3 ms·
I work with Sol and Astra only in my daily work, and occasionally I check out Claude Code so I don't get completely out of touch. I can't stand the way Opus is
by manmal 20d ago
I work with Sol and Astra only in my daily work, and occasionally I check out Claude Code so I don't get completely out of touch.
I can't stand the way Opus is patronizing me as a user, and don't know how people put up with it. It uses language that I guess is supposed to instill confidence in what it says, and it just irks me, because I know the confidence is not justified. Just present me the facts or theories, without trying to convince me, is that so hard?
- beezlewax 20d agoClaude's use of language is hideous at this point. It is verging on gibberish wrapped in important-sounding prose.
- te_chris 20d agoYes, definitely load bearing.
- trymas 20d agoToday, I asked Opus what it’s gibberish actually means. It started with (topic about signing implementation): > This is your coat token, to my coat hanger in the opera. On one hand - maybe yes??! On the other who the hell speaks like that and it’s so specific… I’d expect Alice and Bob with locks or house keys. Is this infamous old book scanning (and destroying) affecting latest models?
- Chance-Device 20d ago> On one hand - maybe yes??! No.
- SoftTalker 20d agoSounds like one of those "Is to as Is to" analogy questions from the SAT.
- r_lee 20d ago> > This is your coat token, to my coat hanger in the opera. that is fucking insane how on earth is Anthropic allowing this to happen? AGI? kill us all? I refuse to believe any of that until they can get this basic shit sorted out, I mean seriously, it's becoming a joke at this point
- GeoAtreides 20d ago> it’s gibberish ironic
- andrewshadura 20d agoAre you sure you didn't typo signing as singing somewhere?
- nottorp 20d agoload-bearing!
- TomGarden 20d agoAgreed. The language consistently triggers visceral negative reactions from me at this point.
- JohnMakin 20d agoIt's definitely worse and getting worse. I'm curious, do they not know this is happening, or not care? I struggle to believe people prefer the way it writes, which is becoming drastically different than its competitors.
- lukan 20d agoFable 5.1 was explicitely supposed to improve that, I used it only a bit so far and it seems at least better.
- svachalek 20d agoFable 5.1 is fairly pleasant to work with, the first in a while. Too bad it's so ridiculously overkill for most tasks. They need to reel in Opus and Sonnet.
- immibis2 20d agoMaybe the humans are suffering from model collapse, and don't notice it.
- paulhebert 20d agoI wonder if they’re training heavily on Claude generated content or conversation transcripts
- abathologist 20d agoPeople are also being trained/acculturated to LLM speak, so even if they are trained on human output, they could be getting reinforcement for their LLM-tinged crap-speak.
- pibaker 20d agoBig empty words are probably cheaper to produce than concise, information rich text of the same length.
- sixtyj 20d agoI don’t like how LLMs answer and as they are statistical machines I have found out that I need to check every text they produce. From the first sight everything seems cool. But it isn’t. :) Exception is code that is so huge output you can’t read everything. But I have to try ponytail skill for coding that should shorten the output.
- chrisweekly 20d ago"Avoid use of "mannered" speech in your responses." goes a long way for Opus and Fable.
- hungryhobbit 20d agoThe issue isn't the prompt you give it. The issue is that as context grows, Claude distributes it's "attention weight" over all that context, and quickly reaches the point of "missing" stuff. You can give it any prompt in the world, but Claude's ability to remember that instruction quickly degrades the more you use it.
- chrisweekly 19d agoYeah, I'm well aware. I shpild've been clearer I was suggesting a 1-line entry like that in CLAUDE.json, which can pay dividends in keeping context lean - which in turn is essential for avoiding the "dumb zone" (over 125k-150k tokens), precisely the effect you describe. Experts like mattpocock suggest keeping context as lean as possible for this reason.
- paulddraper 20d agoYou have to use Fable or Opus 4.6 for tolerable language output. Using Opus 4.7-5 is harmful to your health. https://x.com/wolframs91/status/2090159644849353058?s=46 https://x.com/wolframs91/status/2090159644849353058?s=46
- ismailmaj 20d ago5 for sure is unbearable, 4.8 is a reasonable sweet spot, 4.6 tends to just agree with whatever I say. But lately I haven't downgraded because 5 is so much better at tool use, so I just accept the cost of Fable for chatting and hope Opus 5.1 fixes this mess.
- esotericsean 20d agoOpus is the worst at it. Fable 5 still does it a little. Fable 5.1 is much improved, at least.
- edoceo 20d agoIt's bad enough I stopped paying.
- emptyfile 20d ago[dead]
- OlivierLi 20d agoI tried it for the first time today for stuff I'm well versed in. It said something along the lines of "remember $USER five runs of Chrome is not enough for high quality benchmarks! What you're doing is called a _trial run_". To have a useful continuation to the conversation I had to remind it that I was the one that wrote the documentation it was quoting back at me. It's not actually an intelligent being so I didn't get angry at it but it was a piss poor experience.