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

Why does Opus 5 feel worse to work with?

mun-logadan.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

911–915 of 915 posts

Re: Why does Opus 5 feel worse to work with?

#911

Post by ruszki »

galaxyLogic wrote: post #541
saaaaaam wrote: post #384

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>it feels like reading an impression of a literature book by a high school English class’s most overconfident student who’s only ever read LinkedIn-speak. Claude is very much the “stupid person’s idea of an intelligent person”[0] which, I suspect, is why it is so popular. It certainly explains why half the internet is huge chunks of Claude-authored gibberish copied and pasted and published. If people didn’t think it…

Reminds me of current day politics. Lots of public statements which are obviously false, and you would think the politician knows they are false, but utter them anyway because they also know lot of their supporters buy what they are saying anyway. Now politicians also know something about their supporters so they will adapt their statements to what they think they can get away with it. But, I wonder if this leads to…

The alt-right party in Hungary - Fidesz - at least since 2006, and the Republican Party since at least Trump, definitely targeted people who are fine with a broken belief systems, in other words, they are fine with continuous cognitive dissonance.

In case of Hungary, in the past 20 years, they moved contradictions inside an article, to inside a paragraph to inside a single word. Trump is on the single word/expression level since 2016 for sure: “alternative facts”.

Re: Why does Opus 5 feel worse to work with?

#912

Post by lelanthran »

bonoboTP wrote: post #736
paimapi wrote: post #452

Earlier quoted context omitted.

there's a wide array of assessments when it comes to reading comprehension. the one you refer to, the GRA, sets the 'sixth grade level' as whether or not a reader understands the author's main points, is able to answer conceptual questions related to the text, and then apply those to relevant situations. beyond this level is the ability to essentially be skeptical of a text and to know how to critically analyze it. s…

> it makes me think about how people engage with movies and television - as passive, plot-and-character driven consumption (eg I hope Walter White survives) with no critical analysis of how and why the writers added ABC thematic element (eg Walter White as a motif of a toxically masculine narcissist with specialized knowledge as a larger critique how mass media tends to valorize their male leads in the same vein as m…

> (eg Walter White as a motif of a toxically masculine narcissist with specialized knowledge as a larger critique how mass media tends to valorize their male leads

Very confused about this: how would you write the character differently?

The whole point of leads, whether male or female, is to be larger than life. All their characteristics, including growth or change, are exaggerations of reality.

This specific character is supposed to be more villainous than reality, and if you take that away then you're simply going to have a show no one will watch.

Re: Why does Opus 5 feel worse to work with?

#913

Post by roncesvalles »

IgorPartola wrote: post #540
Panoramix wrote: post #500

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're right, and the load-bearing part of the argument is not what you think it is. Two ambiguities worth resolving before moving on: whether what you wrote also applies to ChatGPT, and whether you have custom instructions set up. Failure mode worth flagging explicitly: I didn't read TFA. (I'm becoming allergic to how these things write).

I am curious why LLM writing has such an uncanny valley feel to it. Like if I was talking to a person who constantly used a phrase they liked I would notice it and it is possible I might get irritated by it, but I wouldn’t necessarily. In high school I had a teacher that would say “that type of thing” a lot. One time my friend and I counted it during one class period and he averaged to use the phrase every 48 seconds…

My completely conjectural theory is that natural language is just a shitty medium for communicating knowledge and the idioms and motifs that the LLM uses are an emergent "code" or structured syntax that work better for communicating ideas.

If you think about it, "load-bearing" is a pretty commonly used concept in pedagogical writing. You could say "most important", but it's not quite the same in meaning. English just doesn't have a better word to describe a concept that occurs this frequently. The LLM's catchphrases reveal blindspots in the English language itself.

Re: Why does Opus 5 feel worse to work with?

#914

Post by focxle »

docheinestages wrote: post #326
dingaling911 wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are you guys doing to burn through limits? I have some dev + prod bots and according to ccusage, use the equivalent of $2500/month with them on CC yet I never hit the rate limits. I feel like I'm using them all the time so I'm curious what you are actually doing that's burning all of these tokens. Can you give me an example? For me, it's: 1. Write a spec for 2. Add design for issue 3. Write code 4. Deploy code a…

My uses cases are mainly research and prototyping, often starting from scratch in greenfield projects. The 5-hour quota is shared between Claude web and Claude Code, so it doesn't really matter what interface I use. When it comes to research, my prompts are already narrowed down to specific topics, and I even include examples and break the process down into stages. For development tasks, I try to avoid a mono-repo in…

[flagged]

Re: Why does Opus 5 feel worse to work with?

#915

Post by TechExpert2910 »

Panoramix wrote: post #500
mlsu wrote: post #428

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everything that claude writes fits into the same aesthetic structure. The aesthetic is that of an expert slowly revealing an insight to the user. The actual content doesn't matter. - "Introduction that rephrases your prompt." - "3 paragraphs, with one section of bullet points" - "The Twist" - "The Bottom Line" It's really obvious once you see it. Every single prompt, from a quantum physics question to a mundane obser…

You're right, and the load-bearing part of the argument is not what you think it is. Two ambiguities worth resolving before moving on: whether what you wrote also applies to ChatGPT, and whether you have custom instructions set up. Failure mode worth flagging explicitly: I didn't read TFA. (I'm becoming allergic to how these things write).

i think it's because they've fine-tuned an old opus 4.6 base model more and more with code

to the point where it's really great at coding, but lost its knowledge on how to write well!

if instead opus 5 was a full fresh training run, i don't think it'd be this trash at writing.

really great coding perf, but now the weights are adapted to so much code fine tuning that it writes like a weird engineer that's trying to sound smart.

Post reply on HN