3 ms·

Mostly because it answers quickly and is more agreeable (too agreeable at times). Meanwhile Claude and Astra like to couch all their agreements with caveats an

Mostly because it answers quickly and is more agreeable (too agreeable at times). Meanwhile Claude and Astra like to couch all their agreements with caveats and provisos.

mapontosevenths 17d ago
> Meanwhile Claude and Astra like to couch all their agreements with caveats and provisos. Sometimes that's what being smart sounds like.
- copperx 17d ago
  Yup. Reality is full of special cases.
- drivebyhooting 17d ago
  And sometimes that’s what trying to sound smart sounds like.
- Someone1234 17d ago
  This is commonly why, on Reddit in particular, you can get eaten alive. Someone confident but incorrect, can often sound more convincing than someone with actual expertise. The expert must add caveats/hedge, because those are the facts on the ground, whereas the person reciting google can be entirely confident. Of course the people judging aren't experts, so they side with confidence and simplicity. Heck, just writing shorter replies on Reddit is rewarded. Nobody reads the articles, let alone a paragraph-long reply. That all being said though, there are limits. Sometimes LLMs on high-thinking go off on full tangents based on little, and don't have the self-awareness to bring it back.
  - nostrebored 17d ago
    In my experience actual experts don’t hedge because they have a perspective. They might say “I think”, but avoid weaseling.
    - mapontosevenths 17d ago
      My experience has been very much the opposite of yours. To an expert communicating with a layperson is a form of compression. You must turn some very complex idea into one that you suppose the other person can grasp given their limited frame of reference. It's always lossy, and you have to guess how much you can remove without sounding patronizing or being inaccurate. It's tough, and the more you know the tougher it gets. Ever done that "explain what happens when I visit Google in my web browser" interview question? A sales guy will answer in a sentence. An engineer might be able to talk about it for several days and still not be sure they didn't miss anything important. That much knowledge can actually be detrimental to communication.
  - JW_00000 17d ago
    I consider, on the contrary, caveating and hedging annoying 'typical redditor'/internet behaviors: they care more about being "technically correct" than conveying the message. On the internet, if you make even the tiniest mistake or simplification, someone will criticize you, so you're trained to always hedge. In normal discussions with friends you can just make general statements and people get what you mean.
    - Someone1234 17d ago
      You aren't arguing a "contrary" to what I actually wrote above. You're arguing with a strawman Redditor, and a point adjacent to what I was posting about - experts responding to topics within their actual realm of expertise. So I won't be addressing this, for those reasons and others.
  - xp84 15d ago
    What you're describing sounds precisely like the state of politics. The most successful politicians on both sides just scream "simple" solutions that don't stand up to even cursory examination. On the one hand, Trump, with 90% of his pronouncements being of that variety. And the DSA type, who just scream that we can fix everything if only we had much higher taxes (but ONLY for "billionaires" who would definitely pay them, perpetually, and wouldn't just leave).
porridgeraisin 17d ago
Yea. I have asked it to verify my ideas with experiments sometimes. And it cheats and warps the results so that the results are reached
re5i5tor 17d ago
“caveats and provisos” makes me think of Robin Williams’ genie imitating William F. Buckley Jr.
- indymike 17d ago
  This is accurate.
jakderrida 17d ago
"couch all their agreements with caveats and provisos." When you're a ChatGPT Projects or Claude Projects user, those caveats and provisos are your worst enemy because they'll change caveats into hard rules (either for the session or committed to memories) and you end up in absolute hell having to make it investigate to figure out why it can no longer produce anything but read-only pre-check code that never actually does anything but keeps performing stupid safety checks.
- ankurshv 17d ago
  [flagged]
- avereveard 17d ago
  Yep the only way out is hooks to forbid what can be detected by ast and second model to prune comments, flatten pyramids of fallback, and squash the test suite removing quirks maintaining wanted behaviors.

Mostly because it answers quickly and is more agreeable (too agreeable at times). Meanwhile Claude and Astra like to couch all their agreements with caveats and provisos.

mapontosevenths 17d ago

> Meanwhile Claude and Astra like to couch all their agreements with caveats and provisos. Sometimes that's what being smart sounds like.

copperx 17d ago
Yup. Reality is full of special cases.
drivebyhooting 17d ago
And sometimes that’s what trying to sound smart sounds like.
Someone1234 17d ago
This is commonly why, on Reddit in particular, you can get eaten alive. Someone confident but incorrect, can often sound more convincing than someone with actual expertise. The expert must add caveats/hedge, because those are the facts on the ground, whereas the person reciting google can be entirely confident. Of course the people judging aren't experts, so they side with confidence and simplicity. Heck, just writing shorter replies on Reddit is rewarded. Nobody reads the articles, let alone a paragraph-long reply. That all being said though, there are limits. Sometimes LLMs on high-thinking go off on full tangents based on little, and don't have the self-awareness to bring it back.
- nostrebored 17d ago
  In my experience actual experts don’t hedge because they have a perspective. They might say “I think”, but avoid weaseling.
  - mapontosevenths 17d ago
    My experience has been very much the opposite of yours. To an expert communicating with a layperson is a form of compression. You must turn some very complex idea into one that you suppose the other person can grasp given their limited frame of reference. It's always lossy, and you have to guess how much you can remove without sounding patronizing or being inaccurate. It's tough, and the more you know the tougher it gets. Ever done that "explain what happens when I visit Google in my web browser" interview question? A sales guy will answer in a sentence. An engineer might be able to talk about it for several days and still not be sure they didn't miss anything important. That much knowledge can actually be detrimental to communication.
- JW_00000 17d ago
  I consider, on the contrary, caveating and hedging annoying 'typical redditor'/internet behaviors: they care more about being "technically correct" than conveying the message. On the internet, if you make even the tiniest mistake or simplification, someone will criticize you, so you're trained to always hedge. In normal discussions with friends you can just make general statements and people get what you mean.
  - Someone1234 17d ago
    You aren't arguing a "contrary" to what I actually wrote above. You're arguing with a strawman Redditor, and a point adjacent to what I was posting about - experts responding to topics within their actual realm of expertise. So I won't be addressing this, for those reasons and others.
- xp84 15d ago
  What you're describing sounds precisely like the state of politics. The most successful politicians on both sides just scream "simple" solutions that don't stand up to even cursory examination. On the one hand, Trump, with 90% of his pronouncements being of that variety. And the DSA type, who just scream that we can fix everything if only we had much higher taxes (but ONLY for "billionaires" who would definitely pay them, perpetually, and wouldn't just leave).

porridgeraisin 17d ago

Yea. I have asked it to verify my ideas with experiments sometimes. And it cheats and warps the results so that the results are reached

re5i5tor 17d ago

“caveats and provisos” makes me think of Robin Williams’ genie imitating William F. Buckley Jr.

indymike 17d ago
This is accurate.

jakderrida 17d ago

"couch all their agreements with caveats and provisos." When you're a ChatGPT Projects or Claude Projects user, those caveats and provisos are your worst enemy because they'll change caveats into hard rules (either for the session or committed to memories) and you end up in absolute hell having to make it investigate to figure out why it can no longer produce anything but read-only pre-check code that never actually does anything but keeps performing stupid safety checks.

ankurshv 17d ago
[flagged]
avereveard 17d ago
Yep the only way out is hooks to forbid what can be detected by ast and second model to prune comments, flatten pyramids of fallback, and squash the test suite removing quirks maintaining wanted behaviors.