Comment on: Claude Fable is relentlessly proactive
In older models it seemed to work well to create regular feedback loops and catch the odd issue with drift from the goal, but I’ve not seen that really since about Opus 4.6 and now it’s starting to seem like (an expensiv
Comment on: GLM 5.2 vs. Opus
PREACH. I have no idea why THIS has become the standard for illustrating model capabilities. It's endlessly frustrating when that was the initial objective for all these models, but, became increasingly clear over time that none of these models were ever capable of getting the desired output for complex software on the initial prompt.The reality is:
- business rules change
- ideas for improvement may arise from the initial prompt
- updates to submodules/functions/configs/secrets are BLOCKERS
... etc.One shot prompting for the expecations of complete software is seemingly more and more a show o
Comment on: GPT-5.6
I really love the Opus/Fable models but I'm honestly sick to death of the buggy product. The CLI always has some weird issue. Right now it doesn't even output messages before tool calls, it just swallows them and they disappear.I don't like OpenAI as a company, but they appear to have QA, and that is probably enough to get me to switch.
Comment on: Opus 5 is lazy (A Twitter thread)
Going back to 4.6. Opus 5 is such a stupid being, that I don't want to talk to it at all. Why should I even talk to it?? It does not follow anything I say, it does not read it's rules, it doesn't read the code in the amount needed, after one prompt it again forgets what I wanted - it's, sorry, shit.Just use the 4.6 again:Claude --model claude-opus-4-6[1m] when you start it and /model claude-opus-4-6[1m] for in session setting of the opus 4.6. What I learned is if one is creating dynamic workflow and let Claude write it, then execute it, keeps the agents spawned in rails much better than opus 4