There is an old saying back home: an idiot never tires, only sweats.

Claude isn't tenacious. It is an idiot that never stops digging because it lacks the meta cognition to ask 'hey, is there a better way to do this?'. Chain of thought's whole raison d'etre was so the model could get out of the local minima it pushed itself in. The issue is that after a year it still falls into slightly deeper local minima.

This is fine when a human is in the loop. It isn't what you want when you have a thousand idiots each doing a depth first search on what the limit of your credit card is.

> it lacks the meta cognition to ask 'hey, is there a better way to do this?'.

Recently had an AI tell me this code (that it wrote) is a mess and suggested wiping it and starting from scratch with a more structure plan. That seems to hint at some meta cognition outlines

I mean, not always. I've seen Claude step back and reconsider things after hitting a dead end, and go down a different path. There are also workflows, loops that can increase the likelihood of this occurring.

[dead]