Hah, yeah even when you put it in AGENTS.md or a skill.. constantly having to remind it.. "what does AGENTS.md" say about doing that?".. Thinking.. Thinking.. "Oh, it says I should never do that, I'll remember that next time.."

Next session - same thing.

I’m pretty sure the big bois don’t do it because it would undermine “confidence”.

Seeing a model output “Oh I should just delete blah. Wait blah is a production service, I shouldn’t touch that. Maybe I can gain access to blah? Oh the aws cli isn’t signed in to blah. I see kubectl has access to blah though! Wait, I should ask user permission first.”

Yeaaaaah. Thinking tokens are fuckin’ wild.

I suspect that they specifically train Grok to be able to work well with military personnel -- speaking the way they speak: brief, to the point, efficient communication. Personally I really like this. Claude sounds like some demented clown from the marketing department.

I do think an infrastructure where another Claude retranslates the output would be better. Oftentimes I forget to put it in the actual prompt and when I receive back 8 paragraphs of Claudeish I ask for it then.

I would have to disagree that it gets as grating as Claudeish though. Its just direct and professional instead of ring-around-the-rosy clickbait.

I've found that prompting any constraint on output (length, style, vocab, even simple formatting) not only places additional cognitive load on the model, which burns some of whatever cognitive budget is available, it will also often skew the output in other subtle and completely unrelated ways.

Since I found this artifact interesting, I did some pretty extensive experiments a couple months ago. The increased load is real, although it may not be apparent if you're not near any cognitive boundaries. The subtle skew, however, seems nearly ever-present regardless of load.

It burns more tokens but is the only way to get tolerable text.

Literally every one, even 1-2 prompts later it starts to go back

This happens most though when the speaker doesn't (or care to) understand their audience.

Eg i find effective communication requires expertise in both the subject matter domain but also the reference of the listener. Eg in ELI5 framing, if you don't know what information 5yr olds are expected to know you'll do a poor job at an ELI5.

It often feels like Claude does poorly at both framing the response relative to what it "thinks" the listener knows, but also the prose is... sideways, just weird as you said.

Agreed. Do you think it's due to that EU issue of making AI text be identifiable?

As for the wording of the prompt, you're pretty on point, I created a custom output style targeting mostly the first two you have there. Some people have wording that demands a certain technical standard or uses fancy words to describe what to avoid, but I haven't seen evidence those work better than asking plainly and I suspect the opposite: LLMs mimic the user to a degree so talking to it in terms of technical specifications and fancy words is an invitation to get them back.

Just because something is difficult to understand doesn't mean it's fraud, although if someone is trying to dazzle you with clever words and names of institutions you recognize because they are selling you something, there's a good chance they're lying to you in order to get some money from you.

Bingo! And on this axis many SOTA models fail miserably. These things are acting on my behalf under my direction. All the supposed intelligence in the world means fuck-all if nobody can understand it.

And like somebody else said… when meat-based humans talk like Claude does, it almost always means they either don’t understand what they are talking about, or are actively trying to conceal something and are a fraud. Not always, but almost always.

It's best for brain storming, rabbit holes, and image recognition.

Let the big models do the heavy lifting for now.

   // `HANDLE` is an opaque kernel handle (kernel32 validates and returns 0/FALSE
   // on a non-console handle); every out-param is `&mut T` to a `#[repr(C)]` POD,
   // ABI-identical to the Win32 `LP*` pointer (thin non-null). The reference type
   // encodes the only pointer-validity precondition, so `safe fn` discharges the
   // link-time proof. (`bun_windows_sys::kernel32` declares these with `*mut`;
   // redeclared locally so the legacy-conhost cursor path below is plain calls.)

   // Progress's terminal handle is the canonical `output::File` (vtable-backed
   // stderr/File from `OutputSinkVTable`). The duplicate `ProgressTerminalVTable`
   // from B-0 round 1 is removed; tty/ansi/winsize route through    the new
   // `OutputSinkVTable` slots so `bun_core` stays T0 (no `bun_sys` dep).

Can't say I've ever heard anyone implying that colonialists leaving Belgium was unjust. Colonialists is actually not the right word, more like extended occupation, only slightly better than the enslavement of the Leopold II era. The Belgian's were less than 1% of the population and all but an ancillary amount worked in exploiting the native population.

Make a galaxy model search the space, create a document, argue and defend decisions, then hand it to 2.5 to implement. 4.6 was a slower less enjoyable version of that.

4.7 is better at "I want the button to cancel the jobs, dont make any mistakes" but honestly that's not what I use it's class for.

Like the whole pizza parlor pedo basement thing, people will death grip stupid stuff because they are so desperate to manifest the worst possible image of those unaligned with them.

The problem is that it blows up in their face and just makes them look unreliable, dumb, and lost.

Musk has done so many objectively bad things that there is no need for people to dilute their reputation on fringe theories and interpretations. Pushing the nazi thing just gives Musk ammo that his detractors are so desperate that they need freeze frames and hidden context to make him look bad.

If you want him to get the benefit of the doubt about his "hand gesture" then it would help if he wasn't promoting far-right parties all over Europe.

There are also interesting inheritance rules with SVG, so you could define the basic shape of a key, well, several shapes, just as rects in the defs, with no stroke or fill specified.

Then, at the group level, you can then specify stroke and fill, so there could be a group of normal keys, another group for modifiers, function keys and so on.

Then there are the keys themselves, how do you clone a shape and put different text inside each clone? There are many ways to do this but I think you are on the right track using the clip path approach, albeit using the rects in the defs.

What is interesting about SVG is that artists don't care for the file format, they just see text as shapes on a page. Then programmers don't care for SVG as that is a graphic designer/artworker thing. So SVG sits in this witch-space, with only a few brave enough to wade in and do cool stuff.

Given your application, and given the fun that could be had with SMIL/JS, you could make your SVG files interactive, so you press a key and a popover tells you more about what that key does. You can even get audio working in SVG, as well as HTML popovers (in foreignobjects, as buttons, but working, nonetheless).

'Views' is another interesting SVG feature. I have a sprite sheet that uses a lot of views, where you are projecting your SVG into some type of virtual canvas, taking a 'picture' of it, and then incorporating that in something else, maybe a CSS variable.

One 'deadly addiction' is animation. Filters are another 'deadly addiction'. Why have a static and actually useful diagram, when you can animate it, move the 'camera' and add the equivalent of 27 Photoshop layers as filters to everything?

For example, supposing you wanted to show what keys to press, with there being modifiers and a sequence, e.g. 'Hello World!'. The animation for one letter could be what triggers the animation for the next 'key press' and so it goes.

My top tip of all: reposition the origin (0,0) to where it makes sense. Many objects have symmetry, so you can define one side, clone it, scale it (-1,1) and do it all around 0,0 to then translate the results to somewhere sensible.

I have found the JetBrains IDEs to be extremely useful for SVG, the preview feature is very helpful, as are the code hints.

AI sort of knows SVG, so I have had some suggestions from Google on how to build filters. These never work, but they do get you thinking. Say you wanted to use filters to add specular highlights and animated shadows to the keys, that would be fair game for AI hints on how to do it.

I've tried the latest models across OpenAI, Claude, Chinese, etc. They just do stuff. That's not how work is though. You want them to do specific work, at which point it's a real hassle to follow up on all the garbage they have been outputting.

/long rant

I can't help much more than that, I did that research in the last few days, but I never used Grok myself.

I pay for GPT, Claude and Gemini. Last week I consumed all my quota on two of them, so I wondered which next subscription I would pay for if needed.

What's superficial about refusing to use a product from someone like that? Or are you one of those 'technology isn't about politics' people? That's a superficial take if you ask me.

All technology is political, and understanding that is a deep, not superficial take. It requires systems thinking which unfortunately many people building technology seem to lack, despite software being a sophisticated complex system.

I'm still never going to use an xAI product.

If a shitty murderous tyrant builds some roads the citizens can still use those roads while protesting against the tyrant

https://x.com/greg_horvay/status/2100764473392820433?s=20