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.
While I appreciate, they publish this information, it's increasingly hard to keep track of it all. I've lost the mental model of how different models at different effort levels perform and what tasks they are good at.
In practice, I tend to just use the default on Claude Code that works well enough. But I wonder to what degree other users really play around with these settings to optimize for their project.
From today through June 22, Fable 5 is included on Pro, Max, Team, and seat-based Enterprise plans at no extra cost.
On June 23, we’ll remove Fable 5 from those plans. Using it after that will require usage credits. If capacity allows, we’ll extend the included window.
After this point—when sufficient capacity allows us to do so—we aim to restore Fable 5 as a standard part of subscription plans. We intend to do this as quickly as we can.
This seems like the pharmaceutical method of get them hooked on the drug with free samples, then once they can't live without it, raise the price. I'm not sure I want to start using Claude Fable on a max plan if it's just going to go away on June 23rd.
But maybe the more charitable reading is that they didn't have to offer this model at all on those plans and they are giving the standard free trial.
Where is the Ferrari in this at all? I completely agree that they missed the mark in design. While the interior is 100% Jony Ive, the exterior screams "design by committee."
An electric Roma successor would have been much better received and possibly cheaper for them to develop (who knows?).
The silver lining in all this is that it means that the EV arm will not cannibalize their ICE cars.
It's been a little while since I cared all that much about the models because they work well enough already. It's the tooling and the service around the model that affects my day-to-day more.
I would guess a lot of the enterprise customers would be willing to pay a larger subscription price (1.5x or 2x) if it means that they would have significantly higher stability and uptime. 5% more uptime would gain more trust than 5% more on a gamified model metrics.
Anthropic used to position itself as more of the enterprise option and still does, but their issues recently seems like they are watering down the experience to appease the $20 dollar customer rather than the $200 dollar one. As painful as it is personally, I'd expect that they'd get more benefit long term from raising prices and gaining trust than short term gaining customers seeking utility at a $20 dollar price point.
I am appreciative of your work on this piece. I'd love to see one that goes deeper into Dario Amodei. Perhaps even a series of profiles on the central figures of this AI era.
I somewhat understand Anthropic's position. However, thinking tokens are useful even if they don't show the internal logic of the LLM. I often realize I left out some instruction or clarification in my prompt while reading through the chain of reasoning. Overall, this makes the results more effective.
It's certainly getting frustrating having to remind it that I want all tests to pass even if it thinks it's not responsible for having broken some of them.
The stripe conference focused more than I would have liked on crypto.
I completely understand that there are markets and customers that can find real utility in it, but I wonder how many businesses will really ever benefit from stablecoins.
We're in higher education, and potentially our international clients could avoid hiccups with regulation, delays, compliance, and more using stablecoins, but it's really a guess. In the meantime, the pricing model of stripe seems to prioritize bigger and bigger clients.
That being said from Stripe's perspective stablecoins an easy bet to make. They win by building payment infrastructure within the traditional payment ecosystem and win by providing an alternative completely outside of it.
I think that's why I find his later works more compelling, particularly "Dependent Rational Animals," in which he grounds traditions in human telos. There are aims or goods which are common and transcend social constructs. After Virtue suffers from a great premise but doesn't quite stick the landing.
I recommend some of his other works: Whose Justice, Whose Rationality and Dependent Rational Animals.
It’s rewarding to seem him attempt a reconciliation between some modern epistemologies and Augustinian Thomism. I’m not sure he really pulls it off but his stature as a thinker in moral philosophy is undeniable.
One of my services is still running on Elastic Beanstalk. There's a lot of pros, but the cons are starting to build up, especially since it's relatively easy to port stuff to Elastic Container Service. I'm in the process of doing that now.
EB was great at the beginning, but as the number of connections to other AWS and third party providers increased, it has become incredibly clunky to tweak the build files. What's even worse is that when something does go wrong -- which it inevitably will -- it's extremely hard and slow to debug exactly what went wrong.
Using it with celery has also been rough.
All of that being said I'm ambivalent about having EB on this list. I think it's a good product that has languished partially due to three reasons:
1. AWS having too many overlapping tools (AppRunner, Lightsail, ECS, etc.)
2. AWS haven't added or prioritized as many new features on EB for years
3. The devOps tooling is much more mature these days.
Does anyone have insight on how this compares these days to Adobe's suite? Seems pretty competitive, but I'm not sure if you're getting 80% of the features for 30% of the cost or 50% of features for 50% of the cost.
To add to this, I have a much deeper appreciation for all the works of Shakespeare I have seen performed rather than merely read. Even hearing certain soliloquies out loud makes them much more powerful and engaging.
I think Shakespeare is better if you suspend belief a bit in some plot machinations and enjoy the work as performed and written. It's not that you shouldn't analyze the work and think deeply on its themes, but I find that many approach Shakespeare as a philosopher first rather than as a playwright and poet.
This was an enjoyable read. My GE fridge uses RFID for keeping track of when to change the water filter. This isn't really an area I'm familiar with but I'm curious how much I would be able to figure out with the right tools.
Looks like they focused a lot more on utility this go around. Going to try out the 16 inch but hoping it can fit in my bags well and isn't a hassle for traveling.
I have one of the newer Dell XPS 15 laptops. Installing linux was a breeze, upgrading the storage and memory took less than half an hour, and the display is gorgeous. The downsides are that it's performance is certainly throttled quite a bit, and it's awkward sitting it on your lap due to its sharp edges and density (far less comfortable than my MBP). It's certainly been a good experience overall, but I think once thinkpad moves over fully to more reliable displays in the 16:10 ratio I'd probably choose those.
It's fair to say Augustine did more reconciling with Neoplatonism. Aquinas did some. I think Aquinas was more wary of relying too heavily upon a philosophy that he saw as incomplete. Even "the philosopher" could not provide a comprehensive framework for Christian philosophy. When Neoplatonism was useful, he would take parts here and there, but he was under no illusion that Neoplatonism provided a sufficient framework for understanding the world. The early Italian renaissance philosophers were far more taken with Plato and the Neoplatonists. Marsilio Ficino, for example, probably went too far trying to reconcile parts that were (arguably) fundamentally incompatible with Christianity.
I have the logitech version of the HM embody chair. It supposedly has more cushioning and some cooling, but it doesn't seem too different. I think the materials on the Aeron were superior, but the embody has a more relaxed position and won out in the end.
It's refreshing to hear this perspective. There have been a lot of authors and producers trying to capitalize on the success of the LOTR films and recreate the magic of middle earth with varying levels of success, but it's harder said than done. At the end of the day, Tolkien's philosophical and theological views do not get in the way of a really great story. I think that's at least in part what Tolkien's reservation with allegory was. There's a temptation to make a story to fit a narrative. History and narrative are crucial elements to making something compelling and this is where it's hard to compete with Tolkien.
"In the near term" is doing some heavy lifting.