4 ms·
Astra told me yesterday: > The run baseline was captured without a physical MAC; the current device is not durably bound to it. > Engineering mode confirmatio
by stavros 20d ago
Astra told me yesterday:
> The run baseline was captured without a physical MAC; the current device is not durably bound to it.
> Engineering mode confirmation is the ESPHome component read-back; the LD2410 UART acknowledgement is not observed, so this is not proof the radar itself applied the sensitivity change.
No clue what the fuck any of it means.
- mikestaas 20d agoReminds me a bit of VXJunkies
- zenoprax 20d agoHave you tuned your Retro Encabulator recently?
- ramigb 20d agoIt was only when native English speakers—or those I presumed were—started calling out how bad "GPT/Claude speak" has become that I realized I wasn't actually losing my grip on English as a second language. For a second, I thought, Oh, I learned this language on my own, but it seems I've hit a wall and need to study further. It didn't help that I've also been trying to acquire Swedish as a third language for a while now.
- andai 20d agoLLMs speak every language. I wonder if they're as insane in the other ones!
- Joeri 20d agoMy experience with opus 5 is that its results are lower quality in dutch, but that its dutch is more readable than its english.
- submain 20d agoI literally created a /plain-language skill.
- fragmede 20d agoin which one!
- keybrd-intrrpt 20d agoNot the original commenter, but I did this in all of them. Their skills formats are basically identical, so I setup simlinks from their own skills directories into a shared one so Claude, Codex, Cursor, and anything else that comes out will all read and write to the same shared skills. It's great having access to the same skills no matter the harness being used
- usef- 20d agoThey are generally portable. Eg. /wait-what https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/blob/main/skills/productivity/wait-what/SKILL.md https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/blob/main/skills/produc...
- tripzilch 20d agoOne thing that I find is that it doesn't seem to grasp levels of jargon-use. Like I ask a basic question, okay, a few questions later, suddenly there's abbreviations and weird formulations everywhere.
- baron3dl 20d agoSometimes when I get frustrated reading Opus/Fable 5+ output I pause my rage out briefly to wonder if it's because I'm just too dumb for the model or if the model is just terrible at English. I'm not sure that telling it to "try explaining that again, simply and briefly" is helping my ego.
- EarthLaunch 20d agoIt's often simply misleading / bad writing. Here's one I just got about some crashes: "If the crashes stop, the factory overclock is marginal; run a small negative offset." This looks like it's saying: "If the crashes stop then we know the factory overclock is marginal." (This makes no sense.) What it's trying to say is: "If the crashes stop then we can run a small negative offset, because the factory overlock is marginal." What I would write: "If the crashes stop, we can avoid crashes by underclocking slightly. The speed difference between that and factory clock is marginal."
- r_lee 20d agoI'm guessing it's because the way the first one was written looks real smart and sophisticated, which I'm presuming the models are rewarded for, especially when they're fed all kinds of PhD papers and so on as high quality, high weight data
- derektank 20d agoIs it possible that the first message is more information dense/less likely to be ambiguous than the latter? It’s clearly being selected for for some reason, maybe it’s an artifact of the tokenizer or specific training data, but I don’t know. If the use of jargon was complete cruft, I would expect it to be selected against during reinforcement learning
- cruffle_duffle 20d agoYou’d think that, I thought that… but then I realized I’m just kidding myself thinking its output makes sense. It doesn’t. It doesn’t. Sometimes it might as well just speak tongues. In other words, it ain’t you. It’s the model. It’s just genuinely bad. Then you switch to ChatGPTs lineup and realize how things can actually be better. It took about a week to really get the feel for how to use their models… then I basically switched. I’ll check in every now and then when they actually make a deal about how opus “now makes sense”. But honestly I’m half convinced Anthropic actually prefers the output of opus 5. I dunno why, but how else could you explain how such a thing got shipped? I mean somebody in the pipeline had to say “dude this model doesn’t make sense, you think we should fix it?” Right? Like it’s a pretty massive drop in quality for such a major brand in this space, you know? How did it make it out the door?!?
- jsw97 20d agoI bet this is what the thinking blocks look like. If so then it maybe it is intelligible, just not to us. I have the same problem.
- stavros 20d agoWell, whatever its thinking block looks like, this is when it was talking to me. I suspect you're right, though, I think it thinks it's thinking. It seems like it doesn't have enough of a theory of mind to know that other people don't think exactly like it thinks.
- jimbobimbo 20d agoThe most surprising part, however, is that when one model slops this into a plan, another model somehow is able to interpret it correctly enough to produce code to spec.
- AceJohnny2 20d agoI mean, humans have been doing just that for a long time.
- le-mark 20d agoI have shared this dismay. I’ll have opus create a plan, I read it doubtfully. And then sonnet implements it. I am surprised it went so well. I theorize the redundant verbosity effectively builds rails that help keep llm focused. I will experiment with such rails myself.
- eru 20d agoI suspect it's because the different models co-evolve? The labs train on one model implementing the plans of another model, especially in the same family of models (like Fable to Sonnet).
- florkbork 20d agoIts telling you your mmWave radar isn't speaking over serial communication well. https://www.analog.com/en/resources/analog-dialogue/articles/uart-a-hardware-communication-protocol.html https://www.analog.com/en/resources/analog-dialogue/articles... (Its negging your soldering)
- sheepscreek 20d ago> (Its negging your soldering) This made me laugh hard.
- geysersam 20d agoI long for the day when AI will just say that directly: "your soldering sucks man" instead of the bizarre made up and jargon packed language they use now.
- stavros 20d agoIt wasn't, it was saying it hadn't looked at the UART because it only had access to the web API.
- sheepscreek 20d agoThere’s some specific terminology here, like the MAC address of the network device, which might have been virtual. UART is a hardware circuit for communication, possibly a serial port. Were you trying to reverse engineer a consumer device or appliance? This particular instance doesn’t seem terse, but I’m sure it has been on other occasions :)
- stavros 20d agoIt was saying it can't tie the calibration results to a device, because it doesn't know the MAC address (I never asked it to look at the MAC address, it way overengineered things). It also couldn't see the UART communication and could only see the web API endpoint, hence the rest of the slop.
- d0100 20d agoLLMs seem to create abstract, local jargon as a side effect of way it reasons using tokens ChatGPT told me its "semantic compression"
- fragmede 20d agoHow is that not plain English? why do my friends not like me? Hmm....
- scotty79 20d agoLanguage evolves with use. As more of the users are bo tlike you the langugae might feel like it's evolving from under you. It just sounds bad, like GenZ English in the ears of someone over 40.