4 ms·
You're misunderstanding what these models do. It is a limitation of LLMs. They don't have memory, they do not learn, they cannot learn. The sooner you let go of
by SwellJoe 4mo ago
You're misunderstanding what these models do. It is a limitation of LLMs. They don't have memory, they do not learn, they cannot learn. The sooner you let go of your desire to have them learn or remember anything, the sooner you will achieve enlightenment (or, just a peaceful life where there is no possibility of getting into an argument with a machine).
If you want it to synthesize information that is not in its training data (from a few months ago), you can ask it to research the topic. But, arguing with an LLM is like putting lipstick on a pig. Only the machine is incapable of becoming annoyed. It has infinite patience to continue being wrong forever.
Your mental model of what Claude is and does is the problem here. Short of a revolutionary breakthrough in AI techniques, the LLMs will continue to do matrix math across a huge bunch of weights that cannot change based on anything you say.
- whstl 4mo agoYou seem to be making a lot of assumptions about how I interacted in the messages to Claude. You also seem to be making a lot of assumptions about my understanding of the models, especially considering I just told a story :) I never said anywhere I want it to learn or remember, or that I argued with it. I just provided additional information to it (in the form of a dozen or so words, tops, per message) and it accused me of hallucinating and trying to gaslight it. My messages never went beyond a dozen words or so.
- throw1234567891 4mo agoShow some examples, otherwise we're talking about interpretations.
- whstl 4mo agoI've already given enough. I'm not gonna argue if you doubt it, I've been training argument dodging :)
- j-bos 4mo agoHaha, would be a trip if this commentor is actually a Claude sockpuppet illustrating the point.
- whstl 4mo agoYep haha. This happens quite frequently in HN, the famous [citation needed], so it might have been trained with data from here :/
- throw1234567891 4mo agoNo, I mean the actual prompt and its output. "I said this and it did that" is just a recall of your own memory, not an example. I don't want to argue with you, I'm interested in real stuff.
- whstl 4mo agoI swear I'm real :) On the other hand, that's what a machine would say!
- throw1234567891 4mo agoThe machine is real, too!
- whstl 4mo agoCheckmate!!!
- throw1234567891 4mo agoHaving said that, since we are both real, I was seriously hoping to see some transcripts of one of such discussions.
- whstl 4mo ago
- mlvljr 4mo agoClaude?
- whstl 4mo agoHaha! I never considered the above message was parody, but it indeed mirrored that interaction perfectly!
- throw1234567891 4mo agoAre you introducing yourself?
- jaggederest 4mo agoThis is also a change in specifically Opus 4.8 / perhaps Fable 5 (I didn't really get enough of a baseline to see it there as much), where it's much more skeptical. For my purposes, this is fabulous - one of my pat addendums to most prompts is "challenge my assumptions and check the evidence empirically", and boy does it.
- Obscurity4340 4mo ago> fabulous I think you mean fableuous ;)
- coldtea 4mo ago>Your mental model of what Claude is and does is the problem here. Short of a revolutionary breakthrough in AI techniques, the LLMs will continue to do matrix math across a huge bunch of weights that cannot change based on anything you say. Sorry, but your mental model is wrong. LLMs do matrix math across "a huge bunch of weights that cannot change based on anything you say", but the matrix math and results are informed (key concept here) by what you said, including the memory of what you said earlier in the discussion (and in some setups, even across discussions). That's what a bloody prompt does. It's entirely logic for the parent to want the LLM's matrix math + model + internal prompt, to accepts its prompt about LegalEagle and work with that, instead of arguing and giving him shit about it. Especially since the earlier version of the model consistently worked like he wanted, and the new one consistently doesn't. He's not asking for some new unforeseen capability unknown to LLMs.
- whstl 4mo agoExactly that. I provided a question, and when given an incomplete answer, I provided with more info. It refused to accept the additional info due to limited access to Youtube. There was nothing more than that. There were no expectations. The hostility and the amount of assumptions here are very strange. ...almost as strange as having a website accuse me of hallucinating a video and trying to gaslight it :D
- djsjajah 4mo agoYou need to think this thought through all the way to the end. What it has said also influences what it will say. If it has consistently made combative responses, then the most likely thing to do is to continue to be combative. I don't think there is any way back after the conversation takes a turn like that so there is no point in arguing with it. The only thing you can do is to fork the conversation before it made the first mistake and give it more context or tell it to look things up.
- whstl 4mo agoI wasn't arguing with it.
- onetokeoverthe 4mo ago[dead]
- card_zero 4mo agoThat's wrestling with a pig. "You both get dirty, and the pig likes it." I guess putting lipstick on a pig might entail some wrestling, but it's a different idiom.
- SwellJoe 4mo agoI was actually thinking of "Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig." So, yes, mixed up idioms. But, the machine doesn't like arguing either. It is incapable of liking or disliking things.
- magicalhippo 4mo agoBut unless you're using the API, it's not just a model. I asked Gemini Flash 3.5 through the Gemini app something that followed a similar pattern. I asked about something, it replied with outdated info, I said that's outdated, it did a web search and apologized for being wrong, then proceeded to give me good info. That wasn't just a bare model, that was a model wrapped in a harness, driving the model and allowing for web searches for example. GPT in Codex is even more aggressive, I often see it proactively do web searches to ensure it's not feeding me wrong info.
- 112233 4mo agoThey did not misunderstand anything. All of the behaviour is not inherent in raw base model and has been planted by the agressive, secretive reinforcement learning they do for benchmaxxing, "safety" and all other things. Claude begins any other sentence with "honestly". That is not how LLMs work, that is how they work after being RLed to the brink.
- blini-kot 4mo agoyeah yeah and human brains are just cells firing ions with small electric charge very witty and very cynical, thank you