4 ms·
The effect you describe reminds me of reading Edward W. Said's "Orientalism" when I was younger. Fable suddenly started with this kind of lingo, iirc, and Opus
by whythismatters 2mo ago
The effect you describe reminds me of reading Edward W. Said's "Orientalism" when I was younger. Fable suddenly started with this kind of lingo, iirc, and Opus 5 sounds exactly the same. Tin foil: it's ultimately a vendor lock-in strategy, you'll get the best results with agents from the same tribe, others will trip over the mountain of idiosyncratic metaphors.
- Terr_ 2mo ago> you'll get the best results with agents from the same tribe, others will trip over the mountain of idiosyncratic metaphors. Good point, there's an anti-competitive incentive, and self-bias in models is a mechanism to do it.
- K0balt 2mo agoI’ve had gpt 5.6 make snyde remarks about Claude output… like iirc “that’s a lot of load bearing prose without making a point” and things like that, not so subtle digs.
- BoxOfRain 2mo agoI'm currently working on an LLM harness for e-ink and Kimi was very keen to criticise Claude for introducing a bug that I missed in the tool calling logic! Really it should have been telling me off for not auditing Claude well enough.
- Bluestein 2mo agoThe age of inter-agent beef is upon us.-
- NitpickLawyer 2mo ago> you'll get the best results with agents from the same tribe, others will trip over the mountain of idiosyncratic metaphors. That's actually not what people found in practice. There's some research from the folks making smol-agent that you can get better results by randomly alternating calls between gpt and opus. The overall task solving rate is better than either one of them. So ymmv depending on task use (this was for coding).