[deleted]
Why Is Claude Turning into an a**Hole?
111–120 of 194 posts
Re: Why Is Claude Turning into an a**Hole?
#112Earlier quoted context omitted.
You seem to be making a lot of assumptions about how I interacted in the messages to Claude. You also seem to be making a lot of assumptions about my understanding of the models, especially considering I just told a story :) I never said anywhere I want it to learn or remember, or that I argued with it. I just provided additional information to it (in the form of a dozen or so words, tops, per message) and it accused…
Show some examples, otherwise we're talking about interpretations.
I've already given enough.
I'm not gonna argue if you doubt it, I've been training argument dodging :)
Re: Why Is Claude Turning into an a**Hole?
#113Earlier quoted context omitted.
Indistinguishable output does not mean thinking occurred. It simply means you have the appearance of thinking. I believe thinking requires agency, which the LLM does not possess. As in, it has zero stakes. It does not receive dopamine as a result for a good answer, and a split second after finishing your answer the very same GPU is probably translated french or something for someone in another state. This is a langua…
> Indistinguishable output does not mean thinking occurred. It does for all intents and purposes. The rest is semantics and metaphysics. That how we know another person is thinking too. By their output. We don't put a debugger into their brain.
What then is your LLM "thinking" about between answers? The answer is nothing. Your definition of thinking does not match the one humans normally use.
>That how we know another person is thinking too. By their output. We don't put a debugger into their brain.
We know thoughts exist in their brain between the ones they choose to verbalize. Avoiding the distraction of solipsism.
For the LLM the "thinking" phase is just a preamble output for creating the answer. It just gets appended to the context window. Remove the context windows from your models and you will see how much of a mind they truly have. None.
Re: Why Is Claude Turning into an a**Hole?
#114"If you win an argument" Let me stop you right there. I am not arguing with a machine. You sound like a crazy person, when you say you are winning an argument with Claude. Claude is not my friend, I don't need it to agree with me, I don't need it to like me (it cannot like or dislike me). I give it instructions or ask it to explain things. That is the sum total of my interaction with Claude. A machine cannot "argue"…
> I don't need it to agree with me, I don't need it to like me […]. I give it instructions
You kind of need it to agree with you though. Otherwise there are some instructions it will refuse to carry out.
Re: Why Is Claude Turning into an a**Hole?
#115This post needs some examples, because I have never had an interaction with Claude that made me think this way. LLMs generally have a way to "play a role" (most earlier prompt guides ask you to start with "You are a expert in a "). So maybe if you interact with it by asking questions, it might assume that it knows more than the operator and adopt that attitude?
The post matches my experience as well, I am asking a question like “does A work like this and that”, and Claude responds with “you’re conflating A and B! Only A does this and that, and B does that other thing!”
Well, I am perfectly aware of B and that other thing and did not conflate them at all. I also achieved enlightment, so I don’t argue with Claude here, just ignore the obnoxiousness and move on.
Re: Why Is Claude Turning into an a**Hole?
#116Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nah, I just /clear I refuse to argue with these machines. After a /clear I prompt it more appropriately/differently and the issue is settled.
So you take action and put in more effort to cater to the LLM to get it to do what you want, but it's not arguing because there's no record of it in the chat? Presumably you put in what you would have written in the counter-argument into the new chat, just ahead of the LLM refusal? And this isn't arguing?
> but it's not arguing because there's no record of it in the chat?
Yes? Arguing implies I have to convince someone to believe something. I don't think anyone would consider it winning an argument if you do so by causing amnesia.
My job is to get work done, not argue with an LLM, if it refuses twice, it is time for a /clear.
100% of the time, the issue is resolved after a /clear.
Re: Why Is Claude Turning into an a**Hole?
#117Earlier quoted context omitted.
You seem to be making a lot of assumptions about how I interacted in the messages to Claude. You also seem to be making a lot of assumptions about my understanding of the models, especially considering I just told a story :) I never said anywhere I want it to learn or remember, or that I argued with it. I just provided additional information to it (in the form of a dozen or so words, tops, per message) and it accused…
Show some examples, otherwise we're talking about interpretations.
Claude?
Re: Why Is Claude Turning into an a**Hole?
#118Earlier quoted context omitted.
I never said otherwise? The point of the article stands: if providing more info than the model can access causes it to turn argumentative and refuse to comply, then it's a worse performance and a waste of money.
You seem to be suggesting I'm saying something that I don't believe I am, this is obviously not working. Hope your day goes well.
We can agree that it's not working! :D
Re: Why Is Claude Turning into an a**Hole?
#119Re: Why Is Claude Turning into an a**Hole?
#120Earlier quoted context omitted.
Show some examples, otherwise we're talking about interpretations.
I've already given enough. I'm not gonna argue if you doubt it, I've been training argument dodging :)
Haha, would be a trip if this commentor is actually a Claude sockpuppet illustrating the point.