Comment by ge96

I think it likely performed well in A/B preference tests with chat users.

I've noticed Claude does far fewer listicles than ChatGPT. I suspect that they don't blindly follow supervised learning feedback from chats as much as ChatGPT. I get Apple vs Google design approach from those two companies, in that Apple tends not to obsess over interaction data, instead using design principles, while Google just tests everything and has very little "taste."

In general I feel like the data approach really blinds people to the obvious problem that "a little" of something can be preferable while "a lot" of the same is not. I don't mind some bullet points here and there but when literally everything is in bullet points or pull quotes it's very annoying. I prefer Claude's paragraph style.

I suppose the downside is that using "taste" like Apple does can potentially lead a product design far, far away from what people want (macOS 26), more so than a data approach, whereas a data approach will not get it so drastically wrong but will never feel great.

I first noticed it when Notion became popular.

All of the PMs I interacted with across companies started using Notion for everything at the same time. Filling Notion documents with emojis was the style of the time.

This slightly pre-dated AI tools becoming entirely usable for me.

It's the style of "blazing fast library made with :heart: in rust :crab:" that was popular in github README.md. My guess is that because the models are told to use md they overfit to the style of md documents too.

First saw it in overly peppy Rails libraries and using gitmoji more than 10 years ago.

Both predate common use of LLMs, unless my memory is even more shaky than usual on this. I'm sure I saw them appear a fair amount on GitHub and related project pages, but I couldn't tell you more specifically how they started & grew.

Somehow they must have been over-represented in the training data (or something in the tokenising/training/other processes magnifies the effective presence of punctuation) because I don't remember them being that common and LLMs seem to love spewing them out. Or perhaps it is a sign of the Habsburg problem: people asked LLMs to produce README files like that because they'd seen the style elsewhere, it having spread more organically at first, and the timing was just right for lots of those early examples to get fed back into training data for subsequent models.

It was an annoying way of writing on places like LinkedIn and marketing copy for 3 or 4 years before LLMs appeared on the scene. I remember realising that I can't read them (my brain jumps between the words and the picture making it hard to focus on the content) before AI appeared.

> then would they even notice if the code works or not?

it's literally their job to ship functional product features...

I like them. It tells very clearly how much effort went into someone's work.

I like them even more on code comments. It tells _precisely_ how much effort went into the pull request, so I don't spend time reviewing lazy work.

Checkmarks as bullets on progress/comparison lists I really like, assuming you mean //. The emoji properly put me off looking deeper into whatever it is that I am looking at unless I was really interested to start with.

Both predate common use of LLMs, unless my memory is even more shaky than usual on this, but must have been over-represented in the training data (or something in the tokenising/training/other processes magnifies the effective presence of punctuation) because LLMs seem to love spewing them out.

seriously! it feels so over the top.