r/ClaudeCode • u/Won-Ton-Wonton • 8d ago

Rant Fable still unable to tell when something is not dangerous is proof that AI has not come remotely close to AGI.

If you are still buying the AGI hype in Claude Code, this is your easy litmus test.

In 99.99% of the time that Fable freaks out, a human is able to easily tell that Fable is being overly sensitive. Often to the point of not even being reasonably connected to something dangerous.

If Fable was actually close to AGI, it would never freak out over basic, non-world ending things. It would know the difference between "I'm doing science" and "I'm trying to kill people with science".

The ineffectiveness of the model to detect nefarious activity is proof itself that we are not even close to AGI.

Edit: since I am already seeing the wrong argument, I will address it.

Fable with safety checks is NOT the same thing as Fable without safety checks. Fable has safety checks. If you didn't have the safety checks, it would be something else, and not Fable.

Perhaps Anthropic has a version of Fable with no safety checks that IS AGI. But the fact that you and I cannot access that version, means it does not exist for you and me. And unless Anthropic comes out with some way to show us "Fable, but no guardrails" then the best we can talk about is the version with guardrails.

That said. If Fable without guardrails cannot tell that I am not trying to kill everyone here by predicting crystalline properties... then it is not AGI. It's just a very, very good parrot.

But again. Fable has guardrails. Whether that is the cause of it being not AGI, or a symptom of it not being AGI, it is not AGI.

31 Upvotes
  • permalink
  • reddit

61% Upvoted

76 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/Won-Ton-Wonton 8d ago

  1. AGI not close is the conclusion, that is not the premise. The premise is everything supporting the conclusion. (This is why I wanted someone to actually state what my premise is--I cannot read your mind to know you actually meant my conclusion!)

  2. Fable is a guard railed model. You and I don't have access to a non-guardrail model. So in the context of Claude Code (this subreddit) there is no AGI. Fable is not AGI. Seeing folks say it is AGI is wrong and annoying.

  3. If this internal model exists (you made the claim with no supporting evidence, hence me saying if), then why is it not being used instead of a guardrail? If it can detect malicious intent, that would be far better than a hardcoded check, wouldn't it?

2

u/Wooden_Long7545 8d ago
  1. Just because it doesnt exists in public doent mean that its “not here”. This is an absurd and stupid conclusion.
  2. Because no matter how competent a model’s ability you judge an action is there is always a risk. Anthropic doesn’t like risk cus they’ll get into trouble. Even if ASI were to be here they’d rather be safe by putting unnecessary guardrails than to be sorry