I like the "Claudish to English" name better. https://github.com/gvzdv/claudish-to-english
Word, that one also includes an example which is great, shows really clearly what the issue is for those who might be less familiar
Vomit: Clean up Claude 5's token output with a separate LLM
11–20 of 315 posts
Re: Vomit: Clean up Claude 5's token output with a separate LLM
#12Very interesting you identified “carries” as well. I have been working on a claude.md to effectively ban this as well as forms of “hold”, “spells”, “sitting”, using “where” instead of “when” (except in SQL), and “pins” other than when pinning an assumption or version of something. This has helped a bit, but Opus 5’s prose is really quite bad.
Re: Vomit: Clean up Claude 5's token output with a separate LLM
#13Which Claude 5? Opus 5 does seem to have diarrhea of the mouth. But Fable 5 hasn't been so bad for me. Or perhaps it is just better at adhering to my guidelines.
Re: Vomit: Clean up Claude 5's token output with a separate LLM
#14For the local folks, I found Muse Glimmer 30B to be great at writing good technical stuff. It has good enough comprehension that it can take in a repo and find the relevant stuff that I ask for, and the output style is a breath of fresh air, with no fluff, ootb.
Re: Vomit: Clean up Claude 5's token output with a separate LLM
#15Just. Use. Sol.
$20 and try it, then compare.
Re: Vomit: Clean up Claude 5's token output with a separate LLM
#16I "downgraded" to Opus 4.6 which is the last one that didn't have these problems.
Re: Vomit: Clean up Claude 5's token output with a separate LLM
#17For the local folks, I found Muse Glimmer 30B to be great at writing good technical stuff. It has good enough comprehension that it can take in a repo and find the relevant stuff that I ask for, and the output style is a breath of fresh air, with no fluff, ootb.
Maybe Glimmer might be good at excising the comment spam, particularly?
Re: Vomit: Clean up Claude 5's token output with a separate LLM
#18Meta to this is anyone remember those days - ages ago now, probably months at least! - when Anthropic’s moral stance against the administration (combined with general consensus they had by far the best model) was making them the underdog champion that got a swell of support on HN? Recently the temp on HN seems to be that they’ve jumped the shark? Their brand doesn’t ooze ethics any more and their models disappoint?
Re: Vomit: Clean up Claude 5's token output with a separate LLM
#19I like the "Claudish to English" name better. https://github.com/gvzdv/claudish-to-english
That one is more specific, but "vomit" captures the feeling of Opus 5's writing very well for me. I don't know if it's the watermarking, but every single language idiosyncrasy that Opus 4.x (x > 5) had has been pushed up to 11 on Opus 5. Plus we got nouns verbing and seams seaming.
It's really unusable for anything other than code. And I have to remove its incomprehensible comments 50% of the time before committing anyway. After interacting with it, "slop vomit" is truly the most fitting description. I have to admit I have lost my temper and spontaneously referred to its output as vomit more than once. Seems like I'm not the only one.
Re: Vomit: Clean up Claude 5's token output with a separate LLM
#20At some point one has to wonder if it's still worth using anthropic's models if we need to babysit 100% of its output with another vendor's model. Why not just use that other vendor's model for everything?
I can't help but feel the circumstances that enable this kind of front page article are vestigial from the days when OAI was super bad and Anthropic was beyond reproach. This change-over-time is why I avoid getting tribal with technology vendors. Assigning ideological motives to 200k+ employee organizations is how we wind up in weird contortions like this.
Most rational actors simply moved from one to the other. It takes a special kind of devotion to the proverbial hole in the ground to keep pushing in this direction.