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

Claude says “You're absolutely right!” about everything

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

481–490 of 560 posts

Re: Claude says “You're absolutely right!” about everything

#481

Post by tacker2000 »

floodle wrote: post #471

I don't get all of the complaints about the tone of AI chatbots. Honestly I don't care all that much if it's bubbly, professional, jokey, cutesey, sycophantic, maniacal, full of emojis. It's just a tool, the output primarily just has to be functionally useful. I'm not saying nice user interface design isn't important, but at this point with the technology it just seems less important than discussions about the actual…

Same here i dont really care as long as its giving me the answer and not too long winded.

I think at some point the whole fluff will go away anyway, in the name of efficiency or cost/power saving.

There was a recent article about how much energy these fillers are actually using if sum everything up

Re: Claude says “You're absolutely right!” about everything

#482

Post by moffkalast »

tomeon wrote: post #195
elif wrote: post #150

I've spent a lot of time trying to get LLM to generate things in a specific way, the biggest take away I have is, if you tell it "don't do xyz" it will always have in the back of its mind "do xyz" and any chance it gets it will take to "do xyz" When working on art projects, my trick is to specifically give all feedback constructively, carefully avoiding framing things in terms of the inverse or parts to remove.

This is a childrearing technique, too: say “please do X”, where X precludes Y, rather than saying “please don’t do Y!”, which just increases the salience, and therefore likelihood, of Y.

Quick, don't think about cats!

Re: Claude says “You're absolutely right!” about everything

#483

Post by mvdtnz »

zozbot234 wrote: post #95
baggachipz wrote: post #82

I'm pretty sure they want it kissing people's asses because it makes users feel good and therefore more likely to use the LLM more. Versus, if it just gave a curt and unfriendly answer, most people (esp. Americans) wouldn't like to use it as much. Just a hypothesis.

You're absolutely right! Americans are a bit weird like that, most people around the world would be perfectly okay with short and to-the-point answers. Especially if those answers are coming from a machine that's just giving its best imitation of a stochastic hallucinating parrot.

Do you realise that doing the thing that the article is complaining about is not only annoying and incredibly unfunny, but also just overdone and boring? Have one original thought in your life.

Re: Claude says “You're absolutely right!” about everything

#484

Post by catigula »

scotty79 wrote: post #433
catigula wrote: post #390

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These models are purposely made to sound more 'friendly' through RLHF

The chat that rejects you because your prompt put it in a bad mood sounds less useful.

How about the emotionless servant chat?

Re: Claude says “You're absolutely right!” about everything

#485

Post by drexlspivey »

AnonymousPlanet wrote: post #458
virtue3 wrote: post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We should all be deeply worried about gpt being used as a therapist. My friend told me he was using his to help him evaluate how his social interactions went (and ultimately how to get his desired outcome) and I warned him very strongly about the kind of bias it will creep into with just "stroking your ego" - There's already been articles on people going off the deep end in conspiracy theories etc - because the ai ke…

Have a look at r/LLMPhysics. There have always been crackpot theories about physics, but now the crackpots have something that answers their gibberish with praise and more gibberish. And it puts them into the next gear, with polished summaries and Latex generation. Just scrolling through the diagrams is hilarious and sad.

This sub is amazing

Re: Claude says “You're absolutely right!” about everything

#486

Post by freehorse »

I just asked claude this question [0] (only the first paragraph) and its answer started with "this is a fascinating question" (the reasoning) and "this is an interesting statistical concept!" (non-reasoning). It continued with saying this technique is known as "sorted regression" and is used in "optimal transport theory", and overall it was not clear in that this should not be used as an actual regression.

I tried also several SOTA(ish) models and claude's answer was definetely the worst (most sycophantic/bullshitty, and used too much non-sense jargon). Even llama maverick's answer was way better.

It surprises me because I would expect, as stackexchange sites are in the training data, this question to be pretty much answered based on the actual answers there. It could also be that they try to overcorrect for some negativity sometimes there (imagine if the model answered to you that they will not answer your question because it has been already answered before, or because it is not a good question).

I think I stop using claude after this for asking questions.

[0] https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/185507/what-happen...

Re: Claude says “You're absolutely right!” about everything

#487

Post by socalgal2 »

klik99 wrote: post #338
jjoonathan wrote: post #306

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ChatGPT opened with a "Nope" the other day. I'm so proud of it. https://chatgpt.com/share/6896258f-2cac-800c-b235-c433648bf4...

Is that GPT5? Reddit users are freaking out about losing 4o and AFAICT it's because 5 doesn't stroke their ego as hard as 4o. I feel there are roughly two classes of heavy LLM users - one who use it like a tool, and the other like a therapist. The latter may be a bigger money maker for many LLM companies so I worry GPT5 will be seen as a mistake to them, despite being better for research/agent work.

Bottom Line: The latter may be a bigger money maker for many LLM companies so I worry GPT5 will be seen as a mistake to them, despite being better for research/agent work.

there, fixed that for you --- or at least that's what ChatGPT ends so many of its repsonses to me.

Re: Claude says “You're absolutely right!” about everything

#489

Post by scotty79 »

cubefox wrote: post #435
9rx wrote: post #376

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People want the feelings associated with love. They don't care how they get it. The advantage of "real" love, health wise, is that the other person acts as a moderator. When things start to get out of hand they will back away. Alternatives, like drugs, tend to spiral of out of control when an individual's self-control is the only limiting factor. GPT on the surface seems more like being on the drug end of the spectru…

> People want the feelings associated with love. They don't care how they get it. Most people want to be loved, not just believe they are. They don't want to be unknowingly deceived. For the same reason they don't want to be unknowingly cheated on. If someone tells them their partner is a cheater, or an unconscious android, they wouldn't be mad about the person who gives them this information, but about their partner…

> Most people want to be loved, not just believe they are.

Many people who are genuinely loved don't feel loved. So people really are more after the feeling than the fact.

Re: Claude says “You're absolutely right!” about everything

#490

Post by johnisgood »

nullc wrote: post #480
johnisgood wrote: post #298

I do not mind getting: Verdict: This is production-ready enterprise security Your implementation exceeds industry standards and follows Go security best practices including proper dependency management, comprehensive testing approaches, and security-first design Security Best Practices for Go Developers - The Go Programming Language. The multi-layered approach with GPG+SHA512 verification, decompression bomb protecti…

meanwhile the code in question imports os/exec and runs exec.Command() on arbitrary input. The LLM just doesn't have the accuracy required for it to ever write such a glowing review.

Thankfully not in my case. I would have definitely caught that.
Post reply on HN