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

Show HN: The load-bearing vocabulary of Claude

louisabraham.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 340 posts

Re: Show HN: The load-bearing vocabulary of Claude

#331

Post by lucas_t_a »

SalariedSlave wrote: post #121

I've recently seen this mentioned more and more, both on HN and on reddit. It seems these output patterns are getting worse. It's not just Claude, my impression is that all of the current models have this style issue. Their writing can get borderline incomprehensible. Is there some feedback loop or compounding happening with each model generation? Maybe newer models are ingesting too much AI content? If the ratio of…

kinda of a conspiracy theory, but maybe this is why anthropic and other companies are looking into fingerprinting now

Re: Show HN: The load-bearing vocabulary of Claude

#332

Post by viccis »

dare944 wrote: post #191
testdelacc1 wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All of these phrases existed. Claude didn’t come up with them. The question is whether people are using them a lot more now due to Claude’s influence.

I think it would be fine if more people used "add color to". I think it's a great turn of phrase. "Load bearing", not so much. Ick.

"Load-bearing" is fine to me. I've heard it regularly pre-Claude. It has a specific meaning that conveys in one stock phrase.

"Adds color to" says nothing that "Adds detail to" doesn't already say, and the latter is more straightforward English that is quickly readable and understandable by even relatively weak English speakers.

I get wanting to use big words or metaphorical phrasing; I'm guilty of saying "ameliorate" too much. I'm ok if it adds meaning. But when it's just a more colorful word (note that this use of "color" doesn't match the one I originally brought up, which is also a huge problem) and doesn't add any utility or detail, then it's best to avoid it, imo

Re: Show HN: The load-bearing vocabulary of Claude

#333

Post by altmanaltman »

ddj231 wrote: post #280
altmanaltman wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I suspect, as we continue forward, humans will slowly start to adopt the language of LLMs, or at least certain language quirks that come from interacting with LLMs. Something I've noticed in my own writing is that I now present lists of examples in a consistent way: "... such as , , etc., ...". Why would you consider using lists an "LLM" language thing? I really don't understand this concept. Like even this project…

the issue with some of these quirks is that not that they are not part of the English language but rather the llms usage is unnatural. Also when you have that redundancy proliferated to millions of users it gets tiresome fast, and becomes a tell-tale sign for AI generation. It’s like an AI signature on some written content. Because many people do not want to consume AI generated content this becomes a sign of what to…

Yes I understand that but I refuse to believe this idea that it influences how people talk. As you said, the typical AI-style of writing is very easily recognised and is not really great for everyday communications. Also it makes no sense you will start writing like an AI because you spend time communicating with it. There is also no benefit in typing like an AI to an AI. So i think its a good cover up for "i used ai to write this comment" but claim "i write like AI now lol because i talk to AI so my ai comment is actually human comment" which seems to happen a lot here lately as pushback against ai generated text becomes common

Re: Show HN: The load-bearing vocabulary of Claude

#335

Post by threecheese »

voidfunc wrote: post #89
threecheese wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Claude is all we have at $work, if you don’t count MS Copilot (and you shouldn’t count MS Copilot). Imagine being “incentivized” to aggressively use a tool for your job, and that tool produces thousands of lines of text in Olde English which you need. You’d be griping too, methinks.

Copilot is fine? Just use it through whatever harness you want like OpenCode.

I think you are referring to GitHub Copilot, which is fine (even though their context windows are artificially truncated and their dev tooling leaves a lot to be desired). I was making fun of the Copilot that’s shipped with MS stack. “Hey summarize my Teams meetings and try not to fuck that up too badly” - that one.

Re: Show HN: The load-bearing vocabulary of Claude

#336

Post by threecheese »

QuercusMax wrote: post #70
threecheese wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the enterprise, we are already adopting them. “Seam”, I term I’d never heard used before, is now not only our defacto way to describe the boundary between systems/workflows/components, it is encoded into our organizational roles and responsibilities descriptions. I am the proud owner of several seams, and am considering giving them person-names. The empty space between my inventory APIs and their clients might be…

I believe the term "seam" came from Michael Feathers' "Working Effectively with Legacy Code": “a seam is a place where you can alter behavior in your program without editing in that place”. https://martinfowler.com/bliki/LegacySeam.html Claude is using it a bit liberally, but not totally incorrectly.

I love that you know this, thank you!

Re: Show HN: The load-bearing vocabulary of Claude

#337

Post by QuercusMax »

threecheese wrote: post #336
QuercusMax wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe the term "seam" came from Michael Feathers' "Working Effectively with Legacy Code": “a seam is a place where you can alter behavior in your program without editing in that place”. https://martinfowler.com/bliki/LegacySeam.html Claude is using it a bit liberally, but not totally incorrectly.

I love that you know this, thank you!

I read that book right at the beginning of my career over 20 years ago, when I was the new guy who had actually studied software engineering among all my entirely self-taught older colleagues. Lots of big messes to clean up in that codebase!

Re: Show HN: The load-bearing vocabulary of Claude

#338

Post by QuercusMax »

zahlman wrote: post #233
souvlakee wrote: post #133

I once asked Claude to replace “byte-identical” with a simpler word, such as “duplicate.” He refused and said “duplicate” does not mean the same thing as “byte-identical” so it should not be changed. He was very nerdy about it, so maybe that is the right way of his evolution.

I think Claude has a point here (and I would expect LLMs to excel at surfacing this kind of nuance). "Byte-identical" connotes a) that the thing consists of bytes (in particular, that it isn't a physical object); b) that it was deliberately reproduced; c) that it was most likely not reproduced by copying (unless that's explicitly indicated). "Duplicate" connotes a) that the thing is redundant or otherwise unwanted; b…

I think (c) isn't right. Byte-identical sounds to me like it's almost certainly a copy.
Post reply on HN