← Back to context

Comment by conception

5 hours ago

I recently realized this as well and I think what I’ve discovered is that AI just produces mediocre content in all realms, but you don’t really notice it except in the realms where you have real expertise. With a lot of harness and prompting you can have it pump out something that’s pretty good but by default the next best token rarely produces anything of quality it seems like and if you think it does, perhaps you may want to recheck your assumptions on your expertise of the topic at hand

I do think this explains much of it. But it doesn’t explain why Claude often writes in the clipped tone of that gnomic in-house tech evangelist who was inexplicably hired because he impressed the CEO.

(I may be projecting real life experience onto the LLM.)

I am genuinely fascinated as to how Claude acquired its utterly aggravating way of writing. It’s so much more irritating than ChatGPT, which is already not good.

  • Yeah the latest batch is really keyed on certain phrases - well beyond “you’re absolutely right!” Of the past. And the readability is trash almost always by default. Probably because they are forcing code so hard that it’s aligning prose into functional groups or something.

    • Interesting. So you think it’s somewhat emergent, in that sense, rather than a sort of designed tone of voice/writing style specified by supervised fine tuning (or the system prompt)?

It tends to the mean. You can get it to do that less, but it's an inherent bias