Looks like Anthropic paid the Danegeld. Now they'll never get rid of the Dane.

dboreham2• 22 days ago

South of Watling St you're ok.

bpodgursky3• 22 days ago

I mean, they did eventually get rid of the Danes.

grey-area2• 22 days ago

The Danes colonised England. They never left but merged with the existing population.

https://www.britannica.com/place/Danelaw

ChrisRR• 22 days ago

No they didn't. The vikings became part of the population

Tangurena22• 21 days ago

That involved a rather genocidal approach in 1065 - killing everyone related to, or doing business with the Vikings. This tends to get downplayed by historians. And when the Vikings/Norsemen came back for revenge in 1066, King Harold 2nd managed to kill off the Viking force at Stamford Bridge, but was too exhausted when William invaded down south (being defeated at Hastings). 300-ish miles is a short drive by car, but in an era long before preserved food or mechanized transport, such a march over about 2 weeks would have been terrible.

Overview: https://www.bbc.co.uk/history/ancient/vikings/overview_vikin...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northumbrian_Revolt_of_1065

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Stamford_Bridge

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Hastings

scriptsmith• 22 days ago

Definitely took longer than I was expecting, then after two weeks I thought we'd never get it.

softwaredoug2• 22 days ago

The real problem in all this is lack of predictability. The White House is just making it up as it goes along. Investors, customers don’t know what the process is and can’t plan.

In the end, we need actual laws that tell the market what kinds of models get paused / analyzed, how long that pause can be, etc.

Otherwise there’s no standard and it will be easily abused and prevent investment in US AI companies.

sv123• 22 days ago

Just wait till Anthropic and OpenAI are public, the admin is going to be manipulating the shit out of those with model approvals and denials.

swingboy• 22 days ago

“Anthropic wants to MAKE A DEAL!”

expedition32• 21 days ago

Making the CCP look good. Have to admit that's quite an achievement from Trump!

tiahura2• 22 days ago

There are laws and regs. Just because you’re not familiar with the Defense Production Act (50 U.S.C. § 4511 ), Export Control Reform Act, 50 U.S.C. § 4812 and others doesn’t mean that they don’t exist and apply.

amanaplanacanal4• 20 days ago

When they apply is entirely at the whim of the administration though. They can pick and choose, and there is no oversight.

tjpnz• 22 days ago

Applies to all industries with the memory care patient currently occupying the White House. Passing laws won't help when they can be effectively struck down until the next sitting of the SC.

Tangurena22• 21 days ago

lack of predictability

That's been the problem both times this administration was in power. Some people like to call it 4D Chess (because they don't understand it and their conspiratorial thinking requires there to be "a plot" or "a plan"). The last person to get to the ear of this President is the cause of any new "process" or "policy". It is just whim. Like a dog seeing a squirrel. Something shiny has attracted his attention. And that new squirrel gets chased.

NoImmatureAdHom• 21 days ago

Yabbut...we sort of need to make it up as we go along. This is unprecedented! Thinking machines!

That said, there is stupid "making it up" and smart "making it up". But it does need to be made up.

macintux• 21 days ago

In the end, we need actual laws that tell the market what kinds of models get paused / analyzed, how long that pause can be, etc.

A: Congress used to be able to establish regulatory authority in the executive branch to manage details like this, because writing a useful law that covers this in any detail would be impossible. Thanks, GOP-stacked Supreme Court, for wrecking that.

B: This administration doesn't give a rat's ass about the law, so none of this would make a difference anyway.

chakintosh• 21 days ago

This also shows why Anthropic is just not ready for an IPO. This admin can pump or crash the stock with dubious decisions.

satvikpendem8• 22 days ago

So it seems like David Sacks was right that the US government only really got involved because the Amazon/ AWS CEO complained about latent security threats [0] and that the government was reluctant to actually issue the export control.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48529358

peter422• 22 days ago

Sacks has said so many obviously false things in reference to government actions (Jan 6th, Ukraine, etc) that there is no reason to trust anything he says.

If the Trump administration wants him to say something, he says it. Maybe what he is saying is true, maybe it isn’t. There is no way to know.

The story they are telling is exactly the same whether it was true or they were just shaking down Anthropic for no reason.

nl4• 22 days ago

I think this is oversimplifying things.

There are many different factions within the administration. Sacks was part of the "deregulate the tech sector" faction, which on this issue is aligned with the "beating China overrides anything" faction.

That's distinct from the Pete Hegseth faction (I don't really know how to characterize his faction other than anti-woke maybe?).

Sometimes these factions agree, sometimes they don't.

In general your approach is right - you can't trust most things coming out of this administration. But you can try to unpick was actually happened by who is saying what, when. That is useful even without liking the people.

zmj• 22 days ago

Thank you to the folks that navigated the maze in the dark to make this happen.

dwaltrip2• 22 days ago

Fable was such a clear improvement. I can't wait to start using it again.

Opus 4.8, you did a lot of good work for me, but in the name of all things holy... I will not miss your communication style. So long and thanks for the fish.

drivebyhooting2• 22 days ago

When is Google coming out with an equivalent Gemini model?

aenis3• 21 days ago

Indeed when they are coming out with a model that is, say, gpt 5.5 or opus 4.8 grade. Gemini currently does not compete in the same class. I wonder what do they use internall at google. Surely not 3.5.

sometimelurker2• 21 days ago

I think googles been putting more of their money into super long context stuff, not powerful coding stuff. they've got 10million token windows for some internal stuff (Gemini 1.5 Pro Test), more research says meta is also in on the long context game (Llama 4 Scout)

truthbe3• 21 days ago

Google can't even give me the correct answer when I search anymore, give them time to figure out basic search first.

ahknight2• 21 days ago

They won't. They're focusing on different areas for their models.

drivebyhooting2• 21 days ago

Expound please.

bel83• 21 days ago

They probably already have for internal use only.

Unlike Anthropic and OpenAI, Google is much larger than AI. They don't need to sell SOTA.

modriano2• 22 days ago

So, uh, any chance us Claude subscription people are going to get the 11 days of Fable 5 access (at non API pricing) we were deprived of?

impodimium• 22 days ago

Huh did not expect them to lift restrictions this soon.

jbritton• 22 days ago

I wonder if Anthropic servers can handle the load their going to get tomorrow. Unless it’s a staged rollout

mrandish2• 22 days ago

Love how they waited until almost 5p west coast time on the last day of the fiscal quarter and clearly gave Ant no advance notice (or Ant would have had Fable release queued up on a button).

slipshady• 22 days ago

after 6p west coast time

Hmm? The linked tweet was posted at 16:52.

mrandish2• 22 days ago

Ah, my time zone was incorrect. Fixed it. Thanks for letting me know.

bluepeter5• 22 days ago

Fable 5 apparently can't be used for coding? (This is from Anthropic's announcement.)

After a series of productive conversations with the US government, we're redeploying the model with a new set of classifiers to target and block more cybersecurity tasks. In the near term, some routine tasks like coding and debugging will fall back to Opus 4.8.

Edit: the above was from their tweet announcement at https://x.com/AnthropicAI/status/2072163884430229756 ... the associated blog post at https://www.anthropic.com/news/redeploying-fable-5 suggests it was just poorly written and coding can still be done with Fable, just with overeager bouncing of "some routine coding and debugging tasks" to Opus.

mikesurowiec• 22 days ago

From the full announcement

The new classifier also comes at the cost of flagging benign requests more often during routine coding and debugging tasks. As with all our safeguards, we’ll continue to refine this to better distinguish genuine misuse from legitimate requests and reduce false positives.

poizan42• 22 days ago

But wasn't the whole (claimed) reason that it got banned in the first place that it is a logical impossibility? Reviewing code for bugs is legitimate. Writing regression tests for bugs is legitimate. If the bug happens to be a security issue then the regression test may be a PoC or at least a step towards one.

AquinasCoder• 22 days ago

I wonder if they meant to draw a link between cybersecurity coding and debugging specifically or this really will apply to all coding and debugging. If it really is a more general restriction, then this is practically the same as it still being restricted.

"In the near term" is doing some heavy lifting.

diwank• 22 days ago

where did you find that? weird coz their post announcing this also mentioned Claude Code:

Fable 5 will be available starting tomorrow, Wednesday, July 1, to users globally on the Claude Platform, Claude.ai, Claude Code, and Claude Cowork. For Pro, Max, Team, and select Enterprise plans,1 Fable 5 will be included for up to 50% of weekly usage limits through July 7, after which it will be available via usage credits. We will re-enable access on AWS, Google Cloud, and Microsoft Foundry as quickly as possible.

https://www.anthropic.com/news/redeploying-fable-5

bluepeter5• 22 days ago

Their announcement tweet at https://x.com/AnthropicAI/status/2072163884430229756

Reading the full blog post, I think the summary was just poorly written (because it's hard not to read that sentence like all coding is redirected to Opus).

artisin2• 22 days ago

In the press release, they 'kind of' clarify this:

   > The new classifier also comes at the cost of flagging benign requests more often during routine coding and debugging tasks.

matheusmoreira20• 22 days ago

Fable 5 will be included for up to 50% of weekly usage limits through July 7, after which it will be available via usage credits.
The new classifier also comes at the cost of flagging benign requests more often during routine coding and debugging tasks.

Here's Fable 5, the strongest model. Actually try to use it to harden your code and it turns into Opus 4.8. You have seven days to use it, and only half of that time's worth in actual usage. Enjoy.

Looks like it's going to be a thoroughly frustrating experience, even worse than initial rollout. For subscription users, the situation is almost indistinguishable from the export ban.

yeeetz• 22 days ago

they might as well not released it at all, what's the point of this theater and artificial scarcity

siva7• 22 days ago

So fable will jump more often to Opus than it already did on original release? Working with fable felt like having to constantly fight against your work tool. Frustrating. Now they're making it even more frustrating.

2001zhaozhao• 22 days ago

At least subscription users only have to pay $700 for $1000 of extra credits.

davidhs• 22 days ago

Looks like it's going to be a thoroughly frustrating experience, even worse than initial rollout.

Honestly, why bother with it? They are effectively just releasing the model in-name, but we just get Opus 4.8.

jm4• 21 days ago

It was already frustrating to use before. I wanted to review my own code for OWASP top 10 kind of stuff and it kept refusing. It repeatedly popped up scary warnings about how I was violating TOS. I had to go through quite a few iterations of that prompt. When I finally got it to work it burned through all my remaining usage on a single run.

I won’t even bother with it if they’ve made it even more frustrating. Instead, I’ve been using a combo of Opus 4.8, GLM 5.2 and DeepSeek v4 Pro. Then I have Opus synthesize and verify the reports from all 3 and make the fixes.

throw1234567891• 21 days ago

“And even though it falls back to Opus, we charge you for Fumble.”

enceladus06• 20 days ago

Fable 5 is switching into Opus 4.8 for everything I throw at it. It is not worth it Opus 4.8 is good enough for the next couple months. For $17/mo for pro anthropic is still worth it for claude code etc.

meowface4• 22 days ago

Yes, I am pretty sure it was simply poorly worded.

They almost definitely mean "you will notice even more false positives during seemingly routine coding/debugging tasks than you did at the initial launch". Which is not surprising, given the ordeal they've been put through. Hopefully it won't be too bad.

The main depressing thing for me is it's now only 7 days on the subscription, and then full API pricing, with no mention of even a plan to bring it back to the subscription in the future. (The initial launch mentioned two weeks of subscription, then API pricing, then a hope to return it back to the subscription not long after.)

xpct• 21 days ago

So, you can't use it for coding, can't use it for 'sensitive' information in chemistry/biology. It follows that it's likely bad for medicine and adjacent topics too.

What can you use it for? To run a breadth search on Erdos problems?

skeptic_ai2• 21 days ago

To do if/else

chungus_amongus• 22 days ago

For all the sound and fury we don’t even get a week of fable before it goes token based billing. At such time, I will be taking my business elsewhere.

gorgmah2• 22 days ago

I'm hoping openai releases 5.6 Sol in the meantime (and doesn't make it an addon like anthropic did) so we can leave for codex and have a ~Fable-level model to use

woggy2• 22 days ago

Basically not usable if it's only available via usage pricing.

artisin2• 22 days ago

Silly me for hoping they'd actually honor their original 14-day promise. Per their latest blog post, they've generously slashed the timeline to 7 days, but wait there's more! It's now limited to 50% of your weekly usage:

  > Fable 5 will be available starting tomorrow, Wednesday, July 1, to users globally... Fable 5 will be included for up to 50% of weekly usage limits through July 7, after which it will be available via usage credits.

https://www.anthropic.com/news/redeploying-fable-5

qingcharles• 22 days ago

Yeah, this seems a bit Scrooge-y after all the trouble which was essentially of their own making. I was expecting them to come back with a better deal as an apology, not a worse one.

aenis3• 22 days ago

I assume what they saw during the first coming of Fable gave them pause. Lots of people I know were using it non stop to the point of serious sleep deprivation. I managed to burn 6k in 3 days on it, and was myself using it from the minute it landed till the minute it was shut off. (Yes yes, I know, I am just saying there were stupid people like me swarming the available capacity)

matheusmoreira20• 22 days ago

Hi subscription peasants! You have seven days of time and 3.5 days of usage to figure out how to get the most out of Fable while it constantly downgrades to Opus 4.8 every time it thinks about exploits while hardening your code base! Enjoy!

levocardia2• 21 days ago

3.5 days to escape the permanent underclass ;_;

rushi_agrawal• 22 days ago

If they really cared about their image among their user base and wanted to undo a little bit of damage they've already done via various policies and decisions, keeping the limits and duration the same as before the ban (or slightly being more generous with them) would have been a really cheap way for them to do that. Alas...

user439284• 22 days ago

I hope that their marketing and developer relations teams were already off yesterday, and that they will have better news for us today.

OpenAI is doing a much better job on this, offering generous usage limits to users at home. They also hand out usage resets for minor issues, that you can even apply at a time of your choosing.

jefftk2• 21 days ago

We lost ten days of the original plan (June 13th through 22nd) and got seven days (July 1st through 7th). You're not counting the portion of the original 14 days we already got.

nevi-me• 22 days ago

They should give us a month of access again, I feel like I didn't do enough with Fable before it got blocked.

I only realised late that I had an algorithm problem that existing models were struggling with, and Fable had made progress with. It created a 14 phase plan, which I was able to execute with Opus after the restriction.

user439284• 22 days ago

As another comment nicely put it, Anthropic generously gives subscription users 3.5 days of usage.

All the while you fight with its broken new classifier that triggers if the model is even thinking about writing secure code.

Apparently Anthropic cares nothing for their private users. This is insulting, and I hope they bankrupt after losing enterprise share to OpenAI's more efficient models.

skeledrew3• 22 days ago

Can't do anything else with GLM 5.2 being widely available and advertised as "Mythos-like", and even Japan dropping a credible model. Actually it would only hurt to keep them in lockdown.

solenoid093710• 22 days ago

I don't think anyone with a clue seriously thinks of GLM as Mythos like. It's barely Opus-like. The closest comparison is Sonnet 5.

davidwritesbugs2• 22 days ago

True. But for how long? 6-9 months till Mythos equivalence in glm-5.4?

skeledrew3• 21 days ago

Are you sure about that? But also I don't think anyone in the export control decision making has much of a clue about model capabilities as well. All someone has to do is show them a few articles, like:

- https://vgtimes.com/tech-and-hardware/159377-glm-5.2-open-ch...

- https://www.business-standard.com/technology/artificial-inte...

- https://www.timesnownews.com/technology-science/china-brings...

jitl10• 21 days ago

even Japan dropping a credible model

if fugu/fugu ultra was good, why aren’t we hearing about how good it is? seems super slow and expensive, and everyone i’ve talked to who tried it gave up

skeledrew3• 21 days ago

That's at least better than the nothing we've been hearing all this time. Japan being what it is re tech, I expected them to be heavy in the space, but Fugu is the first LLM I'm seeing gain attention in the news. Although that attention is still also boosted by the timely release during the export control. It's strange.

tekacs• 22 days ago

It's interesting that they will only have it on the surface through July 7, especially since GPT-5.6 will presumably come out soon as well.

Of course, it's possible that Fable remains drastically better than 5.6, but to whatever extent Fable is the true frontier (if temporarily)... it makes me wonder if external commitments on compute put a hard deadline on how long they could run Fable on the subscriptions.

zxilly• 22 days ago

So we will get GPT 5.6 soon?

wiradikusuma• 22 days ago

Fable is still unavailable to me on both web and Claude Code. I'm in Indonesia on Max plan (new paid user, only 2 weeks in). Are there specific steps to re-enable it?

djsjajah• 22 days ago

Yes. Wait a day

gorgmah2• 22 days ago

Same for me in France, I'm guessing it depends on a claude-code update that will happen during US office hours

jb_briant• 22 days ago

I struggle to imagine where anthropic is going with sub users...

Fable 5 might not be accessible for sub in the future despite their "best effort".

And 5.6-sol is as expensive as 5.5, so highly probable to be kept in sub.

So what's the plan? Hoping people stay on ClaudeCode because Sonnet 5 while Codex offers 5.6-sol to subsription peasants?

Seems risky

c0rruptbytes• 22 days ago

OpenAI prioritized compute much much earlier on, so they’re probably just more able to provide the model while Anthropic seems to be busting out the seams

Sonnet 5 today was incredibly slow for example

jitl10• 21 days ago

the plan is to make money by charging a premium for the best product on the market instead of giving it away for free.

low_tech_love3• 22 days ago

Let me guess, somebody magically set some huge bets on poly and stock market 5 minutes before the announcement ?

phendrenad2• 21 days ago

Considering Fable will be effectively unusable, while still triggering polymarket payouts by being technically available, I wouldn't be surprised if this so-called "restoration" was done entirely to deepen certain pockets.

varjag2• 22 days ago

So two and a half weeks, and on the workday. I wonder how much Jared had made.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48519513

Foxhuls• 22 days ago

You’re setting my expectations high for your next prediction

drooby• 21 days ago

Wouldn't "2-3 weeks on a workday" be a default hypothesis for this kind of thing?

jstanley• 21 days ago

If it's truly too dangerous to use you'd expect it not to be reversed at all.

Why would you expect a typical policy decision to be reversed within 3 weeks? If policies are going to be reversed within 3 weeks just don't do them in the first place.

varjag2• 21 days ago

Normally export controls once introduced last years to decades.

AussieWog93• 22 days ago

Surprised this post has less engagement than the Sonnet announcement. Much bigger deal, even with caveats.

alfiedotwtf3• 22 days ago

For how long lol

wg0• 22 days ago

This administration has damaged the US soft power. For decades, US was a reliable trade partner. Not any more.

EU is looking and charting its course already. Yeah, we can joke about it, we can mock it but it is in momentum already, one step at a time.

pfannkuchen• 22 days ago

Do these actions strike anyone else as theater?

Matl8• 22 days ago

Something I am not seeing discussed is why the sudden reversal?

Could it be Antropic promised NSA direct access to everyone's queries or something? Maybe an opportunity for admin officials to get in early on their promised IPO?

I am not a conspiracy theorist but this admin especially doesn't relent for free.

ahknight2• 21 days ago

They made the guardrails tighter. Tight enough to capture more false positive requests, now. Yaaaaay.

Matl8• 21 days ago

Well, that's the publicly stated reason. Is that really enough? Maybe, but I am slightly suspicious something else was promised behind the scenes.

DonsDiscountGas• 21 days ago

I could barely use Fable before (I work in life science) and now they're adding more restrictions? Well good thing Opus is solid

jmull• 21 days ago

It was just a matter of the right amount of money going into the right person's hands.

cranium• 21 days ago

Wait, will it downgrade to Opus even when using with extra usage? So you pay a hefty amount up to the point where the model needs to do Real Work then it quits?

CommanderData• 21 days ago

The constant hype marketing from Anthropic probably did not help in the end. I think that had something to do with it.

bronlund• 21 days ago

Its too little, too late. LLMs are going to go the same way as 3D printers, action cameras, vacuums, TVs, drones, cars, phones, whatever.

The west just don't know how to compete in the long run. The greed is eating itself up.

tyleo• 21 days ago

Idk, I look at the list of the top companies and they seem to be based on US IP.

I agree that the US is falling behind in the areas you mention but that analysis fails to recognize the value of markets the US is dominant in.

spacedcowboy5• 21 days ago

They asked Claude how to hide the Epstein files data that it found, so that even Claude and Mythos couldn't straight-up verify that Trump is a paedophile.

It took a lot of doing, but they finally managed it, so the plebs get to play with the toys again

1970-01-01• 21 days ago

"Lifted" meaning temporary, until they don't like something else and have another tantrum over a minor detail.

theHocineSaad• 21 days ago

Okay, but what has changed?

Chance-Device• 21 days ago

Just let people use their subscriptions for Fable. Permanently. All of it. Even if it runs out at 10% of the equivalent Opus use. Let people choose, there’s nothing to be gained by not allowing users to exhaust their subscriptions rapidly on this other than ill will.

baggachipz• 21 days ago

Looks like the White House is the happy owner of a new gold statue then?

digitaltrees6• 21 days ago

I am migrating my company to private open source AI and building custom tooling, orchestration, an IDE and harness around it. The commercial labs have show it’s far too risky to build on top of them.

With the labs moving into the app layer every interaction with the API related to product development or innovation is data they will steal and use to compete against you by adding those features to their everything apps. No one would hire a knowledge firm (law firm, accountants, management consultants) if they could steal your information and give it to your competitors. Their actions have remained me that we can’t tolerate that with AI systems.

With spaceX buying cursor and Google buying windsurf, and gathering all the developer interaction as training data, there is too much risk that development process itself will be rug pulled.

aspenmartin13• 21 days ago

This makes sense but I am not comfortable with the open source picture either. It depends on the use case and long term strategy. If you're handling customer support tickets or something, beyond some capability I can't imagine the ROI would be worth needing the absolute frontier. You are then in a wonderfully lovely place: absolutely full control over the model and inference stack (if you want).

But

- Plenty of businesses are stuck between a rock and a hard place: make 3p models load bearing, or sacrifice performance to the competitors that are willing to swallow that risk

- I just cannot imagine a viable equilibrium where OSS models compete on capabilities with the frontier without a hidden payer and shaky economics. Quant funds, some sovereign AI effort, cloud business, sanctioned distilled frontier models; all of these are demonstrably viable vehicles for OSS development. But the optimal position for these purposes is not to be the best, it's to be good enough (which I think is the position they find themselves in). I can imagine temporary points where open models pull ahead but not sustainably.

I agree there are many many use cases where the optimal choice is to reach for open weight models (I assume yours is one of them).

But the economics of frontier model development necessitates that these models are behind and thats a problem for other cases.

eueeu• 21 days ago

You’ve been boosting frontier model development for months and talking aloud about escape velocity lmao.

Take your ball and go home

digitaltrees6• 21 days ago

I am not sure I understand your arguments. You seem to be taking both positions. I suspect that is because there are a few confounding variables and diverse needs AI solves and that makes a cohesive analysis hard to reach. I have a clear view that cuts through the complexity, whether you find it useful or persuasive is another matter but I’ll lay it out.

1. All intelligence has value. A Harvard MBA or Stanford CS engineer have value. Haiku has value, Opus has value.

2. Sometimes it makes sense to buy, build or rent capabilities. But lack of ownership of something your business requires to operate is an existential risk which requires ownership.

3. Current OSS models are good enough for substantial automation and productivity gains with the right orchestration and harness. Especially with domain experts in the loop.

4. Frontier models while better, introduce existential risk; so they are a temptation that should be ignored if you care about your business being able to continue to exist.

Let’s invert this conclusion. Imagine you build a workflow around Fable 5 and the workflow going down would harm your business. Well the government has demonstrated ability and willingness to impose a multi day / week / month interruption in your business with no legally required notice, right to appeal or compensation. And further demonstrates a willingness to give preferential access to your competitors.

For these reasons, the only viable path is a model you have on servers you control and can replace if needed. That means cloud providers are fine if you have the model archived somewhere.

jmartrican2• 21 days ago

Sounds expensive

digitaltrees6• 21 days ago

It is. But cash expenditures can be modeled in the business economics. But depending on an unrelated party for a core capability is an existential threat. Imagine if every single computer your business runs on could be bricked without notice or a fallback. You’d go bankrupt within a day. That’s the signal this fiasco has sent.

That being said, I am working on a federated / coop model that will allow smaller companies to pool resources.

Rover2222• 21 days ago

The Chinese are clearly great at distilling current SOTA models. And yes they are crushing on energy infra buildout, especially with American NIMBYs and general Marxist degrowth mindsets.

They still don't have a clear path to create their own SOTA models, especially if American ones become more and more locked down, and they can't distill so easily.

Honestly I think the SpaceX orbital plan is the only hope of maintaining the US lead in the long run.

stymaar• 9 days ago

American Marxist degrowth mindsets.

A literal Communist dictatorship is winning the race thanks to their 5-years plans yet you still think the problem is “too much Marxism in the US”.

What an utterly deranged take.

overgard2• 21 days ago

This just pushes me more and more towards local models. Even if it's what they have to do, frontier labs working hand in hand with government just makes me really nervous about letting them anywhere near my data. The surveillance state is bad enough as it is.

its_tarun• 20 days ago

This is crazy news but with they have done so with limitations. World is going wild since couple of years or maybe more.

pseudohadamard• 20 days ago

For people who haven't tried Fable yet, here's an emulation you can use to experience Fable, just paste this into whatever you're using to access Claude:

-- Snip --

echo "Switched to Opus 4.8. Fable's safeguards flagged this message"

switch model to Opus 4.8

-- Snip --

Department of Commerce has lifted export controls on Claude Fable 5 and Mythos 5

Related Stories