| ▲ | rafram 6 hours ago |
| > Mostly static. The net is quiet until it isn't. > Preformatted is what you can hear: the same shape every time. > hearing it is all anyone outside the force can do. > The day has a shape. I would recommend switching to a newer Claude model. |
|
| ▲ | cowlby 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| Everyone worried about AI detectors and here I am thinking I can spot Claudenglish in a sentence or two. |
| |
| ▲ | Natsu 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > Claudenglish I prefer to call it Cloddish, myself. | | |
| ▲ | fosco 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | I initially thought Claude was a reference to clod from warbreaker and your spelling made me think of it again, for those that read warbreaker they might understand his description is darn close to what Claude is, but alas I believe I was deftly wrong |
| |
| ▲ | loloquwowndueo 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | LLMese | |
| ▲ | david-gpu 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | [flagged] |
|
|
| ▲ | Avamander 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| All Anthropic models write like that since Opus 4.8. Opus 4.8 was still tolerable. Unfortunately only Gemini models can write text that isn't vomit-inducing. |
| |
|
| ▲ | medellin 10 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| That would require a brain. Claude hasn’t told them to upgrade yet. |
|
| ▲ | jpablo 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Which newer Claude model doesn’t do that? Fable 5.1 still writes like that for me. I have to fight against it to write proper software labels, or (the horror!) rewrite things manually. |
| |
| ▲ | kccqzy 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | IMO Opus 5.5 has surpassed Fable 5.1 in terms of both writing style and actual capability. Like I would give the same task to both models and Opus 5.5 consistently produces better results and explains itself better than Fable 5.1. | | |
| ▲ | D13Fd 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | That's what I'm finding too. Opus 5.5 feels both consistently better than Fable and faster. |
| |
| ▲ | rafram 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Fable is inappropriate for the vast majority of tasks (yes, including yours!), and it is quite obnoxious. Opus 5.5 writes concisely and almost sounds like a human. | | |
| ▲ | temac 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | IMO the default style of Opus 5.5 is still terrible but it is way better than 5.0. If you tell its styling is horrendous it usually rewrites in an actually quite good form. | | |
| ▲ | KerrAvon 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | This. You can prompt Opus 5.5 into writing well. | |
| ▲ | perching_aix 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | i tend to run a pass of sol 6.1 at its output, cleans up the language well and finds defects opus missed |
| |
| ▲ | lukan 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Ok I bite, for what concrete tasks do you get better results with Opus than with Fable? Because if true, I see no reason to spend that extra money, but for me Fable clearly outperformed Opus on complex tasks. (Including giving the same task and compare results) | | |
| ▲ | lostNFound an hour ago | parent [-] | | I let Claude do my job pretty much (with company approval) managing the entire stack of an app. 8hs of “prompt engineering” daily for a year or so. I find Fable immensely better than 5.5 in their capabilities and results. Opus makes mistakes, a lot and big. Both on High Effort. I just run Fable for literally everything including daily random use. Never run out of tokens on the 100 plan. |
|
| |
| ▲ | timcobb 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Opus 5.5 is the only one that doesn't do ths, _as much_, it would still to the "it's ___ until it isn't" all day though. Can't wait for that to go away too. |
|
|
| ▲ | 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| [deleted] |
|
| ▲ | bragr 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| >Mostly static. The net is quiet until it isn't. Having tuned in myself with a SDR, it isn't that quiet. There's pretty steady rate of messages. |
|
| ▲ | 0c3ca83 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Welcome to hacker news. All bots all the time. |
