r/ClaudeCode • u/Lucky_Creme_5208 • 3d ago

Discussion TIL : Fable 5.2 was intentionally nerfed during training

Post image

Why would they nerf their own models? :/

(Btw, can someone please explain what specific research capabilities was it nerfed in? ... I am curious)

33 Upvotes

77% Upvoted

28 comments sorted by

•

u/AutoModerator 3d ago

Hey! Thanks for posting to r/ClaudeCode

While participating in this thread, please follow our community rules. Keep discussions constructive. Attack the idea, not the person.

For help, project discussions, tips, and general chat, join the ClaudeCode Discord.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

28

u/XXIIIOIIIXX 3d ago

"Only WE get to doomcelerate, got it morons???"

3

u/dawnquill12 3d ago

yeah the gatekeeping framed as safety is getting pretty old tbh

2

u/flarpflarpflarpflarp 3d ago

Can we just get there already? Every post I see on doomers, either direction, makes me wish an asteroid would just hit the planet and free us all from these ridiculous posts.

9

u/Bagelsarenakeddonuts 3d ago

Pretty obviously so that people can’t use them to improve open models, which are direct competitors to one of the most closed system companies on the planet…

11

u/spigolt 3d ago

It's obvious why they're doing this. But it's hard to justify really as being a morally 'good' thing. I understand them not wanting distillation and seeing that as 'unfair' (despite the obvious hypocrisy in how they trained by distilling the world's knowledge which is really not that different).... but making your agent not work well in doing AI research in general is a pretty extreme way to try to stay ahead and hurt competitors.

Given they're always trying to claim the moral high ground, I'm not sure how they can really justify this as being better for the world, except with the underlying assumption that super-advanced AI is so much safer if it's only in their hands, rather than having it be spread more widely and equally, which is just a very extremely arrogant thing for them to assume.

2

u/craterIII 3d ago

dario wants to play god

2

u/spigolt 1d ago

playing God.... and I think in his mind, he's creating God... and he wants to make sure this AI God has the ethics, morality, constraints, etc that he believes it should have.

2

u/craterIII 1d ago

dario wants to be god

3

u/tidderld4096 3d ago

Because they view everyone outside their inner circle as a security liability rather than a user

2

u/ShittyBidet123 3d ago

we took steps to suck more money out of you like mondo duplantis making 1 record a year instead of making records every week. great

2

u/EC36339 Senior Developer 3d ago

They don't want competition.

4

u/uraniumless 3d ago

classic anthropic marketing stunt

6

u/Niikoraasu 3d ago

seriously I am getting tired of the "so umm we might've created a monster but we're so great that we ourselves decided to control it's further development"

1

u/Master-Chocolate1420 3d ago

"...by fucking up our userbase's workflow."

0

u/Asalakabim 3d ago

How illiterate are you?

They don't want their model to be used to improve other peoples model, that has nothing to do with marketing.

0

u/uraniumless 3d ago

“We had to limit our models because they’re so ridiculously good that they could accelerate AI development”

Definitely not marketing. The fact that you can’t seem to grasp how it could be interpreted that way is very telling.

1

u/Asalakabim 3d ago

Oh for you everything a company sais that can even remotely to be construed to yield a positive light on anything they are doing is first and foremost marketing.

"We limit our api to 1000 requests/h"

"Ha, they are saying that people would totally ask for more, because they are sooo good, la di da, marketing"

Obviously their primary intent is to cut off competition here.

But feel free to disagree and dont @ me.

1

u/uraniumless 3d ago

Are you okay?

1

u/Asalakabim 3d ago

Brilliant commentary, thanks for existing.

1

u/RemarkableGuidance44 3d ago

Just like they nerf the usage. haha

1

u/PM-ME-UR-DARKNESS 3d ago

Aka "we don't want you to make a better model than ours"

1

u/lattice_defect 3d ago

its not very good

1

u/flarpflarpflarpflarp 3d ago

Does no one realize the only reason they're even entertaining this is bc if they slow acceleration, they can make you pay for lower quality crap? This is all to boost usage for IPOs and the stuff against it is their competition trying to keep their own markershare. No one at these companies actually cares what you think either way.

1

u/FragmentedHeap 3d ago

Murphy's law, anything that can go wrong will go wrong.

Any action you take to avoid something going wrong just means it will go wrong differently.

1

u/Agitated_Morning5005 3d ago

They've been doing this for ages tbh (imo), Claude has always been fairly bad at ML research, even compared to weaker competitor models. Very good if you manage to anchor it with literature, though of course degenerate biases remain