Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Claude Memory

anthropic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 326 posts

Re: Claude Memory

#21

Post by skybrian »

amelius wrote: post #5

I'm not sure I would want this. Maybe it could work if the chatbot gives me a list of options before each chat, e.g. when I try to debug some ethernet issues: Please check below: [ ] you are using Ubuntu 18 [ ] your router is at 192.168.1.1 [ ] you prefer to use nmcli to configure your network [ ] your main ethernet interface is eth1 etc. Alternatively, it would be nice if I could say: Please remember that I prefer t…

Does Claude have a preference for customizing the system prompt? I did something like this a long time ago for ChatGPT.

(“If not otherwise specified, assume TypeScript.”)

Re: Claude Memory

#22

Post by giancarlostoro »

amelius wrote: post #5

I'm not sure I would want this. Maybe it could work if the chatbot gives me a list of options before each chat, e.g. when I try to debug some ethernet issues: Please check below: [ ] you are using Ubuntu 18 [ ] your router is at 192.168.1.1 [ ] you prefer to use nmcli to configure your network [ ] your main ethernet interface is eth1 etc. Alternatively, it would be nice if I could say: Please remember that I prefer t…

Perplexity and Grok have had something like this for a while where you can make a workspace and write a pre-prompt that is tacked on before your questions so it knows that I use Arch instead of Ubuntu. The nice thing is you can do this for various different workspaces (called different things across different AI providers) and it can refine your needs per workspace.

Re: Claude Memory

#23

Post by cainxinth »

I don't use any of these type of LLM tools which basically amount to just a prompt you leave in place. They make it harder to refine my prompts and keep track of what is causing what in the outputs. I write very precise prompts every time.

Also, I try not work out a problem over the course of several prompts back and forth. The first response is always the best and I try to one shot it every time. If I don't get what I want, I adjust the prompt and try again.

Re: Claude Memory

#25

Post by dcre »

"Before this rollout, we ran extensive safety testing across sensitive wellbeing-related topics and edge cases—including whether memory could reinforce harmful patterns in conversations, lead to over-accommodation, and enable attempts to bypass our safeguards. Through this testing, we identified areas where Claude's responses needed refinement and made targeted adjustments to how memory functions. These iterations helped us build and improve the memory feature in a way that allows Claude to provide helpful and safe responses to users."

Nice to see this at least mentioned, since memory seemed like a key ingredient in all the ChatGPT psychosis stories. It allows the model to get locked into bad patterns and present the user a consistent set of ideas over time that give the illusion of interacting with a living entity.

Re: Claude Memory

#26

Post by danielfalbo »

> eliminating the need to re-explain context

I am happy to re-explain only the subset of relevant context when needed and not have it in the prompt when not needed.

Re: Claude Memory

#27

Post by corry »

cainxinth wrote: post #23

I don't use any of these type of LLM tools which basically amount to just a prompt you leave in place. They make it harder to refine my prompts and keep track of what is causing what in the outputs. I write very precise prompts every time. Also, I try not work out a problem over the course of several prompts back and forth. The first response is always the best and I try to one shot it every time. If I don't get what…

Strong agree. For every time that I'd get a better answer if the LLM had a bit more context on me (that I didn't think to provide, but it 'knew') there seems to be a multiple of that where the 'memory' was either actually confounding or possibly confounding the best response.

I'm sure OpenAI and Antropic look at the data, and I'm sure it says that for new / unsophisticated users who don't know how to prompt, that this is a handy crutch (even if it's bad here and there) to make sure they get SOMETHING useable.

But for the HN crowd in particular, I think most of us have a feeling like making the blackbox even more black -- i.e. even more inscrutable in terms of how it operates and what inputs it's using -- isn't something to celebrate or want.

Re: Claude Memory

#28

Post by jMyles »

I wonder what will win out: first party solutions that fiddle with context under-the-hood, or open solutions that are built on top and provide context management in some programmatic and model-agnostic way. I'm thinking the latter, both because it seems easier for LLMs to work on it, and because there are many more humans working on it (albeit presumably not full time like the folks at anthropic, etc).

Seems like everyone is working to bolt-on various types of memory and persistence to LLMs using some combination of MCP, log-parsing, and a database, myself included - I want my LLM to remember various tours my band has done and musicians we've worked with, ultimately to build a connectome of bluegrass like the Oracle of Bacon (we even call it "The Oracle of Bluegrass Bacon").

https://github.com/magent-cryptograss/magenta

Re: Claude Memory

#30

Post by mmaunder »

cainxinth wrote: post #23

I don't use any of these type of LLM tools which basically amount to just a prompt you leave in place. They make it harder to refine my prompts and keep track of what is causing what in the outputs. I write very precise prompts every time. Also, I try not work out a problem over the course of several prompts back and forth. The first response is always the best and I try to one shot it every time. If I don't get what…

Yeah same. And I'd rather save the context space. Having custom md docs per lift per project is what I do. Really dials it in.
Post reply on HN