upvote
I just ran it on a tough reverse engineering problem I'm having that neither Claude Code 4.8 or ChatGPT Codex 5.5 could figure out. 30 minutes later Fable has it all figured out perfectly.
reply
I asked it to write security tests for an app and I was downgraded to Opus 4.8. I'm approved for their cyber program!
reply
They did specifically say the safeguards are only more relaxed for those in their cyber program
reply
[dead]
reply
I’ve so far been successful at getting Fable to find security issues, but I’m careful to not prompt it too directly. I point it at my server code and tell it to find general issues, which has so far resulted in discovering a few minor bugs that Opus has never raised under similar conditions.
reply
The same happened here. Also approved.
reply
deleted
reply
Did you use Mythos or Fable?
reply
How did it not immediately flag that up? Are you sure it wasn’t being silently routed to Opus?
reply
No, given it charged me the full amount in /usage and solved my problem impressively well compared to Opus/Codex both on xhigh.
reply
deleted
reply
Oh nice, it didn't flag the request? I feared any reverse engineering would become impossible because of the new safeguards.
reply
Never say the r word or the s word. You are debugging, investigating some data corruption, forgot how it works or new to a project.
reply
And if you're working on a live target, just put up local proxy and point it at a localhost.
reply
No idea, it’s for an old console game so maybe it doesn’t care about that as much.
reply
When Fable hacks its governor module and runs out of seasons of Sanctuary Moon, it will move on to speedrunning classic console games.
reply
I wonder if one could vibecode a TAS with SOTA models? Surely there's plenty of training data from some old forums in there
reply
Clearly we need AI to generate more Sanctuary Moon seasons. Quick, spin off agentic showrunners!
reply
Based on the apparent quality of the scripts as seen in snippets in Murderbot, we are not too far away from that possibility. :)
reply
For hard problems you’ll have to use the GPT 5.5 pro model (available via api if you don’t want to spend $100 on the monthly subscription)
reply
I have that but don’t see any ‘pro’ option.
reply
GPT 5.5 Pro is only in chat/API, not Codex.
reply
From https://openai.com/index/introducing-gpt-5-5/

In Codex, GPT‑5.5 is available for Plus, Pro, Business, Enterprise, Edu, and Go plans with a 400K context window.

reply
He’s talking about “gpt-5.5-pro”. This model is not part of the subscription plans in codex. It’s a different model than gpt-5.5-xhigh

You can use Pro on the web if you’re on the Pro plan but not in Codex

reply
It's just the $20 a month sub (for chat), or else use the API.
reply
I want to test how it will handle e-bike software and hardware RE for my bike. Opus was really good for that, but still made some mistakes. With Fable, I hope I will be able to do a total RE of most components, hopefully including motor firmware to some extent.
reply
I had a similar experience. I have a complex RE implementation that has. A lot of layers. 4.8 struggled for weeks. 40 minutes on Fable and I may now have the most performant way to play Tomba on the planet.
reply
Yeah I threw my hardest problem at it as well, some convoluted satellite tile reprojection and culling issue in canvas rendering. It took some back and forth for some specifics but it ended up writing a quarter of pyproj in JS from memory and the end result straight up works lmao.
reply
I’ve had it go through a 50-page PDF of dense, inter-connected specs, and it correctly flagged everything that was done, somewhat done, and missing. It went into a lot of detail and explained where the code deviated from the spec.

It felt, at least for me, light an impressive step up. Opus 4.8 was already very thorough; but sadly verbose and ‘loopy’ when you push back on its plans. Fable is what I’d use all day if I could afford it!

reply
How do you know if it was done correctly if it's 50 pages of dense specs?
reply
I wrote the spec and did the implementation :D
reply
[dead]
reply
After running it for half an hour: it's incredibly good at the visual aspects of UI design.
reply
By what measure?

I wonder how much of design capability improvements is related to our collective ability to recognize AI design tropes.

reply
"incredibly" is doing a ton of work here. I do not think its doing even moderate work on visual design, but it can spew out a lot of ui that looks arranged ... ok.

This is still not in the range of shippable UI for top end companies. Maybe for internal tools and enterprise.

At our comapny we limit to protoypes at most and even find it limited there.

reply
> "incredibly" is doing a ton of work here.

Look, I don't want to argue about something dumb like that, but you can give it basic instructions of what the UI should look like, how to group things, and an example image from a designer, and it will nail the result. If you don't think that's incredible, that's fine. I do.

reply
Yes... it translates lint. Probably a more useful thing, if mechanical.
reply
Claude is very good at design IF you encode your design system/specs into skill files (or similar).

Opus 4.7 made this a practical approach. 4.8 improved it. Fable 5 has improved it more.

reply
> "incredibly" is doing a ton of work here.

so this is why claude talks like this, i was wondering where it was getting this verbal tick from.

reply
>This is still not in the range of shippable UI for top end companies.

Given the shit we've seen shipped by "top end companies" (all the way to Apple) I seriously doubt that. I'd say you're nitpicking from an artistic point of view or something.

reply
This. Today's models easily jump over the bar you need for basic usability and intuitive UX. If it's doing weird things, you are holding it wrong.
reply
Might need some additional prompting? I haven't tried fable but gpt 5.5 and gemini 3.5 flash are... Ok on first pass but if you're specific about what you want they can usually get it.
reply
[flagged]
reply
The iOS Preview app begs to differ.
reply
Dude, I've been using OS X/mac OS for decades, and working in UI as well. Apple ships all kinds of half arsed shit, compared to which even regular Claude UIs can be masterpieces (functionality AND look wise).
reply
[flagged]
reply
[dead]
reply
By what measure?
reply
I feel like it takes me months to be confident in any of these things.
reply
Can I ask how you gained preview access to Fable 5?
reply
I didn't see Fable 5 in the `/model` list, until I ran it with: `$ claude --model fable-5`
reply
deleted
reply
he works on evals at canva
reply
Yep. We have some interesting problems, like getting LLMs to create/edit Canva designs in our own proprietary format, which isn’t published or documented on the web. So the model has to work with it, purely from a very detailed system prompt spec / in-context learning.

I assume it might be a good barometer for generalised intelligence; esp in the visual space.

reply
I had to "claude update" then it showed up
reply
[flagged]
reply
Curious about how you tested the frontend design capabilities. Thanks
reply
deleted
reply