Comment by arkadiytehgraet

1 day ago

This account is an LLM-hype peddler, shilling for Anthropic (check comment history). If they say that Claude is not nerfed, then most likely it is, in fact, nerfed.

15 comments

arkadiytehgraet

solenoid0937 1 day ago

I wouldn't call correcting misinformation and FUD "peddling hype" or "shilling" but I suppose we are in a post-truth world, where if you push back against the anti-AI emotions and vibes with grounded facts, you must be a shill.

Anyways, please take your discourse of calling people you disagree with "shills" back to Reddit. I'd much rather engage with someone debating the merits of an argument.

arkadiytehgraet 1 day ago
If you are an LLM-hype peddler, you really should not be offended at being called out. Also, this is the merit you are ostensibly looking for — since you are a shill, everyone should know this first before taking your words seriously.
You should also check your LLM prompt for HN comments, because the original comment you replied to was not anti-AI, and, in fact, very much pro-AI. The only criticism it had was about model being degraded, so they could not go as hard at AI-assisted development anymore as they used to before. I guess it's a bit difficult for LLMs to spot the difference and make proper conclusion for now.
Also even if taking you seriously — how does writing "no, model performance is not degraded because I say so" serve as correcting misinformation? It only does if you are shilling for Anthropic (which you do), otherwise it's just hot air.
- solenoid0937 1 day ago
  
  Not offended at all, but just ranting about how someone is a shill instead of responding to the substance of their argument is simply not the kind of discussion we have on HN. Read the guidelines.
  > "no, model performance is not degraded because I say so" serve as correcting misinformation?
  Because zero evidence has been provided other than feelings. That is not evidence of degradation, and we know they don't serve quants.
  
  12 replies →