481–490 of 915 posts
The single biggest annoyance with Opus 5 is that it writes too elliptically. Sentences that orbit a point, then jump to it like it's a revealed insight. Unnecessarily abstract phraseology. Constantly using inanimate nouns as the subjects in sentences in order to unlock variety in verb choice, especially when it helps construct a sentence where the real action can 'land' like a surprise at the end. It is definitely mo…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A lot of people I work with are reporting that reading Claude-made PR descriptions is burning them out of doing PR reviews because it is incredibly tiresome to read. My company recently forbid AI-only text if it’s meant meant to be consumed by humans. I dodged the drama but I agree so much.
Enterprise software CEO here. I'm so pissed off that I didn't think of this rule, but so, so happy to be adopting it org-wide on Monday. Fed up with what used to be short memos now being mini-whitepapers, with maddeningly low information density.
The single biggest annoyance with Opus 5 is that it writes too elliptically. Sentences that orbit a point, then jump to it like it's a revealed insight. Unnecessarily abstract phraseology. Constantly using inanimate nouns as the subjects in sentences in order to unlock variety in verb choice, especially when it helps construct a sentence where the real action can 'land' like a surprise at the end. It is definitely mo…
> The single biggest annoyance with Opus 5 is that it writes too elliptically. This is even more painful for non-native English speakers like myself. I feel fairly comfortable reading academic papers or in general, communicating in professional context. But with Opus 5, it feels like reading a literature book: load-bearing, inert, wholesale, hunk, verbatim, and so on... I can figure out the meaning, but working with…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The single biggest annoyance with Opus 5 is that it writes too elliptically. This is even more painful for non-native English speakers like myself. I feel fairly comfortable reading academic papers or in general, communicating in professional context. But with Opus 5, it feels like reading a literature book: load-bearing, inert, wholesale, hunk, verbatim, and so on... I can figure out the meaning, but working with…
As a native speaker, I have to ask it to rephrase 5-10 times a day. Sometimes I actually get mad and I tell it “I can’t answer that because I don’t know what the fuck load-bearing indirection means”. I’ve gotten so frustrated that I’ve ended a session and started over.
- acronyms and shortcuts - it makes it's own and start using it without introduction
- exotic names of variables or functions - it uses them as examples or analogies, but when I ask what they mean and where are they from it gives me answer that it came from C language or some C library (I only work with typescript and python)
- convoluted descriptions of code behaviour - it's hard to rely on a outcome of prompt of type "explain code in..."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The single biggest annoyance with Opus 5 is that it writes too elliptically. This is even more painful for non-native English speakers like myself. I feel fairly comfortable reading academic papers or in general, communicating in professional context. But with Opus 5, it feels like reading a literature book: load-bearing, inert, wholesale, hunk, verbatim, and so on... I can figure out the meaning, but working with…
A lot of people I work with are reporting that reading Claude-made PR descriptions is burning them out of doing PR reviews because it is incredibly tiresome to read. My company recently forbid AI-only text if it’s meant meant to be consumed by humans. I dodged the drama but I agree so much.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The single biggest annoyance with Opus 5 is that it writes too elliptically. This is even more painful for non-native English speakers like myself. I feel fairly comfortable reading academic papers or in general, communicating in professional context. But with Opus 5, it feels like reading a literature book: load-bearing, inert, wholesale, hunk, verbatim, and so on... I can figure out the meaning, but working with…
I'm switching to GPT because of this. The prose is so much more legible. The only reason I keep using Claude Code is because the harness is the best IMO.
Claude Code has become the largest noobtrap I've ever seen. Move, try something else for a change. Codex, Pi, OpenCode, DeepSeek's harness all great harnesses with zero bullshit or drama.
But for good or even exceptional engineers to exist, by definition, bad ones have to, too.