4 ms·
They still need to choose when to do that though. When I prompt the program to e.g. alter a bash script in a specific way or to recite a longer known text it ca
by thunfischtoast 2mo ago
They still need to choose when to do that though. When I prompt the program to e.g. alter a bash script in a specific way or to recite a longer known text it can't go round and randomly exchange tokens. It has to somehow define what is a simple repeated text from a different origin and what is a novel generation.
- user43928 2mo agoI am wondering how that applies to newly generated code. Odd variable naming? Stylistic choices that are watermarked? Or as someone else noted further down in the comments, it could be more subtle: Between the first and second most likely choice, in certain positions it will consistently choose in a certain way.
- melvinroest 2mo ago> Odd variable naming? Stylistic choices that are watermarked? Whatever it is, I'm sure it's load-bearing.
- asdfsa32 2mo agoYou're absolutely right. But it is not just load-bearing, it is the load-bearing seams.
- silversmith 2mo agoPersonal observation: Opus 5, over the last week, has started outputting A LOT more comments. Despite my global instructions being full of variations on "don't use comments unless absolutely necessary". I might be imagining things of course. But comments would be great fit for this use case.
- StilesCrisis 2mo agoThey have mentioned that their system prompt used to say "avoid over-commenting" and it no longer does. They should bring that back IMO.
- pram 2mo agoYes the length of comments Opus 5 leaves is exhausting. Not to mention it will insert info thats only relevant within the current session. I've just been deleting all of them lol
- sixothree 2mo agoComments seem most plausible, especially since I absolutely expect it to match my code style, existing architecture, and have the code go through CSharpier and dotnet format after the fact. edit: as an aside - I actually use extensions to collapse comments and change the color to be less intrusive.
- wpietri 2mo agoI would guess they're not worrying about watermarking a tweak to a human-written program. That's both a tiny fraction of Claude use and of very little concern to the kinds of people who want to check watermarks.
- kuboble 2mo agoI cannot imagine the code with well defined specification will have extra watermarks unless the watermark is requested as part of the harness instructions. If it works like people describe - on the every nth token or something - then the mark will be left in the chain of thought and discussion with the model - not in the code artifacts.
- __MatrixMan__ 2mo agoIf you're that targeted with your edits, then do you deserve a watermark anyway?
- sisyphus15 2mo agoYou are aware that Claude already doesn't choose the most probable token, right? That's literally what the temperature parameter means. It picks tokens at random (from the list of most probable next tokens), increasingly so as the temperature goes up. This has always been the case. And now, with the watermarking, it will simply go from random to pseudo-random, adding some patterning. There isn't any effect on the quality or precision of the output. Nothing changes in practice.