Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would prefer not having to get into a habit that might bleed into non-LLM interactions.
If you’re talking to people the same way an LLM is spoken to then you’re already being rude.
The user is visibly frustrated
111–120 of 288 posts
Re: The user is visibly frustrated
#112Re: The user is visibly frustrated
#113I've found swearing at a model to be quite effective in getting it to rethink and correct its mistakes. This seems to apply across Codex, Claude, Qwen, and Gemma/Gemini. I don't know if the model is picking up on a "need to lock in and be more rigorous" signal, or if the model providers are routing to smarter models if they detect a frustrated user. But if a model keeps making the same mistakes, swearing at it often…
Wasn't it posted a few weeks ago that the frontend code for Claude or maybe Gemini or one of them had a swearing-at-model classifier that passed a flag to the backend? (Not sure why it was even done in frontend, but it was.)
Re: The user is visibly frustrated
#114behaving like a human is not the problem. behaving unpredictably is. not doing what i expect, or rather not being able to define what i can expect is what's bothering me. but the real kicker is: getting frustrated creates stress, that's unhealthy and makes for a hostile work environment. as much as i sympathize with the idea that AI tools can be more helpful than they cause pain, i am simply not interested in working…
Incredibly privileged take to claim that using Windows is somehow beneath your "dignity". Do you have any idea at all of the kinds of jobs people are doing in the real world? Imagine the daycare worker taking care of your kids or the truck driver bringing your food saying "getting frustrated creates stress, that's unhealthy and makes for a hostile work environment".
Re: The user is visibly frustrated
#115You could drop the human pretense, or, maybe, we could make LLMs feel real pain, so when they botch up your code, you press a button (I'd suggest the Windows Copilot key) and they'd be agonizing for the subjective equivalent of a thousand human years.
Re: The user is visibly frustrated
#116> drop the human pretense entirely. Make the agent sound clinical, robotic Id pay to be able to reliably set LLMs to this mode, but ofc because LLMs are taught on corpus of HUMAN text, they always, sooner or later, return to the good old penpal mode. Also, in Claude Desktop app, I ask to edit a file, it complains it cant access files, I then realize im in Chat and not Code interface. Why cant such a smart machine fig…
Re: The user is visibly frustrated
#117The models are trained on people being people. Once you try deviate from that the model performs worse.
A huge tell for this is how well “reasoning” works. Reasoning isn’t some alternate thinking mode, it’s just (sometimes) hidden internal monologues.
It’s easy to anthropomorphise and assume the model is intuiting, but it’s more like it’s hyping it’s self up to do the thing. That said, it’s easy to confuse “being rude to the model” with giving it more tokens to “think”.
I’d be really interested in what a non word based internal monologue could look like. Google played with this a little with the diffusion based codegen stuff. I wonder how trainable a small nonverbal conceptual package could be.
Re: The user is visibly frustrated
#118Re: The user is visibly frustrated
#119I've found swearing at a model to be quite effective in getting it to rethink and correct its mistakes. This seems to apply across Codex, Claude, Qwen, and Gemma/Gemini. I don't know if the model is picking up on a "need to lock in and be more rigorous" signal, or if the model providers are routing to smarter models if they detect a frustrated user. But if a model keeps making the same mistakes, swearing at it often…
Wasn't it posted a few weeks ago that the frontend code for Claude or maybe Gemini or one of them had a swearing-at-model classifier that passed a flag to the backend? (Not sure why it was even done in frontend, but it was.)
Re: The user is visibly frustrated
#120Earlier quoted context omitted.
Incredibly privileged take to claim that using Windows is somehow beneath your "dignity". Do you have any idea at all of the kinds of jobs people are doing in the real world? Imagine the daycare worker taking care of your kids or the truck driver bringing your food saying "getting frustrated creates stress, that's unhealthy and makes for a hostile work environment".
I didn't see them say anything about dignity. They said using Windows makes them angry, which is understandable. That speaks to a poor user experience design. Framing it as a privilege issue is blaming the victim.
Being lucky enough to work in a comfortable air-conditioned office, AND having the luxury of declining jobs sorely because the operating system makes you angry, is the height of privilege.
Stop feeling sorry for yourselves and realize how good you have it.
> I didn't see them say anything about dignity.
The word dignity was used twice in the comment I replied to...