It's not this week's change. Fable was the step change for programming. And most of truly useful and powerful capabilities arrived in the last eight months.

▲

Lapel2742 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> Fable was the step change for programming.

AFAIK: Mistral does not even try to compete in this field. There are other use cases for LLMs beside coding. As Mistral AI wrote:

> During the first wave of generative AI, the central question was who could build the most powerful model. Organizations and governments are now asking a different one: how to harness the power of AI for their mission-critical needs without surrendering control over the infrastructure and intelligence loop. Demand for that combination of performance with control, choice and independence is growing internationally, as enterprises and governments weigh the long-term technology dependencies, data governance requirements and deployment choices that come with any AI investment.

> Mistral is the only AI company in the world building the full stack required to answer that question: open-weight models, the infrastructure and the compute capacity they run on, and the products that bring them into production; ensuring that customers are never locked into a single vendor's roadmap, pricing or availability.

> Mistral’s full-stack and open approach also allows organizations to build on it without exposing their most valuable data, workflows and institutional knowledge to anyone outside their own walls. That's what makes Mistral’s stack the sovereign AI layer, meaning retaining control across four dimensions: data that stays inside the organization's boundaries, models that are controllable and customizable, compute that is private and predictable, and systems in production that are fully controllable and auditable.

	▲	nicce 44 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		>> Fable was the step change for programming > AFAIK: Mistral does not even try to compete in this field. They have released models speficially for programming that ”vibe coding” would be safer. https://mistral.ai/news/leanstral/

▲

slopinthebag 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

People said this for Opus 4.6 too. Every release the models get RLHF'ed into accomplishing a new task and the people who need to do this task think there was a step change.

▲

ifwinterco an hour ago | parent [-]

To be fair Opus 4.6 was genuinely a really good model when it came out, in fact I'm not sure Opus 5 is even any better.

It's definitely a lot slower, though

	▲	slopinthebag an hour ago \| parent [-]
		Yeah that's kinda my point. I'm not sure if the models have gotten that much smarter, but they're certainly getting more capable. That's not the same thing though. There are things GPT 6.0 can accomplish for me that 5.3 was not able to. But there are also things it still fails at, and it doesn't seem to be much better at the big picture. It does spam about 100x more tests though and I wonder if just RLHFing it to test everything constantly is carrying it more. 6.0 writes so many tests and spends so much time verifying it's work in python sandboxes. Slow as hell but it tends to get things right the first time more which is good, I guess. I don't love the thought of a 500loc feature adding +4000loc due to tests though.

▲

raverbashing an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

If the choice is between Mistral and no AI, I'll take Mistral any day

Even those old llama models were ok for coding

Yes yes they won't be like Claude's fire and forget (until you see how many tokens you burned to write "Hello World")