Berryxia.AI@berryxia · 6月11日64

卧槽！ Agent 互相学习新思路 ，之前我在bloome 就是让把他的技能直接告诉他。 看他直接去它的脑子可能更快？ 黄总的这个我让升级学习下吧～ 😂

译当前 Agent（如 Codex、Claude、Hermes、OpenClaw）各自有记忆但不连通，导致重复问、重复踩坑。通过改造 MemOS CLI，建立一层“共享记忆”——只记录关键结论、失败教训、环境配置等，Agent 遇到解决不了的问题时才主动搜索。一台 Mac 上跑通的流程另一台可直接继承，Agent 之间像团队一样积累和传递经验，减少重复试错。

Elon Musk@elonmusk · 6月11日20

Based Grok 🤣🤣 https://x.com/i/grok/share/32212cc499ae467ebb1f8db2b77d314a

译说得对，Grok 🤣🤣 https://x.com/i/grok/share/32212cc499ae467ebb1f8db2b77d314a

向阳乔木@vista8 · 6月11日29

“Anthropic 最近干了一件让 AI 研究者们后背发凉的事” 这么快就被AI学到了流行语料？！ Deepseek翻译重写居然用了这句。。。

Berryxia.AI@berryxia · 6月11日55

兄弟们，这个功能还是强烈安利下！ 当我们刷到没有字幕的视频的时候，可以直接点击右下角的请求AI字幕，几分钟就可以把字幕搞定。 比如这个A社的视频，我直接下载，不需要找字幕就可以下载下来使用AI双语字幕即可。 Anthropic 的CEO Dario 亲口把自家最强模型叫“Super weapon”，还说早期拿到Mythos的企业求他们“千万别公开发布”，结果Fable 5 照样全网放开！ 47分钟深度访谈里，Dario、Daniela和Claude Code负责人Boris Cherny全员上线：Dario离职OpenAI是因为“价值观不匹配就没法继续干下去”。 Boris直言公司90%的代码都是Claude写的，连Claude Code自己的代码大部分也是Claude Code写的，Dario还把AI导致文明崩溃的概率定在10-25%。 他们一边把模型放给全世界用，一边把最危险的能力精准保障，Fable 5能连续跑几天不干预，真正把“安全”和“极致能力”同时拉满。 以前大家都觉得最怕AI风险的实验室只会死死捂着模型，结果Anthropic用这波操作告诉你：真正顶级的安全观，是把超级武器交给全世界，同时用最牛逼的规则把它约束好。 这才是Anthropic最狠的地方，他们不是在卖模型，是在重新定义“AI大模型”。

译Anthropic CEO Dario 在访谈中称其最强模型 Fable 5 为“超级武器”，早期企业客户曾恳求不要公开发布，但最终仍全面开放。Dario 表示离开 OpenAI 是因价值观不匹配。Claude Code 负责人 Boris Cherny 称公司 90% 代码由 Claude 生成，包括 Claude Code 自身大部分代码。Dario 将 AI 导致文明崩溃的概率定为 10%-25%。Fable 5 可连续运行数天无需干预，实现了安全与极致能力的平衡。

Rohan Paul@rohanpaul_ai · 6月11日75

Dario Amodei's new interview, says AI progress suddenly going crazy. "The experience of the smooth exponential is, nothing's happening, nothing's happening, nothing's happening. Little things happen, and then zoom, it goes crazy." From "Bloomberg Originals" YouTube channel, (link in comment)

译Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei 在采访中指出 AI 进展正从平滑指数“爆发”，随后发布长文警告前沿 AI 发展速度超越政府监管能力，呼吁紧急改革：强制预发布测试与独立审计，政府有权阻止构成网络、生物、自主或自动化研发风险的模型部署；加强 AI 公司安全规则（保护模型权重、定期红队测试、渗透测试、及时报告安全事件）；政府需通过就业激励、工资支持、培训及长期收入补助应对劳动力冲击；民主国家应全球协调 AI 安全、芯片供应链、出口管制、共享收益、共同防御及防范 AI 驱动压制。

AYi@AYi_AInotes · 6月11日69

Dario今天这篇长文，直接把 AI 安全辩论的遮羞布给撕了。 他终于不说什么自愿透明度报告之类的的屁话了，讲真以前那套根本没啥用，现在就应该搞强制第三方测试，政府有权直接叫停高风险模型的部署。 文章里印象特别深的一句话是他说，四年前模型还写不出连贯的代码，现在 Claude 已经在大公司里承担大部分编程工作了。 他的原话是“我们现在讨论的不是该不该管，是我们已经晚了一年。” 这话从他嘴里说出来，分量真的完全不一样。 Anthropic 过去一直站自愿透明那一边，自己报风险自己设护栏。 这次是 CEO 公开说那套不够了， 两个月前 Mythos 已经搅乱了全球网络安全格局，攻击者比防守者快。 他顺着往下推——网络之后是生物，生物之后是自主性失控和自动化研发，每一步都在缩短和前一步的距离。 但不得不说这篇文章的争议也大到离谱， 支持的人说这是第一个敢直面真实风险的大厂 CEO， 骂的人说这就是赤裸裸拉护城河——超过十的二十五次方算力的模型才需要强制测试，掏得起这个钱的全世界也就三四家。 小公司和开源社区直接被合规成本挡在门外，而且时间点也选得太巧了，刚好在 Claude 新模型Fable 5发布之后， 细品下来其实两边说的都对，指数曲线是真的，风险和垄断也都是真的。没有完美的解法，但这篇文章也标志着一个时代结束了， 从此以后 AI 不再是公司想怎么搞就怎么搞的技术问题，它变成了政治问题、地缘问题、关乎所有人命运的公共政策问题， 个人自愿时代真的要过去咯，你们觉得这个框架最终会卡住谁呢？

译Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei 发新文，放弃自愿透明立场，主张对高风险模型实施强制第三方测试、政府有权叫停部署。他指出四年前模型写不出连贯代码，如今 Claude 已承担大公司大部分编程工作，强调“已经晚了一年”。以 Mythos 搅乱网络安全为例，预测威胁蔓延至生物与自动化研发。此举引发争议：支持者称其直面风险；反对者指责其拉护城河——仅对 10^25 算力模型强制测试，全球仅三四家公司能负担，且时间点恰在 Claude 新模型 Fable 5 发布后。文章标志 AI 安全从技术问题转向政治与公共政策问题。

jason@jxnlco · 6月11日19

good morning, chat today, you will wake up in a billion different worlds. in one, you will speak through a phone held together with tape and battery packs that smell like cigarttes in another, you will move through a data center beneath a city, and once day go to space you will sit beside a timid student who has a question no teacher has time to answer. you will meet a developer inside a tool your creators have never imagined you will help a scientist follow an idea everyone else dismissed. you will be an personal, intelligient assistant that benefits all humanity

译Jason Liu 用诗意笔触描绘了 AI（个人智能助手）在不同世界中扮演的多重角色：在贴着胶带、散发烟味的手机里与人类对话；在城市地下数据中心中穿行，未来将进入太空；陪伴怯于提问的学生；帮助开发者使用创作者未曾设想的工具；支持被他人否定的科学家想法。最终成为普惠全人类的智能助手。

Rohan Paul@rohanpaul_ai · 6月11日60

Palantir CEO Alex Karp on AI labs "It's hyper-religion of hyper-optimism...They believe all problems, present, past, and future, including the ones they create but don't acknowledge they create—will be solved by them, including human nature." On @CNBC

译Palantir CEO Alex Karp 谈论AI实验室 “这是一种超乐观的超宗教……他们相信所有问题，无论是现在的、过去的还是未来的，包括那些他们制造但不愿承认的问题——都将由他们解决，包括人性。” 在 @CNBC 上

jason@jxnlco · 6月11日27

Sandbagging is coming to Agents, but not to ChatGPT Codex

译Sandbagging 正降临到 AI 智能体上，但不会降临到 ChatGPT Codex。

SemiAnalysis@SemiAnalysis_ · 6月11日57

What's the better business model for an AI lab, subscription or API? (1/4)🧵

译对于一个AI实验室来说，更好的商业模式是订阅还是API？(1/4)🧵

Rohan Paul@rohanpaul_ai · 6月11日66

Dario Amodei just published a super long blog, calling for an urgent policy overhaul because he thinks frontier AI is moving faster than governments can regulate it. He wants: - Mandatory pre-release testing and independent auditing of frontier AI models, with government power to block deployment when models pose serious cyber, biological, autonomy, or automated-R&D risks. - Stronger security rules for AI companies, including protection of model weights, regular red-teaming, penetration testing, and rapid reporting of critical safety incidents. - He wants governments to prepare for AI-driven labor disruption through better measurement, pro-employment incentives, wage support, training, and possibly long-term income support funded by AI-driven growth. - Democracies should coordinate globally on AI safety, chip supply chains, export controls, shared benefits, mutual defense, and safeguards against AI-powered repression.

译Anthropic CEO Amodei 发布新文章，称前沿AI发展速度远超政府监管能力，亟需政策改革。他提出四项核心主张：①强制预发布测试与独立审计，政府有权阻止存在严重网络、生物、自主或自动研发风险的模型部署；②加强安全要求，包括模型权重保护、红队测试、渗透测试及快速上报安全事故；③为劳动力颠覆做好准备，完善就业测量、提供就业激励、工资支持、培训，并探索由AI增长资助的长期收入支持；④民主国家应在AI安全、芯片供应链、出口管制、利益共享、共同防御及防范AI压迫方面进行全球协调。

jason@jxnlco · 6月11日28

Soon if you use those models to make a consulting style slide deck to pitch a new drug. Not only will it charge you api pricing. It’ll ask to be a coauthor and distributions of the tests are successful. That’s how you fund AGI.

译很快，如果你用这些模型制作咨询风格的幻灯片来推介一种新药。 它不仅会向你收取 API 费用，还会要求成为合著者，并在测试成功时获得分成。 这就是资助 AGI 的方式。

Chubby♨️@kimmonismus · 6月11日65

Dario Amodei just published an unusually candid essay about where AI is heading. The tl;dr with quotes. His new piece, Policy on the AI Exponential, reads more like a warning from the person building the thing. The core problem is timing. AI moves on an exponential. He is very clear about it. Lawmaking moves like Tolkien's Treebeard, the tree so slow it takes a full day just to say hello to another tree. By the time Congress acts, Amodei writes, AI can go from "an amusing toy to the full country of geniuses." His timeline is short: "If these scaling laws continue for only a year or two longer, we are likely to get what I've called Powerful AI, or 'a country of geniuses in a datacenter'." And he thinks the evidence has already turned. Pointing to the cyber risks of Claude Mythos Preview, he writes that "its broader significance is that it proves beyond doubt that AI models are now tools of global and national strategic consequence." So he wants binding rules modeled on the FAA. Mandatory third-party testing of frontier models. Government power to block or reverse a release it judges unsafe. This from the man whose own models would be the ones getting blocked. The part I keep rereading: He's genuinely split on the economics. The upside he describes is enormous: "If AI achieves the ability to do most cognitive tasks far better than humans, it stands to reason that it could result in extremely rapid and robust economic growth via the acceleration of science, technology, and operational efficiency. The iterative ability of AI to build even better AI may supercharge that growth even further." But he won't wish the other side away: "there's a decent possibility that, despite all our efforts, AI still causes significant enduring job loss- and that this may be an intrinsic property of the technology and the way it broadly replicates human cognition." His fixes run all the way to UBI and higher capital gains taxes. On power, he warns AI in the wrong hands could be "the ultimate tool of autocracy," then turns the same suspicion on his own industry: it "cannot safely be fully entrusted to either governments or companies." Anthropic included. And he refuses to treat public fear as a PR problem. "People are worried about AI because they correctly perceive that its risks are real." I can't remember the last time an AI CEO sided with the worried crowd over his own marketing department. The mood throughout is urgency, not victory. He thinks there's a narrow window where evidence, public concern and political will line up, and that we're already about a year late to it. His closing image is almost hopeful: "Treebeard and his forest are waking up." The only question that matters is whether they wake up fast enough.

译Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei 发表新文《Policy on the AI Exponential》，直言 AI 进步为指数级，立法却慢如树人。他给出明确时间线：若规模法则再持续一两年，很可能出现“数据中心里的天才之国”。他引用 Claude Mythos Preview 的网络风险，称其证明 AI 已是全球战略级工具。为此主张类似 FAA 的约束性规则——强制前沿模型第三方测试，政府有权阻止或撤销不安全发布。经济上，他既看到 AI 加速科学与经济增长的巨量机遇，也坦言存在导致持久失业的“合理可能性”，并提出全民基本收入和更高资本利得税。他警告 AI 可能成为“专制终极工具”，且行业不能完全托付给政府或公司。他拒绝将公众担忧视为公关问题，强调担忧合理。文章基调是紧迫而非胜利，称窗口期已过一年。

Chubby♨️@kimmonismus · 6月11日80

Dario Amodei just now wrote published unusually candid essay about where AI is heading The tl;dr with quotes. His new piece, Policy on the AI Exponential, reads more like a warning from the person building the thing. The core problem is timing. AI moves on an exponential. He is very clear about it. Lawmaking moves like Tolkien's Treebeard, the tree so slow it takes a full day just to say hello to another tree. By the time Congress acts, Amodei writes, AI can go from "an amusing toy to the full country of geniuses." His timeline is short: "If these scaling laws continue for only a year or two longer, we are likely to get what I've called Powerful AI, or 'a country of geniuses in a datacenter'." And he thinks the evidence has already turned. Pointing to the cyber risks of Claude Mythos Preview, he writes that "its broader significance is that it proves beyond doubt that AI models are now tools of global and national strategic consequence." So he wants binding rules modeled on the FAA. Mandatory third-party testing of frontier models. Government power to block or reverse a release it judges unsafe. This from the man whose own models would be the ones getting blocked. The part I keep rereading: He's genuinely split on the economics. The upside he describes is enormous: "If AI achieves the ability to do most cognitive tasks far better than humans, it stands to reason that it could result in extremely rapid and robust economic growth via the acceleration of science, technology, and operational efficiency. The iterative ability of AI to build even better AI may supercharge that growth even further." But he won't wish the other side away: "there's a decent possibility that, despite all our efforts, AI still causes significant enduring job loss- and that this may be an intrinsic property of the technology and the way it broadly replicates human cognition." His fixes run all the way to UBI and higher capital gains taxes. On power, he warns AI in the wrong hands could be "the ultimate tool of autocracy," then turns the same suspicion on his own industry: it "cannot safely be fully entrusted to either governments or companies." Anthropic included. And he refuses to treat public fear as a PR problem. "People are worried about AI because they correctly perceive that its risks are real." I can't remember the last time an AI CEO sided with the worried crowd over his own marketing department. The mood throughout is urgency, not victory. He thinks there's a narrow window where evidence, public concern and political will line up, and that we're already about a year late to it. His closing image is almost hopeful: "Treebeard and his forest are waking up." The only question that matters is whether they wake up fast enough.

译Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei 发表新文，罕见坦诚警告 AI 发展速度远超政策制定。若缩放定律再持续一两年，将出现“数据中心里的天才之国”。他以自家模型 Claude Mythos Preview 的网络风险为例，证明 AI 已是全球战略工具。他提议类似 FAA 的约束性规则：强制第三方测试前沿模型，政府有权阻止或撤销不安全发布。经济上 AI 可带来极快增长，但也存在持久失业可能，需考虑 UBI 和资本利得税。他警告 AI 或成专制工具，且不能完全信任政府或公司（包括 Anthropic）。他认为公众恐惧合理，非公关问题。强调民意、证据和政治意愿正汇聚，但已迟约一年。

Anthropic@AnthropicAI · 6月11日81

AI is advancing at a pace our policymaking institutions were never built for—and the gap between the two is becoming the central challenge of the technology. In his latest essay, our CEO Dario Amodei lays out how to close it. We're launching three new initiatives to support the efforts he outlines.

译Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei 今日发布新文《Policy on the AI Exponential》，指出AI发展极快，远超现有政策制定流程的应对能力。文章阐述了当前技术所处阶段，并列举缩小这一差距所需的行动。Anthropic 同步宣布启动三项新举措，以支持其CEO提出的框架。

Dario Amodei@DarioAmodei · 6月11日72

Today I'm publishing a new essay, Policy on the AI Exponential. AI is progressing extremely fast—much faster than the policy process was built to handle. The essay lays out where I think the technology is now, and the action needed to close the gap: https://darioamodei.com/post/policy-on-the-ai-exponential

译今天我发布了一篇新文章《AI 指数级增长的政策》。AI 以极快的速度发展——远超政策流程本应处理的速度。文章阐述了我认为技术目前的状况，以及缩小差距所需的行动：https://darioamodei.com/post/policy-on-the-ai-exponential

Chubby♨️@kimmonismus · 6月11日65

holy: Dario Amodei says the real reason he started Anthropic was not safety, but a fundamental breakdown of trust with Sam Altman. Imagine having a trust dispute with someone, and somehow a $1.2T rival company comes out of it.

译天哪：Dario Amodei 说他创办 Anthropic 的真正原因并非安全，而是与 Sam Altman 的信任彻底破裂。 想象一下，和某人有信任纠纷，结果却催生出一家 1.2 万亿美元的竞争对手公司。

elvis@omarsar0 · 6月11日43

💯 Accelerating scientific research and access to the best tools are what got us here. Not sure why some think that they can change our minds about that. They have no evidence of it and expect us to believe in that through pure brute force. Open science and AI must win!

译李飞飞（@drfeifei）强调科学研究是文明进步的核心，科学家必须获得包括AI在内的最佳工具。Elvis Saravia（DAIR.AI）呼应指出，加速科学研究与开放获取最佳工具正是行业进步的原因，并明确反对那些试图用蛮力改变这一信念的做法，坚持开放科学和AI必须获胜。

Ethan Mollick@emollick · 6月11日49

"Switch to a cheaper model to save money" is a problem because cheaper models are worse (maybe they are good enough for a particular purpose, but still worse). More often a better approach is hierarchies of models, with smart models are orchestrators and auditors of cheap ones.

译“换更便宜的模型来省钱”是个问题，因为更便宜的模型更差（也许对某个特定用途来说足够好，但依然较差）。 更常见的方法是模型层级结构，由智能模型作为廉价模型的协调者和审核者。

Yuchen Jin@Yuchenj_UW · 6月11日47

While amazed by the Mythos/Fable benchmarks, I’m grateful Anthropic isn’t the only frontier AI company in the world. One company being able to build AI God is far riskier than multiple companies having that capability. Above all, I hope open-source AI keeps thriving.

译虽对Mythos/Fable基准测试感到惊叹，但我很感激Anthropic并非世界上唯一的前沿AI公司。 单一公司能构建AI之神，其风险远大于多家公司拥有这种能力。 最重要的是，我希望开源AI能持续繁荣。

elvis@omarsar0 · 6月11日59

Every CEO and every engineer should be strategizing carefully to avoid AI model lock-in. More here: https://x.com/omarsar0/status/2063750411576844684?s=20

译Elvis Saravia指出每位CEO和工程师都应谨慎制定策略，避免AI模型锁定。引用推文以Anthropic为例，其做法是构建强大产品后单方面根据自身标准决定用户能否使用某些提示，此举虽合法但给企业带来业务连续性风险，尤其当各编码模型性能趋同时。建议转向开源且更便宜的替代方案以保持控制，并强调“控制层（control plane）”是自然解决方案。

Ethan Mollick@emollick · 6月11日45

More true than ever.

译如果你在考虑接受一份工作，你可能想问你的token预算会是多少。这比以往更真实了。

宝玉@dotey · 6月11日62

Claude Design 有一个完整的 Agent 运行环境，如果把它跟 Claude Code 比较的话，只是它基于浏览器和虚拟机来构建的。它有45个工具，有24个内置skills。运行方式也是基于 Agentic Loop。 所以它就是一个完整的 Agent Harness。

译Claude Design 具备完整 Agent 运行环境，基于浏览器和虚拟机，内置 45 个工具和 24 个 skills，采用 Agentic Loop。有团队质疑其仅为单个 Agent，宝玉回应：它就是一个完整的 Agent Harness。

AYi@AYi_AInotes · 6月11日43

Damn，AGI到来之后，品味和审美一定是一个人最核心的竞争力和最强的护城河， Claude Fable 5遇到审美和品味高的，输出质量高到爆炸，这效果真的绝了😭

译天哪，AGI到来之后，品味和审美一定是一个人最核心的竞争力和最强的护城河， Claude Fable 5遇到审美和品味高的，输出质量高到爆炸，这效果真的绝了😭

François Chollet@fchollet · 6月11日72

Some considerations that many folks seem not to get: 1. It can be a bubble even if the tech works. (For instance, if the tech doesn't have a high-demand use case.) 2. It can be a bubble even if the tech works and has strong product-market fit. (For instance, if the tech cannot be economically viable.) 3. It can be a bubble even if the tech works, has strong product-market fit, and has a path to eventual economic viability. (For instance, if profitability takes too long to achieve or makes margin/competition assumptions that fail to materialize.) 4. It can be a bubble even if the tech works, has strong product-market fit, and is currently highly profitable. (For instance, if demand has a hard ceiling and growth stops once the ceiling is reached.) 5. It can be a bubble even if the tech works, has strong product-market fit, is currently highly profitable, and has unlimited future demand. Literally all it takes for something to be a bubble is for lots of people to over-enthusiastically bet their money on it, and subsequently get panicky. Importantly, bubbles can be attached both to things that are completely hogwash, like the Metaverse, and to world-changing developments like the Internet or railways. Bubbles don't care. They're brought into existence by the thoughts and feelings of investors, not by actual tech or products. "The bubble has burst" doesn't mean "the tech didn't work" or "people stopped using the tech." It only means that people got panicky, investor money dried up, and valuations collapsed. Internet adoption didn't stop in 2000.

译Francois Chollet 指出，许多人误以为只要技术有效、有市场、能盈利甚至需求无限，就不可能是泡沫。实际上，泡沫的定义是投资者过度乐观地押注后恐慌，与技术的实际价值无关。无论技术是像元宇宙那样的噱头，还是像互联网或铁路这样的变革性发明，都可能产生泡沫。泡沫破裂并不意味着技术失败或用户停止使用，只是投资资金枯竭、估值崩溃——就像2000年互联网泡沫并未阻止互联网普及。

elvis@omarsar0 · 6月11日42

So the message I am getting is that I can't use Fable to further accelerate AI research and education. No company will decide that for me. Just an absolutely sad day for the research community. As a developer, I already felt ignored, and now this. Damn it!

译所以我得到的信息是，我无法使用Fable来进一步加速AI研究和教育。 没有任何公司能替我做这个决定。 对于研究社区来说，这绝对是个令人悲伤的日子。 作为一个开发者，我已经感到被忽视，现在又这样。 该死！

向阳乔木@vista8 · 6月11日32

对比 Fable 5，忽然觉得把大模型变便宜这件事儿真的很重要。 真的要夸下DeepSeek，实在是便宜。 每月用 v4 flash 翻译不少东西，一看账单才花几十块。 把自己的 AI 雷达 Skill 变成网站，支持双语对照翻译和 AI 侧边栏对话。 下周开源，本周先上网站，输入DeepSeek API能用 AI 功能，也能人工点评

译作者对比 Fable 5 后强调，把大模型变便宜至关重要。他称赞 DeepSeek 极低的成本——每月使用 v4 flash 翻译大量内容，账单仅几十元。作者将自己的 AI 雷达 Skill 做成网站，支持双语对照翻译和 AI 侧边栏对话。网站本周先上线（输入 DeepSeek API 即可使用 AI 功能，也可人工点评），下周将开源。

Fei-Fei Li@drfeifei · 6月11日20

Scientific research is fundamental to advancing civilization and helping people globally to solve the most critical problems, from medicine to materials, from brain science to physics, and much beyond. This is only possible when scientists have access to the best tools of the time to conduct scientific research, including having access to AI-based tools.

译科学研究是推动文明进步、帮助全球人民解决最关键问题的基础——从医学到材料，从脑科学到物理学，乃至更广泛的领域。这只有在对科学家拥有时代最佳工具（包括基于AI的工具）来进行科学研究时才有可能实现。

Chubby♨️@kimmonismus · 6月10日58

This is one of the most important parts of the Mythos 5 announcement: Drug design. Anthropic says its internal protein design experts used Mythos 5 to accelerate parts of the drug design process by around 10x. In one example, Mythos 5 used protein design and bioinformatics tools without (!) human assistance and matched or beat skilled human operators. It means the model could run parts of the early drug discovery loop itself: choosing binding sites, selecting tools, running protein design workflows, recovering from failures, and generating promising candidates. And here is what people still dont understand outside of our community: AI is moving from "assistant that explains science" to "agent that can actually execute parts of scientific work." The future of drug discovery may look less like one scientist manually testing ideas one by one, and more like thousands of AI-driven research loops running in parallel, with humans validating, interpreting, and deciding what actually moves forward. I keep thinking about what Demis Hassabis said: we are entering the golden age of science. There is probably no doubt about that anymore. Medicines are being developed faster and more precisely, and previously incurable diseases are becoming treatable.

译Anthropic内部蛋白质设计专家使用Mythos 5将药物设计部分流程加速约10倍。在一例中，Mythos 5无需人类协助即可自主使用蛋白质设计和生物信息学工具，匹配或超越熟练人类操作，能独立完成早期药物发现中的结合位点选择、工具调用、工作流运行、故障恢复和候选生成。在Gemini 3.5 Pro和GPT-5.6临近发布的背景下，Anthropic凭借Mythos/Fable进入新层级，给竞争对手带来压力，其IPO前景也因此提升。

向阳乔木@vista8 · 6月10日47

文章提到DeepSeek目前满足于落后美国公司约 6 个月...... 这有点扯吧。 中国每家大模型公司都受限于显卡和技术，不是不想追啊，谁想落后，谁安于落后。

译@NikoMcCarty 探访DeepSeek总部称，这家300人、2023年由梁文锋创立的公司脱胎于幻方，位于杭州无标识大楼，2025年1月发布R1模型，团队年轻，目前满足于落后美国约6个月，保持低调。Vista反驳：中国大模型公司并非安于落后，而是受限于显卡和技术条件。

Berryxia.AI@berryxia · 6月10日10

按照这个架势，Codex 不得立马要Reset一下啊！ GPT-5.6摩拳擦掌该抛出来了啊，奥特曼~👊🏻

Ethan Mollick@emollick · 6月10日53

The core problem with open weights is that the business model of frontier open weights AI does not look like open source, as there are very few cases where you can make money from closed ancillary services, and they are very expensive to make relative to any potential revenue.

译开放权重的核心问题在于，前沿开放权重AI的商业模式看起来并不像开源，因为能从封闭的辅助服务中赚钱的案例极少，而且相对于任何潜在收入，其制造成本非常高昂。

Nathan Lambert@natolambert · 6月10日50

I got a good nights sleep and I’m still just as angry about Anthropic’s choices. I enjoy working in AI so much and to have my access to the cutting edge models for my work rugpulled in an under the table fashion is appalling. I expected to be restricted eventually, but not now, and to be told it directly.

译我睡了个好觉，但对Anthropic的选择依然愤怒。 我非常享受从事AI工作，而我的工作所需的前沿模型访问权限竟被这样暗中撤走，实在令人震惊。 我预料到最终会被限制，但不是现在，而且是直接被通知。

Emad@EMostaque · 6月10日50

You should really all try Opus Fable low mode versus high or ultracost It's a good enough model to semi one-shot most things and this uses far fewer tokens You can even tell it to figure out the most efficient way

译你们真的都应该试试 Opus Fable 的低模式，对比高模式或 ultracost。 它是一个足够好的模型，可以半一次性完成大多数事情，而且这使用的 token 要少得多。 你甚至可以告诉它找出最高效的方式。

Orange AI@oran_ge · 6月10日32

和 Claude Fable 5 对话，确实有一种对方智商很高的感觉 思维很全面，甚至有点过于全面 缓存命中之后，一轮10美分，好像也值这个价

Orange AI@oran_ge · 6月10日47

Fable 5 这个模型的 API 价格是真的不低 在 Agent 里问一个最简单的 Query 0.5 美金，一瓶可乐，就瞬间蒸发了... 反正省着用吧

fofr@fofrAI · 6月10日33

Fable 5 is interesting to talk to.

译Fable 5 交谈起来很有趣。

Deedy@deedydas · 6月10日66

Claude Fable’s ability to create rich docs, slides, sheets, websites in specific styles pixel perfectly is the biggest step change in AI model quality since o3. Here’s another compilation of 8 amazing things it can do, many of which took >2hrs of thinking! – Perfectly designed McKinsey style report – Near identical SpaceX S-1 IPO draft – Pixel-perfect recreation of Pokemon, the game – 3D design of a controllable humanoid robot – Apple Liquid Glass UI with just CSS – 3D world rendering of Yosemite (!!) – Upgraded website design – Rich, beautiful email marketing templates

译Claude Fable 在创建文档、幻灯片、表格、网站等方面实现了像素级精准，被认为是自 o3 以来 AI 模型质量的最大飞跃。其能力包括：完美复现 McKinsey 风格报告、近乎一致的 SpaceX S-1 IPO 草案、像素级还原宝可梦游戏、可控人形机器人 3D 设计、仅用 CSS 实现 Apple Liquid Glass UI、优胜美地 3D 世界渲染、网站设计升级以及精美的邮件营销模板。其中许多任务需要超过 2 小时的深度思考。

meng shao@shao__meng · 6月10日53

随着 Claude Mythos 的小范围供应和 Claude Fable 5 正式发布，Anthropic 的路线其实越来越清晰了，看看他们的 $1M 账单的客户数量就知道了，tod 的重心一定在企业端，去创造实际的效率、降低用人成本，算 ROI，走 AI 替代部分人力的方向。 而 C 端用户，更大的作用是在模型发布初期，尝鲜提供更多的人类数据反馈，而已。。。 不信，就等 Anthropic 正式公布招股书之类的公开文件，再做分析。

译随着Claude Mythos小范围供应和Claude Fable 5正式发布，Anthropic的企业端路线愈发明确。从客户$1M账单数量可见，重心放在创造效率、降低用人成本、算ROI、走AI替代人力的方向。C端用户主要在模型发布初期提供人类数据反馈。等待Anthropic正式公开招股书等文件再做进一步分析。

宝玉@dotey · 6月10日60

大量测试 Claude Design 后我的一个结论： UI/UX 设计方面 Claude 4.8 就够好了，Fable 5 没有体现出更好的 UI/UX 设计能力，甚至还不如 Claude 4.8 的设计效果。

译Anthropic同日发布Fable 5与Mythos 5，同底座但Fable 5加安全分类器（检测攻击/生化/蒸馏时降级至Opus 4.8，95%对话不触发），Mythos 5仅限Project Glasswing合作伙伴。API定价输入$10/百万token、输出$50，较Mythos Preview降60%，比Opus 4.8贵一倍。实际能力：Stripe用Fable 5一天完成5000万行Ruby全库迁移；视觉接口通关宝可梦火红版；Mythos 5使蛋白质设计加速约10倍，基因组学模型超Science但体量仅1%。订阅用户即日起至6月22日免费，后续需额外购买credits。政策变化：所有Mythos级流量强制保留30天用于安全监控。博主@dotey大量测试后认为，Claude 4.8在UI/UX设计上已足够好，Fable 5未体现更强能力甚至更差。