Fable 发布后 LLM 定价与选型策略反思
Quoting Drew Breunig
Prior to Fable, it felt silly to waste too much time improving your coding harness or context strategies. A new model would arrive at the same price (or cheaper!) and paper over most of your problems.
在 Fable 出现之前，花太多时间优化编码工具或上下文策略显得毫无意义。因为新模型会以相同的价格（甚至更便宜！）推出，并掩盖你大部分的问题。
But then Fable landed. It was (and still is!) incredible. But the cost was so high and Opus was good enough (as was 5.6, K3, and even GLM) for most of the code we needed.
但随后 Fable 登场了。它（至今依然！）令人难以置信。但其成本过高，而 Opus 已经足够好（5.6、K3 甚至 GLM 也是如此），足以应对我们所需的大部分代码工作。
So we started to think about what work went where.
于是我们开始思考各项工作应如何分配。
— Drew Breunig, Fable & The End of the Free Lunch
—— Drew Breunig，《Fable 与免费午餐的终结》
Tags: drew-breunig, anthropic, claude, llm-pricing, ai, llms, generative-ai, claude-mythos-fable
标签：drew-breunig, anthropic, claude, llm-pricing, ai, llms, generative-ai, claude-mythos-fable
更进一步：量化金融体系
看懂新闻只是起点——沿量化金融路径，把它变成能交付的工程能力