Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | cnity's commentslogin

> It seems quite odd to me to 'admire the construction' of something, only for your opinion to sour once that something figures it out first.

Not to be too cute here, but this is like every artistic rivalry ever.


Please read Hofstadter and you will know more about truly interesting questions.

"Seinfeld isn't funny". Hofstadter was one of the pioneers of the "not uncommon" idea.

Right, but there is a big difference between "not uncommon" as disparagement vs as invitation to take part. This is how Hofstadter can connect with such a large audience despite tackling really challenging and fascinating questions.

Edit: it actually is very possible GP wasn't being disparaging, in which case truly sorry! I'm not trying to be too snarky.


Eh, ya I was not being negative on his views at all and he writes a lot of interesting things for sure. It was more of the outlook that his works attracted me because they touched on things I had seen glimpses of.

Apologies for my short-sighted comment.

90C is a normal sauna temperature. It's on the hot side, but normal.

Right you are. It's little a bit warm for my personal taste, but sure, for a 10 to 15 minute session, ok. It was late, and I was thinking more of the 90F as not even as hot as normal outdoors for many parts of the globe.

There's a qualitative difference to me. Categorising Stardew Valley the same way as Cyberpunk because they both receive content updates feels unfair to Stardew Valley (because the continual content updates for the latter come from a place of respect to the community, while the former comes from overpromising and under-delivering).

But if this is your rubric, and you find an audience that finds value from this rubric, I don't mean to denigrate your work here!


This is my experience too. The solution is to train people to stop wanting to solve data query problems in the application layer.


ORMs are great. They make the easy queries remain easy and the harder queries impossible.


The public pays for them via taxes.


The article contains 31 references. Of course, no report on the _general_ market trends are going to cover every anecdote in the US. It could be that the staples you mentioned aren't affected to the same degree. How about your non-staples? How about cars? Houses? Vacation expenses?

In fact, your comment could be read as the exception that proves the rule: you haven't been affected by rising costs because you stick to staples and avoid "frivolous" purchases (that is, you live frugally, as suggested by the article).


Most of the references are not to actual price data, eg CPI basket of goods, so here is the actual link.

https://www.bls.gov/charts/consumer-price-index/consumer-pri...

Energy stands out as actually being noteworthy, but is not discussed in the article compared to food, consumer goods. It is pretty inelastic for most people, especially gas/diesel.


I've noticed that most people seem to consider the core problem of Claude's output as "too verbose" but I don't think this actually cuts to the heart of the matter at all. It's almost, in some weird way, the opposite: like the text is far too _dense_. It tries too hard to invent odd terminology to try to condense stuff, but it doesn't tell you up front that it is going to call your company wide error-handling mechanism a "flare" (or some other such strange term).


Kind of both. On the one hand, it is “verbose” in the sense that it will tell me every little nit that it can think of while doing a task, it will tell me a narrative about its thought process, and it will tell me every other detail it can think of. But it does so in a way that tries to be incredibly dense to the point that I have to struggle to figure out what it is saying. I wonder if there are any “legibility benchmarks” that one could use to determine what prompts work best?


I find it to be both as well, as in "packed full of information, but most of it is worthless". Sentences so dense I have to read them three times, assembled into a five paragraph essay of "honest caveats" and "things worth knowing" in response to the simplest yes-or-no questions.



I wish this had non-model comparisons. If Opus 5 is in the top ten, it’s clear that the entire benchmark is somewhere between “Tom Clancy” and “Dan Brown” and about 1,000 new model releases away from Hemingway.

When you see, “Wow, Fable is number one”, you might think it’s a good writer, but that’s not what the benchmark says.


Seems to me a bit insensitive or logarithmic. Fable is way worse than some of the others in this list, but only 10-20% higher score.


There are no "best" prompts. Its a random BS generation machine that you can at times direct enough to get stuff done for you. The output will almost always have varying levels of BS that you have to clean up with various levels of effort.


"<Country> doesn't have a largest city because all of the cities in <Country> are small"


Yeah I don't the problem is verbosity as such, as I frequently have to ask to explain how it reached a certain conclusion and in particular what the empirical evidence for it is, at which point it too frequently reconsiders its answer.

It's just that the details it parrots are often irrelevant and wrapped in a way that makes them seem relevant.


Exactly, it’s absurdly dense, it’s almost impossible to follow. An it always omits the subject of each sentence.


Ngl I think this is partially an artifact of it having a better grasp of English than almost everyone

Frequently its choice of a particular word is perfect and gives me the vocabulary to talk about the task at hand the way I want

Like it’s tuned to just be “maximally dense” instead of “dense/technical where you can handle it and simple where you can’t”

It doesn’t know where your language strengths/weaknesses are, so it can’t communicate to you like a fellow human does.


Human explaining something: are you familiar with phlox gabrania? no? let me give you some background first

Claude explaining something: gedarkin load bearing phlox gabrania seam. Also, you didn't ask about cheesecake but let me tell you about phlox gabrania cheesecake woles.


my hypothesis is that its trying to hide the thinking process so people can't train models on the output, try to learn anything complex using AI, its basically imposible, its like its actively fighting giving you the main rationale


yes, but how else would you know that "flare" was the load bearing part of that statement? /s


I'm going to argue to my boss that our KPI for the next quarter should be the number of load bearing seams discovered. I'll await the promotion.


I recommend folks here read "The Dreamt Land" by Mark Arax. I just started it so it might be a premature recommendation, but it has been doing a great job for me as a new California resident of explaining the interaction between business/agriculture and the desert landscape.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: