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.

Makes sense. Steve jobs didn't let his kid touch apple devices.

The first rule of drug dealers: Don't use your own drug!

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.

I’ve read the link, but I don’t get how it’s relevant to the OP’s point that Anthropic public communications don’t sound like Claude. Can you enlighten me?

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?

Related:

Silicon Valley Executives Are Tech Fans. Just Not for Their Kids

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49396742

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.

gate= some sort of a guard or test

name= a variable name or fields

load bearing= coupled dependencies that can break other things if you change it

Claude Code's creative use of language in an engineering context is often quite infuriating. I want language to be as simple as possible, it should be accessible and require as little context as possible. Below are a few examples that Code wrote that I encountered in my own work (related to signal processing):

"excursion" (means: a spike/jump — a value that rises or deviates from baseline, just say spike or outlier)

"legitimate majority-normal baseline" (means: a real majority of normal pixels)

"matched pool of pure-noise ('normal') pixels" (means: the same number of normal pixels, don't bring pools into this)

"ablation" (means: comparing before vs. after — turning a thing on/off to see what changes)

I actually used Claude Code to try and find examples like these but not entirely unexpectedly it had a very hard time detecting these, even though I encounter them like every other sentence. I can imagine this style is great when writing prose, not so much when writing documentation.

Similarly, I tried using Claude Design to make some slides, and the individual slides were fine, but just about every other slide it used different words to denote the same concept, which I would say is the fastest way to lose your audience.

> wanted a clear discourse about a complex topic with people whose native language is not English.

Did you try specifically telling it that? I haven't used Fable but I do write lots of docs for a non native audience and I get good results from stating that.

> And they probably know basic LLM tricks like "write it in the style of X".

You can probably get it to do a surface-level impression of Mark Twain that way, but from what I've heard, it's not that easy to prompt Claude out of the "voice" described in the article for technical writing, and all existing methods, like asking it to ELI5 or tropes.fyi, only have partial success.

> or put a LoRA on top of their Haiku

Are there any creative-writing LORAs published for open-weight models?

Why would they use Haiku for anything? They aren't paying for the tokens.

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?