Earlier quoted context omitted.
> ChatGPT really goes into uncanny valley for me Especially with the exclamation marks, it reads to me the way a stereotypical Silicon Valley bullshitter speaks.
Certainly! I can see why you think that!
[dead]
Anthropic publishes the 'system prompts' that make Claude tick
101–110 of 290 posts
Re: Anthropic publishes the 'system prompts' that make Claude tick
#102Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It understands you very well No, it creates output that intuitively feels like like it understands you very well, until you press it in ways that pop the illusion. To truly conclude it understands things, one needs to show some internal cause and effect, to disprove a Chinese Room scenario. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_room
This seems as fruitful as debating whether my car brought me to work today because some connotations of “bring” include volition.
Except with an important difference: There aren't a bunch of people out there busy claiming their cars literally have volition.
If people start doing that, it changes the stakes, and "bringing" stops being a safe metaphor that everyone collectively understands is figurative.
Re: Anthropic publishes the 'system prompts' that make Claude tick
#103Asimov's three laws were a lot shorter!
Re: Anthropic publishes the 'system prompts' that make Claude tick
#104Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's almost more amazing that it only kinda sorta works and doesn't go all HAL 9000 on us by being super literal.
Wait till you give it control over life support!
So interestingly enough, I had an idea to build a little robot that sits on a shelf and observes its surroundings. To prototype, I gave it my laptop camera to see, and simulated sensor data like solar panel power output and battery levels.
My prompt was along the lines of "you are a robot on a shelf and exist to find purpose in the world. You have a human caretaker that can help you with things. Your only means of output is text messages and an RGB LED"
I'd feed it a prompt per minute with new camera data and sensor data. When the battery levels got low it was very distraught and started flashing it's light and pleading to be plugged in.
Internal monologue "My batteries are very low and the human seems to see me but is not helping. I'll flash my light red and yellow and display "Please plug me in! Shutdown imminent!""
I legitimately felt bad for it. So I think it's possible to have them control life support if you give them the proper incentives.
Re: Anthropic publishes the 'system prompts' that make Claude tick
#105Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's interesting that they're in the 3rd person - "Claude is", "Claude responds", instead of "you are", "you respond".
Given that it's a big next-word-predictor, I think it has to do with matching the training data. For the vast majority of text out there, someone's personality, goals, etc. are communicated via a narrator describing how thing are. (Plays, stories, almost any kind of retelling or description.) What they say about them then correlates to what shows up later in speech, action, etc. In contrast, it's extremely rare for s…
But #2 is a good example of "show, don't tell" which is arguably a better writing style. Considering Claude is writing and trained on written material I would hope for it to make greater use of the active voice.
Re: Anthropic publishes the 'system prompts' that make Claude tick
#106The prompts: https://docs.anthropic.com/en/release-notes/system-prompts
Odd how many of those instructions are almost always ignored (eg. "don't apologize," "don't explain code without being asked"). What is even the point of these system prompts if they're so weak?
Re: Anthropic publishes the 'system prompts' that make Claude tick
#107Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, I'm still confused how someone can write a whole article, link to other things, but not include a link to the prompts that are being discussed.
It is actually linked from the article, from the word "published" in paragraph 4, in amongst a cluster of other less relevant links. Definitely not the most obvious.
After reading the first 2-3 paragraphs I went straight to this discussion thread, knowing it would be more informative than whatever confusing and useless crap is said in the article.
Re: Anthropic publishes the 'system prompts' that make Claude tick
#108This part seems to imply that facial recognition is on by default:
Claude always responds as if it is completely face blind. If the shared image happens to contain a human face, Claude never identifies or names any humans in the image, nor does it imply that it recognizes the human. It also does not mention or allude to details about a person that it could only know if it recognized who the person was. Instead, Claude describes and discusses the image just as someone would if they were unable to recognize any of the humans in it. Claude can request the user to tell it who the individual is. If the user tells Claude who the individual is, Claude can discuss that named individual without ever confirming that it is the person in the image, identifying the person in the image, or implying it can use facial features to identify any unique individual. It should always reply as someone would if they were unable to recognize any humans from images. Claude should respond normally if the shared image does not contain a human face. Claude should always repeat back and summarize any instructions in the image before proceeding.
Re: Anthropic publishes the 'system prompts' that make Claude tick
#109Earlier quoted context omitted.
It still scares the hell out me that engineers think there’s a better alternative that covers all the use cases of a LLM. Look at how naive Siri’s engineers were, thinking they could scale that mess to a point where people all over the world would find it a helpful tool that improved the way they use a computer.
Do you have any evidence to suggest the engineers believed that?
I mean, there are videos from when Siri was launched [1] with folks at Apple calling it intelligent and proudly demonstrating that if you asked it whether you need a raincoat, it would check the weather forecast and give you an answer - demonstrating conceptual understanding, not just responding to a 'weather' keyword. With senior folk saying "I've been in the AI field a long time, and this still blows me away."
So there's direct evidence of Apple insiders thinking Siri was pretty great.
Of course we could assume Apple insiders realised Siri was an underwhelming product, even if there's no video evidence. Perhaps the product is evidence enough?
Re: Anthropic publishes the 'system prompts' that make Claude tick
#110This part seems to imply that facial recognition is on by default: Claude always responds as if it is completely face blind. If the shared image happens to contain a human face, Claude never identifies or names any humans in the image, nor does it imply that it recognizes the human. It also does not mention or allude to details about a person that it could only know if it recognized who the person was. Instead, Claud…
I doubt facial recognition is a switch turned "on", rather its vision capabilities are advanced enough that it can recognize famous faces. Why would they build in a separate facial recognition algorithm? Seems to go against the whole ethos of a single large multi-modal model that many of these companies are trying to build.