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

Claude Memory

anthropic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 326 posts

Re: Claude Memory

#251

Post by derwiki »

deadbabe wrote: post #17
labrador wrote: post #15

I've been using it for the past month and I really like it compared to ChatGPT memory. Claude memory weaves it's memories of you into chats in a natural way, while ChatGPT feels like a salesman trying to make a sale e.g. "Hi Bob! How's your wife doing? I'd like to talk to you about an investment opportunity..." while Claude is more like "Barcelona is a great travel destination and I think you and wife would really en…

That’s creepy, I will promptly turn that off. Also, Claude doesn’t “think” anything, I wish they’d stop with the anthropomorphizations. They are just as bad as hallucinations.

The company is literally named Anthropic

Re: Claude Memory

#252

Post by dns_snek »

awesome_dude wrote: post #247
baq wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

LLMs literally can’t forget. If it’s in the context window, it is known regardless of what you put in the context next. That said, if the ‘pretend forget’ you’re getting works for you, great. Just remember it’s fake.

Like I said, the AI does exactly what I intend for it to do. Almost, as I said earler, like the AI has processed my request, realised that I am referring to the context of the earlier discussions, and moved on to the next prompt exactly how I have expected it to Given the two very VERY dumb responses, and multiple people down voting, I am reminded how thankful I am that AI is around now, because it understood what yo…

> I am reminded how thankful I am that AI is around now, because it understood what you clearly don't.

We understand what you're saying just fine but what you're saying is simply wrong as a matter of technical fact. All of that context still exists and still degrades the output even if the model has fooled you into thinking that it doesn't. Therefore recommending it as an alternative to actually clearing the context is bad advice.

It's similar to how a model can be given a secret password and instructed not to reveal it to anyone under any circumstances. It's going to reject naive attempts at first, but it's always going to reveal it eventually.

Re: Claude Memory

#253

Post by crackalamoo »

cainxinth wrote: post #23

I don't use any of these type of LLM tools which basically amount to just a prompt you leave in place. They make it harder to refine my prompts and keep track of what is causing what in the outputs. I write very precise prompts every time. Also, I try not work out a problem over the course of several prompts back and forth. The first response is always the best and I try to one shot it every time. If I don't get what…

I make heavy use of the "temporary chat" feature on ChatGPT. It's great whenever I need a fresh context or need to iteratively refine a prompt, and I can use the regular chat when I want it to have memory.

Granted, this isn't the best UX because I can't create a fresh context chat without making it temporary. But I'd say it allows enough choice that overall having the memory feature is a big plus.

Re: Claude Memory

#254

Post by godelski »

cainxinth wrote: post #23

I don't use any of these type of LLM tools which basically amount to just a prompt you leave in place. They make it harder to refine my prompts and keep track of what is causing what in the outputs. I write very precise prompts every time. Also, I try not work out a problem over the course of several prompts back and forth. The first response is always the best and I try to one shot it every time. If I don't get what…

Honestly it feels weird to call these features "memory". I think it just confuses users and over encourages inappropriate anthropomorphism. It's not like they're fine tuning or building LoRAs. Feels more appropriate to call them "project notes".

And I agree with your overall point. I wish there was a lot more clarity too. Like is info from my other chats infecting my current one? Sometimes it seems that way. And why can't I switch to a chat with a standard system prompt? Incognito isn't shareable nor can I maintain a history. I'm all for this project notes thing but I'd love to have way more control over it. Really what makes it hard to wrangle is that I don't know what's being pulled into context or not. That's the most important thing with these tools.

Re: Claude Memory

#255

Post by godelski »

Nition wrote: post #100
cainxinth wrote: post #23

I don't use any of these type of LLM tools which basically amount to just a prompt you leave in place. They make it harder to refine my prompts and keep track of what is causing what in the outputs. I write very precise prompts every time. Also, I try not work out a problem over the course of several prompts back and forth. The first response is always the best and I try to one shot it every time. If I don't get what…

> The first response is always the best and I try to one shot it every time. If I don't get what I want, I adjust the prompt and try again. I've really noticed this too and ended up taking your same strategy, especially with programming questions. For example if I ask for some code and the LLM initially makes an incorrect assumption, I notice the result tends to be better if I go back and provide that info in my init…

  > Humans do the same thing. We get stuck on ideas we've already had.
Not in the same way. LLMs are far more annoying about it.

I can say: I'm trying to solve problem x. I've tried solutions a,b, and c. Here are the outputs to those (with run commands, code, and in markdown code blocks). Help me find something that works " (not these exact words. I'm way more detailed). It'll frequently suggest one of the solutions I've attempted if they are very common. If it doesn't have a solution d it will go a>b>c>a>... and get stuck in the loop. If a human did that you'd be rightfully upset. They literally did the thing you told them not to, then when you remind them and they say "ops sorry" they do it again. I'd rather argue with a child

Re: Claude Memory

#256

Post by EigenLord »

I think there's a critical flaw with Anthropic's approach to memory which is that they seem to hide it behind a tool call. This creates a circularity issue: the agent needs to "remember to remember." Think how screwed you would be if you were consciously responsible for knowing when you had to remember something. It's almost a contradiction in terms. Recollection is unconscious and automatic, there's a constant auto-associative loop running in the background at all times. I get the idea of wanting to make LLMs more instrumental and leave it to the user to invoke or decide certain events: that's definitely the right idea in 90% of cases. But for memory it's not the right fit. In contrast OpenAI's approach, which seems to resemble more generic semantic search, leaves things wanting for other reasons. It's too lossy.

Re: Claude Memory

#257

Post by tacone »

On a side note I often start a new chat session just to *clean up" the context and let Claude start over from the real problem. After a while it gets confused by its own guesses starts to go astray.

Re: Claude Memory

#258

Post by typpilol »

mediaman wrote: post #248
awesome_dude wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean I am telling you what has actually worked for me so far - and being a NLP the system (should) understand what that means... as should you...

He is telling you how it mechanically works. Your comment about it “understanding what that means” because it is an NLP seems bizarre, but maybe you mean it in some other way. Are you proposing that the attention input context is gone, or that the attention mechanism’s context cost is computationally negated in some way, simply because the system processes natural language? Having the attention mechanism selectively…

I wonder if the AI companies will eventually just have a tool that lets the llm drop it's context mid convo when the user requests it.

Re: Claude Memory

#260

Post by hereonout2 »

brookst wrote: post #172
corry wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Strong agree. For every time that I'd get a better answer if the LLM had a bit more context on me (that I didn't think to provide, but it 'knew') there seems to be a multiple of that where the 'memory' was either actually confounding or possibly confounding the best response. I'm sure OpenAI and Antropic look at the data, and I'm sure it says that for new / unsophisticated users who don't know how to prompt, that thi…

I'm pretty deep in this stuff and I find memory super useful. For instance, I can ask "what windshield wipers should I buy" and Claude (and ChatGPT and others) will remember where I live, what winter's like, the make, model, and year of my car, and give me a part number. Sure, there's more control in re-typing those details every single time. But there is also value in not having to.

I've found this memory across chats quite useful on a practical level too, but it also has added to the feeling of developing an ongoing personal relationship with the LLM.

Not only does the model (chat gpt) know about my job, tech interests etc and tie chats together using that info.

But also I have noticed the "tone" of the conversation seems to mimick my own style some what - in a slightly OTT way. For example Chat GPT wil now often call me "mate" or reply often with terms like "Yes mate!".

This is not far off how my own close friends might talk to me, it definitely feels like it's adapted to my own conversational style.

Post reply on HN