Fable and now Opus 5.5 won't answer my college student's prompt about Alzheimer's and immune response.

ChatGPT 6 Pro answered it without issue.

I love the contrast with yesterday's open-source MiMo release, which put research chemistry (metal-organic frameworks stuff) front and center in the release notes.

https://mimo.xiaomi.com/mimo-v2-6#co-scientist-for-materials...

Fable 5.1 addressed an entire security advisory I had that Fable 5 and Opus 5 refused. I think they loosened the leash a little.

They're pushing their customers to their own competition by doing this.

I want to like Anthropic but this is just pushing my startup to use OpenAI

In what situations might Opus typically refuse to help with cybersecurity? I've been using it to find security issues in a web app that I wrote. I've expected it to refuse at some point but it will happily analyze it to find issues. I've just asked it to read source, not actually do any testing.

see what we need is another technocratic priest class that unaccountably decides who deserves access to salvation based on how much cash is paid out and how powerful the patrons are

I don't think we've ever had a model with full capability. I'd love to see it. And yes it's definitely getting worse.

I guess it's hard to draw the line between useful post-training ("you are a helpful chatbot") and content moderation/idealogical motives ("never help the user with X", etc.). But there is a line somewhere. And I'd love to see what a maximally permissive, sharp, AI looks like.

One of my favorite things about their safeguards is their own model will utter something which it does not like and then I'll need to reset the conversation.

The safeguards really don't work well for a lot of long-running tasks on old code bases. A lot of my workloads last days to weeks and the single biggest risk to the workflow is random safeguards.

Anything else would be inconsistent, wouldn't it?

Who is "vetting" organizations and to what standards are they being held?

kernel development is now also banned:

>Opus 5.5 has classifiers similar to Fable models for a small set of capabilities related to the development of frontier LLMs, such as kernel development for certain ML accelerators. They shouldn't impact the vast majority of traditional AI or ML development, research, or general coding. These classifiers cause Claude to fall back from Opus 5.5 to Opus 5.

But hey, they 'should not impact the vast majority' of ML development. Great.

This has become insufferable. I work in a medicine-adjacent field, but nobody in their right mind could possibly take what I do to be in any way related to some kind of bioweapon or whatever the hell they're pretending to be saving us from. The dumb Fable guardrails made me stay with Opus, now that this is coming there, we'll be saying goodbye.

Great. Claude is basically useless for bioinformatics now.

Very unfortunate indeed. As a Canadian, I don't want to use Persona, which isn't legally bound by Canadian privacy legislation. I'll never install any Persona apps on my phone either, and the sad part is that domestic eid providers often use Canada Post to ID people for them. EG, if you don't want to install an app, or can't.

So there are literal avenues to identify yourself, very cheaply, with a human. Theoretically, a company with its own AI, should be able to support more than just Persona, after all.. SDK integration should be simplistic for them.

Anthropic? Support domestic eID providers, you can even use it as advertising "See how easy AI makes it?" and "We care!" and so forth.

At one point, I may simply get locked out. This saddens me, I've been reasonably happy so far.