Anthropic dropped Fable 5 and I immediately swapped it into our dev stack. We route everything through a single endpoint on zenmux, so the actual switch was changing one model string and watching the latency graphs. The good parts first because there are a lot of them. I threw a refactoring task at it: split a messy python service into modules, preserve the public api, and write tests that prove nothing broke. Fable 5 planned the whole thing, caught a circular dependency I did not mention, and verified the tests pass. With Opus 4.8 I usually have to nudge it a couple of times when it forgets to update the init file. Fable 5 just did it. Then I dumped our full codebase and asked it to find a race condition we had been hunting for a week. It traced the async flow, named the exact function, and described the interleaving that triggers the bug. That level of context digestion feels new. Opus is good at long context, but Fable 5 felt like it was actually reasoning across the whole window instead of pattern matching near the top. I also sent it a blurry dashboard screenshot from a client call and it rebuilt the html and echarts config including the tooltip formatting. My designer’s first words were "when did you learn front end." I did not. But here is the part nobody in the launch threads is talking about enough. It is slow. On high effort I am seeing 45 to 90 seconds for a single complex turn. Our latency graphs go from a flat green line to a jagged mess the moment Fable 5 traffic hits. And it is expensive. The same prompt that costs X on Opus 4.8 costs roughly 1.4 to 1.7X on Fable 5 because it generates more tokens and runs at a higher effort tier by default. It writes its own reasoning traces out loud and bills you for them. For research tasks the quality is worth it. For "rewrite this email" it is comically overpowered. The bigger issue is the silent fallback. Fable 5 is basically Mythos with guardrails. When your prompt touches cybersecurity, biology, chemistry, or

The most AI-obsessed firms are spending roughly $7,500 monthly per employee on AI, per Ramp AI Index. That's not more than an engineer's salary — yet.

Instagram is going to let you tweak what its algorithm shows you on your main feed. With the Your Algorithm feature, "you can now see the topics we think you're interested in, and change them, across all the major parts of Instagram," according to Instagram boss Adam Mosseri. Right now, the feature will only surface […]

The US military struck Iran again after an Iranian drone’s lucky midair strike.

The UFC event on the White House’s South Lawn is the president’s birthday gift to himself. Sources expect it to be a lobbying extravaganza.

Amazon has launched a new feature for its Echo and Echo Kids smart speakers called Sleep Studio that's designed to make the daily transition to bedtime more enticing for kids and less stressful for parents and caregivers. The feature uses a combination of bedtime stories, relaxing sounds, and guided meditations along with scheduling and customization […]

Thirteen other medical groups have already endorsed the independent schedule.

Anthropic released Claude Fable, its first Mythos-class AI model, yesterday and it's already causing concerns inside Microsoft. Sources tell me that Microsoft is limiting the use of Claude Fable 5 for employees because of Anthropic's new data retention requirements. While Microsoft quickly rolled out Claude Fable 5 to its GitHub Copilot and Foundry customers, I'm […]

Problems with Starlink's India expansion could challenge SpaceX's IPO growth story.

Move also cuts off a massive market of legit users who buy cards with physical cash.

V.C. Andrews died in 1986. Since then, more than 100 novels have been published under her name by ghostwriter Andrew Neiderman. Most readers either never noticed or didn't care. The books still had the gothic families, dark secrets, and familiar atmosphere people expected from a V.C. Andrews novel. It got me thinking about something we're starting to see with AI. When people ask whether AI can continue the work of a deceased author, musician, or artist, they're treating it as a brand-new question. But publishing has already been running a real-world experiment for nearly 40 years. A dead author's name remained on the cover. Someone else learned the style, themes, and formula. New works were produced for an audience that wanted more of the same. The franchise continued. The obvious difference is that Neiderman was a human ghostwriter and an AI model isn't. But from the perspective of readers, what exactly is the meaningful distinction? If a future "new" novel by a deceased author is good enough that readers enjoy it and can't tell the difference, should we care how it was produced? Or is there something fundamentally different about a human ghostwriter carrying on a literary legacy versus a model trained on the author's corpus? I wrote a longer piece about the V.C. Andrews case and why it feels relevant to the future of AI-generated creative work: https://tjcrowley.substack.com/p/the-ghost-in-the-machine-has-been Curious where people here draw the line. submitted by /u/Dependent_Run_6410 [link] [留言]

As part of Apple's worldwide developers conference (WWDC) they announced some of the new stuff coming to WebKit and Safari 27. Among them is a feature that Google Chrome got in April of last year: fully customizable select elements. As an accessibility professional, I am absolutely thrilled. I am disappointed, though, that Firefox doesn't have it yet. You can find the session for what's new here: https://developer.apple.com/videos/play/wwdc2026/204 submitted by /u/ThatBlindSwiftDevGuy [link] [留言]

Google is making some changes to how it saves your interactions with Search. In an email sent to users, Google says it will save the images, files, audio, and video you use to search under a new "Search Services History" setting. That includes the images you search for with Google Lens, recordings from its real-time […]