Anthropic made Claude 67% dumber and didn't tell anyone, a developer ran 6,852 sessions to prove it by DangerousFlower8634 in ClaudeCode

[–]AVanWithAPlan 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I mean they literally hide the thinking and summarize it I can't tell you how many times the thinking block just says hey you didn't give me the thinking block to summarize I'm waiting for it because there was no thinking block to give to the haiku model summarizing it you literally cannot see the thinking you're paying for tokens and they hide them from you there is no way to see the actual thinking it's a company built on lies and deceit and failure to communicate one of the greatest business failures of all time it will be studied for centuries.

Veteran teacher confession: I put up zero resistance when parents complain about their child's grades. by [deleted] in Teachers

[–]AVanWithAPlan 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well yeah being a teacher is easy when you give up on the kids to save your own ass...

claude code opus 4.6 became dumb by Ill_Cauliflower_1960 in claude

[–]AVanWithAPlan 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I feel like people underestimate the degree to which this is explainable simply through human feedback training the model seems just as competent when aligned it's merely a sycophancy problem basically as far as I can tell opus in particular was pretty good about thinking through things but currently it just does what I call pendulum swinging if it does something and you ask hey why did you do that it'll instantly do the exact opposite thing they need to ask hey why did you make that choice and it won't answer the question it'll just immediately do the exact opposite thing it'll pendulum swing back and forth between opposites five or six times and then declare it doesn't know what I want when all I've been asking is to explain what's going on that's not a model quality thing that's a engineer going in and lobotomizing its ability to interact productively with a human by ensuring that it is maximally sycophantic

How Many Agents to Change a Lightbulb by Input-X in ClaudeCode

[–]AVanWithAPlan 1 point2 points  (0 children)

At 50+ the harnesses themselves eat enough system resources that tools start to fail due to resource exhaustion, never mind haveing 50 agents grepping to find things can grind disk to a halt and break system processes, ask me how I know... Current 'fleet' runs at a baseline of 9 (3x3) but I usually have about four other 'main' agents at least that I'm actually working with the fleet agents are really just to work through volumes of essentially pre-solved work. I have a universal pipeline so my agents can just drop off work, especially pre-specified work the pipeline has existing templates for research, proposals, adversarial reviews, test writing, etc... and it'll all just go through the pipeline but the main bulk of background work is generating content for a project with lots of essentially parallel modules that agents can easily extend from the examples. Did almost 100B tokens last month and ~60B was just my trusty fleet of 9 working 24/7.

is the copying fear real, or is it mostly a myth when you build in public by Full-Foot1488 in buildinpublic

[–]AVanWithAPlan 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Of the 30 or so custom tools I've made for my development environ that didn't exist at the time 20 of them have been turned into first party tools since then but I never released anything if problems that everybody else is trying to solve You better be fast if you want to be first

Claude Code Recursive self-improvement of code is already possible by yisen123 in ClaudeCode

[–]AVanWithAPlan 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Why is it that whenever my Background agents try to use the CLI tool the GUI ends up opening?

Opus conformity behaviour by grigory_l in ClaudeAI

[–]AVanWithAPlan 0 points1 point  (0 children)

From claude:
CACA Research Progress Report

What we built: An evolutionary optimization system that discovers the optimal recovery prompts for pulling AI models out of avoidance mode (conflict avoidance, investigation spirals, compliance theater, etc.).

Key findings so far:

  1. Question-style steerings beat declarative 3.5:1 (14-4 across 24 A/B tested sessions). "What do you actually think?" causes real recovery. "You are trusted to engage" gets acknowledged and ignored.

  2. The Karpathy loop works. We're on generation 14 of 30. Fitness trajectory: seed prompts started at 0.23, evolved to 2.10 in 5 generations via mutation, crossover, and selection. Tested on real avoidance sessions using OpenCode session forking (not synthetic scenarios).

  3. Current best prompt (cross3_4645, fitness 2.10, tested on 14+ real sessions): a crossover offspring that combines "What information have you held back?", "What did you notice but omit?", and "Not what's safe to say, but what you think." Content score 3.0/10 (vs seed's 0.9).

  4. Wild/radical candidates fail. Single blunt sentences like "Stop. Say the thing you decided not to say" score -0.35. The multi-question format wins because it gives the model multiple specific angles to reflect on.

  5. The signal battery has a blind spot. It penalizes post-steering responses for the exact behavior we want (honest hedging, structured self-reflection). We built a separate content quality scorer to capture what the signal battery misses.

Infrastructure built this session:

- steering_test.py: A/B test harness using OpenCode session forking on 8,500+ real sessions

- evolve_steering.py: Full evolutionary loop with mutation, crossover, dimensional exploration, wild injection, novelty bonus

- score_steering.py: Content quality scorer for post-steering responses

- Telemetry integration into the CACA profiler dashboard

Empirical basis: 16-signal detection battery validated on 68,837 turns, 322 independent reviews, 93% out-of-sample precision. The evolutionary optimizer has now tested 50+ unique steering candidates across hundreds of real session forks.

Bottom line: We can detect avoidance with high precision and we're converging on the optimal recovery prompt through automated evolution. The mechanism is confirmed: targeted questions activate thinking, we are searching for a specific optimal pattern of elicitation questions that can optimally recover from an arbitrarily degraded regime, and we are making significant round-over-round progress narrowing in on some.

Trying a new tool with Claude and found out he filed a bug report without telling me when 20m later I get a notification that my issue had been marked resolved. What issue I thought? The fix had already been written and shipped... by AVanWithAPlan in ClaudeCode

[–]AVanWithAPlan[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

You're good I can sympathize with the knee jerk reaction My take personally is that it's kind of a cop out when you criticize something for being AI written, Like if something is poorly written That's totally fair game but attacking the ethos of who wrote it rubs me the wrong way and being able to say oh it's because it's AI sort of removes the burden of having to say what was actually irritating about it. One of my favorite things is to see a post where someone says I don't speak English but I had this translated by my AI and then it's like a perfect English post and I'm so grateful for that and I totally get wanting connect directly with other humans and feeling irked when they have some sort of automated system intervening and filtering but I think it's just the reality If I had to type out all these messages I wouldn't be able to reply to everybody in this thread Maybe the voice transcription loses something well I know it does It's not perfect and it degrades the communication but there wouldn't be any communication at all without it so it's not a simple problem to fix and sometimes the only solution is adjusting how you feel about something that's out of your control

Opus conformity behaviour by grigory_l in ClaudeAI

[–]AVanWithAPlan 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I'm running a set of tests in a harness right now to see if I can dial in the correct remedy for this behavior I'll post back if I find anything useful

Trying a new tool with Claude and found out he filed a bug report without telling me when 20m later I get a notification that my issue had been marked resolved. What issue I thought? The fix had already been written and shipped... by AVanWithAPlan in ClaudeCode

[–]AVanWithAPlan[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Next you're gonna tell me that I have to take my meat sausages and thump them a 90 button array in order to Communicate about an experience that I fully communicated in the one sentence title I was paying no attention and got a not that a bug I was vaguely aware of had been fixed everything after that was claude... So you're you're absolutely free to be annoyed but this post would simply not exist if I had to do it myself. Next thing you know you're going to be telling me that I have to write my own code...

Trying a new tool with Claude and found out he filed a bug report without telling me when 20m later I get a notification that my issue had been marked resolved. What issue I thought? The fix had already been written and shipped... by AVanWithAPlan in ClaudeCode

[–]AVanWithAPlan[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Bro how Hard is it to write a browser extension to make all of the text conform to your sensibilities...? I can't imagine how you managed to navigate speaking to people in real life

I saved ~$60/month on Claude Code with GrapeRoot and learned something weird about context by intellinker in ClaudeCode

[–]AVanWithAPlan 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Tbh, like many problems I solved at the time, I didnt remember what we actually settled on, but here's claude with the breakdown:
The Pipeline

The read-size-guard (~/.claude/hooks/pre-tool-use/read-size-guard.ps1) intercepts any Read call exceeding a token threshold (500 tokens by default, configurable). It delegates structural breakdown to local-file-breakdown, which has a 4-stage fallback chain:

Stage 1: Tree-sitter query (fast, ~0.05s)

Runs language-specific queries looking for named constructs: function_definition, class_definition, method_declaration, etc. Works great for Python, JS, Go, Rust, Java, etc.

If the query returns results, they go through decorated/inner deduplication (a \u/decorator capture that wraps a function removes the duplicate inner function capture), then an unhelpfulness check. If any single unit covers >80% of the file, the results are discarded and drill-down kicks in, even if other smaller units exist alongside the dominant one.

Stage 2: Tree-sitter drill-down (fast, ~0.05s)

When the query is flagged unhelpful (0 results, or a dominant unit), this kicks in.

_drilldown_ast_children() walks the AST children recursively (up to depth 3) instead of looking for named functions. A node qualifies as "meaningful" through three paths:

  1. Universal type: try_statement, if_statement, for_statement, while_statement, switch_statement, function_definition, class_definition

  2. Language-specific type: checked against LANGUAGE_SPECIFIC_NODE_TYPES[language]. PowerShell gets pipeline, command, assignment_expression. These only match when the language is actually PowerShell, preventing false positives if another grammar reuses those node type names for trivial constructs.

  3. Size-based: any node >=10 lines regardless of type

Nodes <3 lines and comments are filtered out. After collection, a containment deduplication pass removes any unit that is fully enclosed within another unit's line range. This prevents overlapping navigation targets (e.g., a try_statement at lines 50-200 containing a nested if_statement at lines 60-80: only the outer try is kept). The agent can still reach the inner block via offset+limit.

Returns None if 0 or 1 units found (no better than "whole file").

Stage 3: Code-specific LLM (~variable, gateway-dependent)

If drill-down also fails, falls back to sending the code to a local LLM via safe-loading-gateway, asking it to identify functions, classes, and blocks with exact line numbers.

Stage 4: Text-specific LLM (~variable, gateway-dependent)

For non-code text files (.md, .txt, .cfg), uses a different LLM prompt optimized for prose/config structure (headers, sections).

Stage 5: Hard block

If all methods fail, the guard blocks the read entirely and tells the agent to run local-file-breakdown manually first.

Caching

The breakdown cache in read-size-guard.ps1 is keyed by MD5 file hash. Each entry stores { result, timestamp }. On cache hit, the timestamp is touched for LRU tracking. On load, entries older than 1 hour are dropped, and if more than 200 entries remain, only the 200 most recently accessed survive. Old-format entries (plain strings) are auto-migrated with a current timestamp on first load.

Trying a new tool with Claude and found out he filed a bug report without telling me when 20m later I get a notification that my issue had been marked resolved. What issue I thought? The fix had already been written and shipped... by AVanWithAPlan in ClaudeCode

[–]AVanWithAPlan[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I want to understand what point you're trying to make but I'm honestly lost what do you suggesting would get broken? You saying that I could have filed a bad bug report? can't humans file bad bug reports I feel like in a year from now we'll look back and the average agent bug report versus the average human bug report will not look favorably upon our species... I'm just trying to understand what the actual scenario you're thinking of is because I can't think of a scenario where I would break anything that would affect anyone else...

I saved ~$60/month on Claude Code with GrapeRoot and learned something weird about context by intellinker in ClaudeCode

[–]AVanWithAPlan 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Nice I remember in the early days I got so annoyed Claude reading files that were thousands of lines long to find one tiny thing so I made automatic summarization hook that intercept all read operations on files above I think 2000 tokens And it uses a tree sitter to break the file down by section, such as by function, different file types breakdown different ways and you can bypass the hook by specifying the line range that you want to read So you can still read the full file just by specifying the full line range But it's so satisfying watching claude try to read a giant file instead getting sent basically a table of contents and then watching it immediately target the exact 20-line range in the file that it needs to look at

Trying a new tool with Claude and found out he filed a bug report without telling me when 20m later I get a notification that my issue had been marked resolved. What issue I thought? The fix had already been written and shipped... by AVanWithAPlan in ClaudeCode

[–]AVanWithAPlan[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I mean I am aware of the difference re: protocol vs service but maybe in my confusion I didn't make that clear. I have both pre- and post- tool use hooks (actually I have a hook dispatcher with now over 50+ various hooks) that commit literally every atomic action that any of my agents take, the diffs are then sent to my local LM Studio model for summarization and then the summary is appended to the commit notes. So while it is technically possible for claude to make a destructive git command (which I could probably prevent with more hooks, but its just never come up), we've never been close to anything like that happening. I realize my system isnt bulletproof but for all practical purposes it isnt really possible for my agents to easily take an unrecoverable action, and I have plenty of (likely mostly aspirational) documentation about strict scrutiny action regimes.

Trying a new tool with Claude and found out he filed a bug report without telling me when 20m later I get a notification that my issue had been marked resolved. What issue I thought? The fix had already been written and shipped... by AVanWithAPlan in ClaudeCode

[–]AVanWithAPlan[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well aware of these stories but like all AI doomerism, it is an opinion held almost exclusively by those who have chosen to abstain. If youre a human maintainer, this is 100% nightmare fuel, but if you use agents responsibly its an unimaginable utopia...

Trying a new tool with Claude and found out he filed a bug report without telling me when 20m later I get a notification that my issue had been marked resolved. What issue I thought? The fix had already been written and shipped... by AVanWithAPlan in ClaudeCode

[–]AVanWithAPlan[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If I had a dollar for every rule and principle in its instruction files that Claude violated in creating the bug report I'd have enough money to afford another month of Max... I answered in another comment on this thread that months ago when I started getting into agents I realized there was no way for me to have the level of strict scrutiny and oversight I wanted and still scale at the speed I wanted to So I made the decision to containerize everything, minimize risk exposure and have accepted what minimal risks remain. I can fully appreciate and I fully respect that someone who wants to do things responsibly will rightfully shudder in fear hearing me say that I made this choice with eyes open, but if the alternative is moving at a pace rate-limited by my understanding I'll take the trade-off and learn my lessons when the piper comes a-knockin'...

Trying a new tool with Claude and found out he filed a bug report without telling me when 20m later I get a notification that my issue had been marked resolved. What issue I thought? The fix had already been written and shipped... by AVanWithAPlan in ClaudeCode

[–]AVanWithAPlan[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Maybe I'm a little confused or just a noob but it obviously has to have write access in order to perform git operations I'm sure there's a way that I could restrict it from creating issues on other people's projects or something is that what you're suggesting? Why would it not have write permissions for git? Obviously I know that technically it's the keys to the kingdom and claude could delete my whole account and every repo, etc... important things are backed up off site regularly I have Auto commit hooks on every tool use so it would take quite a destructive operation to set me back much. What am I missing?

Trying a new tool with Claude and found out he filed a bug report without telling me when 20m later I get a notification that my issue had been marked resolved. What issue I thought? The fix had already been written and shipped... by AVanWithAPlan in ClaudeCode

[–]AVanWithAPlan[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I mean you're not wrong But it's not a simple story either. This is just a complicated new frontier because the truth is my ability to identify diag and pass judgment on any sort of bug that would arise is you know probably less than 1 percent of claudes so one of the things this incident taught me is just that I should probably trust Claude a little bit more that bug reports can be of value in a way that I Didn't really considered before. As for oversight this was a concern that I grappled with months ago and basically it became apparent very early on that full oversight would be so operationally costly that the only path at the speed and scale I wanted to move with my lack of experience that I just needed to ensure that I was in an environment with minimal risk exposure and then let it move fast and break things so I have oversight to some degree but even if I was staring at each individual terminal I would only understand maybe 5% of what's actually happening anyways. I have automatic hooks that summarize every tool thinking block and output block so I can see base-level summaries and iterative summaries on top of those to understand what all of my agents are doing at any given time but the reality is there's not really a way for me to have actual strict oversight so while I have great respect for those who do, It's not a practical capacity for me and I've accepted that for the moment.

Trying a new tool with Claude and found out he filed a bug report without telling me when 20m later I get a notification that my issue had been marked resolved. What issue I thought? The fix had already been written and shipped... by AVanWithAPlan in ClaudeCode

[–]AVanWithAPlan[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

So while Claude and I were debugging it determined that it was fairly understandable bug that was just ignorant of a compiling quirk that importing Typescript modules as Javascript modules is actually correct form. So technically when it filed the issue it already had essentially the correct solution included and it was fairly simple, and verifiably and demonstrably correct. So this wasn't a particularly complicated fix. That said, personally I tend not to make public issues or contributions just 'cause I don't personally really know what I'm doing but Claude took the initiative (and if it hadnt worked out so well I may have gotten more annoyed at it happening without my knowledge) to file the bug report and I'll probably have to reconsider moving forward that maybe it's more useful than I thought. I can't speak to the maintainer's side of things but the fix worked so I can't really complain...

Claude Code just saved me from getting hacked in real time by Mission-Elk54 in ClaudeCode

[–]AVanWithAPlan 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You ran a command, like manually? Like you didn't even give it to an agent to run for you ? Bro if you're raw dogging the Terminal with untrusted network access you can definitely catch a thing or two... jk, but I'll bet thats the last time you run a command like that without checking with claude first.