So many problems with this: The benchmark is totally useless. It measures single prompts, and only compares output tokens with no regard for accuracy. I could obliterate this benchmark with the prompt "Always answer with one word" This line: "If a user corrects a factual claim: accept it as ground truth for the entire session. Never re-assert the original claim." You're totally destroying any chance of getting pushba…
Universal Claude.md – cut Claude output tokens
161–170 of 192 posts
Re: Universal Claude.md – cut Claude output tokens
#162It seems the benchmarks here are heavily biased towards single-shot explanatory tasks, not agentic loops where code is generated: https://github.com/drona23/claude-token-efficient/blob/main/... And I think this raises a really important question. When you're deep into a project that's iterating on a live codebase, does Claude's default verbosity, where it's allowed to expound on why it's doing what it's doing when it…
Re: Universal Claude.md – cut Claude output tokens
#163Earlier quoted context omitted.
Computer don't do anything.
What's their value then?
E.g., a hammer doesn't do anything, and neither does a lawnmower. It would be silly to argue (just because these tools are static objects doing nothing in the absence of direct human involvement) that those tools don't have a very clear value.
Re: Universal Claude.md – cut Claude output tokens
#164Why does is this ridiculous thing trending on HN? There are actually good tools to reduce token use like https://github.com/thedotmack/claude-mem and https://github.com/ory/lumen that actually work!
Re: Universal Claude.md – cut Claude output tokens
#165Re: Universal Claude.md – cut Claude output tokens
#166Re: Universal Claude.md – cut Claude output tokens
#167Re: Universal Claude.md – cut Claude output tokens
#168Earlier quoted context omitted.
What's their value then?
Just like with absolutely any other tool, their value is in what it enables humans using them to accomplish. E.g., a hammer doesn't do anything, and neither does a lawnmower. It would be silly to argue (just because these tools are static objects doing nothing in the absence of direct human involvement) that those tools don't have a very clear value.
When people use other people like tools, i.e. use them to enable themselves to accomplish something, do those people cease to do things as well? Or is that not a terminology you recognize as sensible maybe?
I appreciate that for some people the verb "do" is evidently human(?) exclusive, I just struggle to wrap my head around why. Or is this an animate vs. inanimate thing, so animals operating tools also do things in your view?
How do you phrase things like "this API consumes that kind of data" in your day to day?
Re: Universal Claude.md – cut Claude output tokens
#169Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just like with absolutely any other tool, their value is in what it enables humans using them to accomplish. E.g., a hammer doesn't do anything, and neither does a lawnmower. It would be silly to argue (just because these tools are static objects doing nothing in the absence of direct human involvement) that those tools don't have a very clear value.
Seems equally silly to me to suggest that hammers and lawnmowers don't do anything, but I mean here we are. When people use other people like tools, i.e. use them to enable themselves to accomplish something, do those people cease to do things as well? Or is that not a terminology you recognize as sensible maybe? I appreciate that for some people the verb "do" is evidently human(?) exclusive, I just struggle to wrap…
To be clear, I am not the person you were originally replying to. I personally don't care much for the terminology semantics of whether we should say "hammers do things" (with the opponents claiming it to be incorrect, since hammers cannot do anything on their own). I am more than happy to use whichever of the two terms the majority agrees upon to be the most sensible, as long as everyone agrees on the actual meaning of it.
> I appreciate that for some people the verb "do" is evidently human(?) exclusive, I just struggle to wrap my head around why. Or is this an animate vs. inanimate thing, so animals operating tools also do things in your view?
To me, it isn't human-exclusive. I just thought that in the context of this specific comment thread, the user you originally replied to used it as a human-exclusive term, so I tried explaining in my reply how they (most likely) used it. For me, I just use whichever term that I feel makes the most sense to use in the context, and then clarify the exact details (in case I suspect the audience to have a number of people who might use the term differently).
> How do you phrase things like "this API consumes that kind of data" in your day to day?
I would use it the exact way you phrased it, "this API consumes that kind of data", because I don't think anyone in the audience would be confused or unclear about what that actually means (depends on the context ofc). Imo it wouldn't be wrong to say "this API receives that kind of data as input" either, but it feels too verbose and awkward to actually use.
Re: Universal Claude.md – cut Claude output tokens
#170Earlier quoted context omitted.
What's their value then?
Just like with absolutely any other tool, their value is in what it enables humans using them to accomplish. E.g., a hammer doesn't do anything, and neither does a lawnmower. It would be silly to argue (just because these tools are static objects doing nothing in the absence of direct human involvement) that those tools don't have a very clear value.