I figured I would test Fable out to build a game. Three prompts later it had produced a fully working game, and it's genuinely blown my mind - this is what frontier models can do now. When Fable first got released, I had some spare usage left at the end of a weekly limit. I opened a Claude chat, started talking it through, drafted out an initial game idea, and two messages later had a v1 prompt ready to put into Fable. I had it design the whole thing - the type of game, the name, everything - because I wanted to test this properly. It came up with a pizza tycoon game: upgrades, building out stores, serving customers, the works. You've probably seen plenty like it before. That v1 prompt alone produced a fully working game with all the foundations in place. I drafted what to improve next and put in a v2 prompt - and that's when the game really came to life. Graphics, everything, all landed well. I could not wait for the next week's usage to reset so I could push it to v3. Then we all know what happened - Fable got restricted. But then Fable came back! Just yesterday I used the rest of a weekly limit to launch a v3 prompt. I went as ambitious as possible, packed in as many features as I could, and pushed it to its limits, because I effectively had free usage.(Claude reset my weekly limit on day five, without changing the overall weekly reset day. I had 0% usage with two days still to go, so I had more available than ever and simply hadn't been doing anything high-tariff with it. Not sure if anyone else's Claude has been this generous lately, but I'm not complaining.) I launched the v3 prompt on Fable 5 Ultra Code. It took 2 hours and 40 minutes to build. This morning I got Fable to put the whole thing on GitHub, add screenshots, and make it all look professional - and even that held up. So go check out the GitHub page, and play the game yourself. Hopefully all the links work now that I've said that :] https://github.com/Masked-Brown/slice-of-life

Jeetu Patel, Cisco's president and chief product officer, posted this after their keynote week: https://www.linkedin.com/posts/jeetupatel_we-are-at-the-beginning-of-one-of-the-most-activity-7469585414857687040-4mtk/ Most of it is silicon and platform news. One line is worth pulling out if you build ICM systems: "every agent action will be a routing challenge, a trust decision and a telemetry event." A $200B infrastructure company just said what's slowing agents down is a trust problem, not a capability one. Agents don't get adopted until something can vouch for what they produce. The whole field, top to bottom, is arriving at the problem the people in this community have been working on since day one. What I want to flag is the crack in his own triad. Two of the three are infrastructure. Routing and telemetry get solved from outside the agent, and Cisco will happily sell you both. The trust decision is different. Their word for it is observability, meaning behavior monitoring, watch what the agent did. But watching what an agent did tells you nothing about whether its output should have shipped. You can log every step and still send a confident wrong answer out the door. That gap is the opening for every ICM builder here. Observability makes a system readable. It doesn't verify anything. The part that holds the line is a gate at the point of action with the authority to refuse, and that gate depends on knowing what "correct" means for your specific work. Which is exactly what a platform can't template. Cisco can build the dashboard. It can't decide, for your build, whether this particular output is honest. That decision stays judgment, and judgment doesn't commoditize when the infrastructure gets cheap. So here's the possibility for this community: the biggest players are going to make agents observable. Very few are going to make them refuse. If your ICM system already has a real gate, a step that can say no and mean it, you're building the layer they just named as the frontier, at the one altitude a platform struggles to reach.