I find the language of "collaborating with Claude" off-putting. I don't collaborate with Claude, I use Claude. It's a tool in my hands, not a colleague or a friend.
AI companies seem eager to perpetuate the fantasy that all users carefully review all LLM output, and supervise all tool calls.
Anthropic certainly isn't planning to take responsibility for Claude's mistakes - that's the user's responsibility. Describing everything as 'collaborating' is I think part of their efforts to emphasise the user's role in the process.
I think the opposite. AI Companies use the term collaborate to increase the trust in the LLM output.
I trust the output of colleagues I am collaborating with and have an assumption of some shared responsibility. But if I use a tool like numpy/matplotlib then I am accountable for the conclusions I come up with. I can't make an excuse that "matplotlib" created a plot so my decisions were incorrect and not due to my own negligence.
Stiff, repetive style is often a result of very small, less than 0.5 sampling temperature, very small top-k, very high min-p etc. Most of "normies" (wrt to /r/localllama and /r/sillytavernai) never tweak the samplers.
You must not be doing much real work with these models, otherwise you would know that with the latest Claude models you can't even adjust the temperature or top p/k
The real way to actually get a good output has always been in the prompt, not these parameters
You must not be doing much real work with these models, otherwise you would know that with the latest Claude models you can't even adjust the temperature or top p/k
No, I do not. Good for me I guess.
The real way to actually get a good output has always been in the prompt, not these parameters
Have fun using web-interfaces for overpriced US models while I am getting my work done with Chinese models for a fraction of price on openrouter using API. Besides, when using API I am sure all American models, including Claude honour sampling settings.
No, they don't. That's the whole point. I've spent several hundred thousand dollars in API costs in the last few years to power my app, I think I know what I'm talking about. Nobody besides you is talking about web interfaces
Meanwhile you clearly have zero clue what you are talking about because a simple Google search would show you otherwise but that must be too difficult for you
I've spent several hundred thousand dollars in API costs in the last few years to power my app
Which is kinda sad, if you've used Anthropic products, because you could get comparable performance from cheaper models for vast majority of tasks.
No, they don't. That's the whole point.
Bad for them; do not use Anthropic then. Besides "the whole point" of conversation you have interrupted is that "low temperature and tight sampling produces stiff boring cliche prose" - which is truism, as those settings control the entropy of the output. And it is utterly irrelevant frankly if one has access to the Claude sampler through API or not; as Anthropic has apparently locked the sampler at very conservative temperature (probably as low as 0.2), there is no way to squeeze god prose out of it, as the logits have been severely messed up wrt to the actual word distribution in standard English.
They aren't even available for the new Claude models which we use extensively so I think that should tell you something. I've made over $6 million with my AI app in the last few years without worrying about temperature and other parameters. What have you done?
Anthropic's public writing style is very different from Claude's because it's written by humans. Even in their job ads they ask candidates to not use AI for any writing (or at least they used to).
Yes. AIs are a lot better at coding than they are at writing. I author less than 1% of the code I push these days, but still write the grand majority of emails and posts. Probably I would do it 100% human if it was high stakes and I expected it to be read by millions.
You think Tim Cook's kids don't use iPhones? Or that Larry Ellison's kids don't use Oracle Financial Services Adaptive Intelligence Foundation for Anti Money Laundering Application?
Steve Jobs famously didn't let his kids use iPads (and restricted their access to tech pretty heavily, it seems). If you watch the Social Dilemma, it's full of people who invented what we consider fundamental tech, but don't let their families use any of it because they can see the problems it causes. It makes the techno-optimism ring pretty hollow.
Let's not conflate "this technology isn't for kids" with "this technology is bad", though. I wouldn't want my kids using a tablet, but I wouldn't want anyone using a gun.
There are many different ways to make an LLM sound more human-like (the author has actually explicitly mentioned ChatGPT sounds more natural). For their public announcements etc. they might as well used specially trained small 24-32B creative writing model or put a LoRA on top of their Haiku. One could also use "antislop" samplers, maybe some encoder-decoder unslopping postprocessing small models etc. Or they simply may have been written by humans.
I don't see why Anthropic would be expected to publish default Claude voice or use Claude for their public writing. No matter how great AI is, it doesn't commit you to using it for everything.
And they probably know basic LLM tricks like "write it in the style of X".
When you read a blog post with Claude voice, you're seeing the result of someone who couldn't even be bothered to do that which is why they deserve extra lashings.
On the bright side, I'll know immediately a post is Claude-generated. If the author didn't bother writing it, I don't bother reading it.
/s?
This is where the concern-trolls barge in with "what about non native English speakers using AI to blogslop everything is actually a good tool!"
I mean, don't other people bail out of stuff that in slop style?
Anthropic's guide for job applicants on how you should use Claude when applying for a job there is relevant here: https://www.anthropic.com/candidate-ai-guidance
I find the language of "collaborating with Claude" off-putting. I don't collaborate with Claude, I use Claude. It's a tool in my hands, not a colleague or a friend.
AI companies seem eager to perpetuate the fantasy that all users carefully review all LLM output, and supervise all tool calls.
Anthropic certainly isn't planning to take responsibility for Claude's mistakes - that's the user's responsibility. Describing everything as 'collaborating' is I think part of their efforts to emphasise the user's role in the process.
I think the opposite. AI Companies use the term collaborate to increase the trust in the LLM output.
I trust the output of colleagues I am collaborating with and have an assumption of some shared responsibility. But if I use a tool like numpy/matplotlib then I am accountable for the conclusions I come up with. I can't make an excuse that "matplotlib" created a plot so my decisions were incorrect and not due to my own negligence.
I have the opposite view point, "collaborating with Claude" is I think how I would best describe that experience.
Do you collaborate with your keyboard on the spreadsheet? The prosaic prompting is an I/O device to a machine.
Not collaborating with Claude but searching and using all the data stolen by it.
dont you collaborate with your toaster to make breakfast
Other than the specific phrases like load-bearing etc, I find the biggest tell of all just to be repetition.
Every damn Claude article does the “tell ‘em what you’re going to tell ‘em, tell ‘em, tell ‘em what you told ‘em” routine.
Stiff, repetive style is often a result of very small, less than 0.5 sampling temperature, very small top-k, very high min-p etc. Most of "normies" (wrt to /r/localllama and /r/sillytavernai) never tweak the samplers.
You must not be doing much real work with these models, otherwise you would know that with the latest Claude models you can't even adjust the temperature or top p/k
The real way to actually get a good output has always been in the prompt, not these parameters
No, I do not. Good for me I guess.
What an absurd claim.
Have fun toying around with your local models and leave the real work to the rest of us buddy
Have fun using web-interfaces for overpriced US models while I am getting my work done with Chinese models for a fraction of price on openrouter using API. Besides, when using API I am sure all American models, including Claude honour sampling settings.
No, they don't. That's the whole point. I've spent several hundred thousand dollars in API costs in the last few years to power my app, I think I know what I'm talking about. Nobody besides you is talking about web interfaces
Meanwhile you clearly have zero clue what you are talking about because a simple Google search would show you otherwise but that must be too difficult for you
Which is kinda sad, if you've used Anthropic products, because you could get comparable performance from cheaper models for vast majority of tasks.
Bad for them; do not use Anthropic then. Besides "the whole point" of conversation you have interrupted is that "low temperature and tight sampling produces stiff boring cliche prose" - which is truism, as those settings control the entropy of the output. And it is utterly irrelevant frankly if one has access to the Claude sampler through API or not; as Anthropic has apparently locked the sampler at very conservative temperature (probably as low as 0.2), there is no way to squeeze god prose out of it, as the logits have been severely messed up wrt to the actual word distribution in standard English.
Wrong: https://gist.github.com/Hellisotherpeople/71ba712f9f899adcb0...
Nice slop
You are flaunting your inability/unwillingness to use sampler settings.
What?
They aren't even available for the new Claude models which we use extensively so I think that should tell you something. I've made over $6 million with my AI app in the last few years without worrying about temperature and other parameters. What have you done?
Oh, wow.
Tells a lot about you.
Anthropic's public writing style is very different from Claude's because it's written by humans. Even in their job ads they ask candidates to not use AI for any writing (or at least they used to).
Makes sense. Steve jobs didn't let his kid touch apple devices.
The first rule of drug dealers: Don't use your own drug!
The phrase is, "don't get high on your own supply."
One of the Ten AI Commandments.
Yes. AIs are a lot better at coding than they are at writing. I author less than 1% of the code I push these days, but still write the grand majority of emails and posts. Probably I would do it 100% human if it was high stakes and I expected it to be read by millions.
Same reason the tech execs kids aren't using the tools created by their parents
You think Tim Cook's kids don't use iPhones? Or that Larry Ellison's kids don't use Oracle Financial Services Adaptive Intelligence Foundation for Anti Money Laundering Application?
Steve Jobs famously didn't let his kids use iPads (and restricted their access to tech pretty heavily, it seems). If you watch the Social Dilemma, it's full of people who invented what we consider fundamental tech, but don't let their families use any of it because they can see the problems it causes. It makes the techno-optimism ring pretty hollow.
Let's not conflate "this technology isn't for kids" with "this technology is bad", though. I wouldn't want my kids using a tablet, but I wouldn't want anyone using a gun.
I wouldn't let kids use a sharp kitchen knife either, but it is still something that everyone benefits from owning.
But do we really benefit from smartphones?
Related:
Silicon Valley Executives Are Tech Fans. Just Not for Their Kids
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49396742
There are many different ways to make an LLM sound more human-like (the author has actually explicitly mentioned ChatGPT sounds more natural). For their public announcements etc. they might as well used specially trained small 24-32B creative writing model or put a LoRA on top of their Haiku. One could also use "antislop" samplers, maybe some encoder-decoder unslopping postprocessing small models etc. Or they simply may have been written by humans.
I don't see why Anthropic would be expected to publish default Claude voice or use Claude for their public writing. No matter how great AI is, it doesn't commit you to using it for everything.
And they probably know basic LLM tricks like "write it in the style of X".
When you read a blog post with Claude voice, you're seeing the result of someone who couldn't even be bothered to do that which is why they deserve extra lashings.