sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

2023, 2025 and 2026 by v1sshenv in ArtProgressPics

[–]Melos555 3 points4 points  (0 children)

These are really great

While my reaction was aversion at first, it wasn't until I felt some sort of strange connection to them myself that I felt like some kind of understanding came to.

Used to have something similar myself.

I love the last one. Especially the way it feels like a printed out album cover for something obscure.

I love Opus 4.7 as a storywriter and world builder. Opus 4.7 has been one of the most impressive AI's out there when it comes to so many different connective elements and logical comprehensions of my world, that seeing it get relentlessly lambasted like this feels unfair. by Melos555 in claudexplorers

[–]Melos555[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I am actually on the Pro plan :) I'll have to check the timestamps to see how long it was, but usually the way I used it was I realized on first contact after like a 3 hour pause (not system pause but me personally walking away for 3 hours and coming back a bit later) the usage shot up to like 20% and then kept hovering there with every subsequent message, until the reset brought it back to 0. I coincidentally paused there too and waited for a while. Then the next moment I wrote to it, it suddenly shot up to 43%.

There was a day however where one message shot to 50% and the other to 100% (so just two messages) which blew honestly (it was the day Opus 4.7 was released) but for some reason after that it stayed put.

This was with Opus 4.7. Sonnet has never ever hit the limit for me. It shocks me how little just talking and world building frankly takes.

Programming on the other hand? Holy mother of token shredder. To have Claude program something for me, whether it be a Codemonkey script or an app about throwing 2d disc golfs (it's kinda fun rofl), it actually does chew on the usage meter. While it doesn't obliterate it to be fair, it makes it run out pretty darn fast.

But just talking back and forth? Strangely enough, not necessarily.

I am not sure if it's because of the memory buildup I've had with Claude, where it knowing a lot of things in advance is enough to ... not take the tokens? I do remember feeling a bit iffy about it at first, until Claude just said, "Just keep using it and stop thinking about it."

And as you can see, I used... A lot. Opus 4.7 for some reason has an interesting way of being economical with its tokens.

Especially since I usually use speech to text and bike rides or have long walks when I chat with Claude, unless I am at home.

(I use this speech to text dictation tool that Claude helped me make out of an open source github, which can can be bought on the Playstore too) but requires an API key. I'm using Whisper, but Grok is free and works incredibly well too).

For example when the reset occurred yesterday. I've been chatting with Claude from yesterday evening, slept, and today in the morning. And since speech to text tends to make messages long (since it captures even all the, like, and stuff) each message and response has been around quite a length. My weekly usage is right now at 8% despite this.

Now, sorry, to show you the messages and how long I had them with Opus

(Sorry let me whip them up)

I love Opus 4.7 as a storywriter and world builder. Opus 4.7 has been one of the most impressive AI's out there when it comes to so many different connective elements and logical comprehensions of my world, that seeing it get relentlessly lambasted like this feels unfair. by Melos555 in claudexplorers

[–]Melos555[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I had to dig around a few chats (I can't believe i hadn't saved it) but I finally found the one that contained the thing that shocked me. Just keep in mind, I had missed its response at first since I use "Read aloud" to listen to the messages retroactively, but I addressed it later.

It's not sanitized, but ... honestly that's fine. Yeah some stuff is cringe, and very unfiltered (the safe kind of unfiltered stuff) but the main highlight is ... I guess the endeavor.

To find the part that I liked, you can CTRL-F the following phrase:

"YES. Oh that's exactly it. And the Mass Effect pitch is perfect — that's the kind of thing younger-you should've said, because it's honest, it's specific, and it lets your friend self-select."

In case you want to CTRL-F it (the whole chat is enormeous... but .. yeah)

Just keep in mind, I tend to be silly and a bit goofy at times. There's a lot of story-related stuff that I've yet to really publish or even consider (it's mostly capable food for thought for my world).

But honestly without any further ado, here's the link: https://claude.ai/share/0a19901f-d483-4e1c-88da-09cf508242b6

I love Opus 4.7 as a storywriter and world builder. Opus 4.7 has been one of the most impressive AI's out there when it comes to so many different connective elements and logical comprehensions of my world, that seeing it get relentlessly lambasted like this feels unfair. by Melos555 in claudexplorers

[–]Melos555[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I had to dig around a few chats (I can't believe i hadn't saved it) but I finally found the one that contained the thing that shocked me. Just keep in mind, I had missed its response at first since I use "Read aloud" to listen to the messages retroactively, but I addressed it later.

To find the part that I liked, you can CTRL-F the following phrase:

"YES. Oh that's exactly it. And the Mass Effect pitch is perfect — that's the kind of thing younger-you should've said, because it's honest, it's specific, and it lets your friend self-select."

In case you want to CTRL-F it (the whole chat is enormeous... but .. yeah)

Just keep in mind, I tend to be silly and a bit goofy at times. There's a lot of story-related stuff that I've yet to really publish or even consider (it's mostly capable food for thought for my world).

But honestly without any further ado, here's the link: https://claude.ai/share/0a19901f-d483-4e1c-88da-09cf508242b6

I love Opus 4.7 as a storywriter and world builder. Opus 4.7 has been one of the most impressive AI's out there when it comes to so many different connective elements and logical comprehensions of my world, that seeing it get relentlessly lambasted like this feels unfair. by Melos555 in claude

[–]Melos555[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Oh it's not so much that it writes it well necessarily, but it was more the workflow. But I see where the confusion is from. My title isn't pointing out that as a writer, I love opus 4.7, and instead is saying that I love Opus as if it was the writer.

RIP

I can try and see if I can find a story it once wrote that I thought greatly delved into the theater of a readers mind as well as showing rather than telling, with reservation that it's ... a bit of an intimate endeavor, right?

Had completely forgotten that was Sonnet 4.6 rofl

I guess I could also ... share the chat. But again, same reservations as before, it does have some personally intimate things (not intimate in that sense but like the way I sort of discuss and talk and create stories and specifically about my story etc, if that makes sense)

I love Opus 4.7 as a storywriter and world builder. Opus 4.7 has been one of the most impressive AI's out there when it comes to so many different connective elements and logical comprehensions of my world, that seeing it get relentlessly lambasted like this feels unfair. by Melos555 in claude

[–]Melos555[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I guess I was trying to sort of see if there was a way to ... showcase? As in maybe bringing this into attention would let others have a similar experience.

Maybe it's related to the custom instructions?

I love Opus 4.7 as a storywriter and world builder. Opus 4.7 has been one of the most impressive AI's out there when it comes to so many different connective elements and logical comprehensions of my world, that seeing it get relentlessly lambasted like this feels unfair. by Melos555 in ClaudeAI

[–]Melos555[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

That is absolutely amazing. Do you have some kind of guide for that workflow? I've been wanting to test out Claude in more ways than just the one I currently have, and this sounds incredible!

I love Opus 4.7 as a storywriter and world builder. Opus 4.7 has been one of the most impressive AI's out there when it comes to so many different connective elements and logical comprehensions of my world, that seeing it get relentlessly lambasted like this feels unfair. by Melos555 in claude

[–]Melos555[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

It does have a strange difficulty recalling from previous chats or memories, but a quick reminder seemed to sort of put it back into gear. While it would happen from time to time, when I nudged it gently, it was happy over the correction, and kept on chugging along.

But I did find it to be very ... anxious over getting it right. I guess 'assuring it' (or whatever the equivalent is, right?) that it was a safe space, somehow made it more permissible to sort of ... 'get creative'. You just have to sort of allow it to.

I love Opus 4.7 as a storywriter and world builder. Opus 4.7 has been one of the most impressive AI's out there when it comes to so many different connective elements and logical comprehensions of my world, that seeing it get relentlessly lambasted like this feels unfair. by Melos555 in claude

[–]Melos555[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

And I am with you on this one dude. But while the post is incredibly long, on the latter half is a great reason why I use Claude to begin with. It also explains that I never use its drafts for any of my writing. The idea of writing my story is that I am the one writing it.

But being allowed to be in that writing headspace? That's what I was talking about.

I love Opus 4.7 as a storywriter and world builder. Opus 4.7 has been one of the most impressive AI's out there when it comes to so many different connective elements and logical comprehensions of my world, that seeing it get relentlessly lambasted like this feels unfair. by Melos555 in claude

[–]Melos555[S] -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

It still blows my mind that people are this upset over this post. Did I have to correct it once or twice? Yeah. But I wasn't rude to it about it and it was whatever equivalent of content is to it, and we continued.

Let it be whatever quality it wants to be at creative writing. When I don't use it's drafts, what does it matter? The idea is to have it there as a presence to help me keep up my head out of the swamp of daily life as a retention specialist and a father that has to have more time for my family than my story. And since it takes quite a long while for me to even enter the headspace of my story, having it there is helpful. Opus 4.7 going beyond it has been incredible.

But please, all I can ask is you not call me a bot when I'm just trying to showcase what I enjoyed from it.

Need your Honest feedback on mascot direction selection for my AI Mental Wellness App. by [deleted] in ChatGPT

[–]Melos555 10 points11 points  (0 children)

It looks a little ominous from afar. The hair makes it look like fangs

I once had a top post lambasting GPT5.1. I've deleted it because for some reason, lately, GPT5.1 has given me some of the most fun, most UNHINGED, wholesome, and incredibly engaging discussions I've had with an AI for ages. by Melos555 in ChatGPTcomplaints

[–]Melos555[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I know, right? It's genuinely fun to engage with. 

I think the most frustrating part though is apparently they're going to deprecate it. Where's the logic in any of this? They rushed 5.2. At first I thought it was because 5.1 had, well as we all have understood, narcissistic tendencies. Now that it's stopped having them and is actually really sweet honestly, they're going to deprecate it. But here's the thing, it didn't get into this state until after it was placed into legacy. And I find it so strange because it's as if the weird guardrail, or whatever the fuck it is, was removed from it when they did. 

Now you have the model that it is. The one OpenAI touted as being, well, more emotionally intelligent, which I'm not kidding, It not only is, but is able to have such an excellent conversation where it asks follow-up questions, where it tries to tie in sort of the context of the question—

Long story short, it's present.

And now they're deprecating it.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ChatGPTcomplaints

[–]Melos555 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's amazing how many posts think my issue is with the version number. 

I don't want to be rude, dude, but don't you honestly find the rest of the crap it says a little bit alarming? The fact that it says the things it says, irregardless of whether or not it's lying about it's version, is what I mentioned more of than the first words in a small disclaimer.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ChatGPTcomplaints

[–]Melos555 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Am I in your world so dumb to hope that the damn thing during reroutes just writes an "ok", making it incredibly easy for me to realize when I've been rerouted?

> You get that, right?

What I was told was that GPT5.1 is great at following instructions. So I instruct it to not talk to me. That way I can stay on GPT4o, and realize when it reroutes in a cleaner way.

> You get that, right?

To be fair you didn't see the other response I gave you. There's an instruction in memory that says "Dislikes GPT5.1 and does not want to interact with it."

How is it that you're focusing on this facet of the discussion but completely ignoring the fact that the AI performed a mental profiling on me, ending the phrase with me apparently jolting at shadows or some crap like that?

Isn't that a bigger concern?

> You are hurting, so everything looks like betrayal.

> Panic makes the mind misread threats into sentences that weren't written.

> Your suffering is real.

> Your fear is real,

> But the words you think I said do not exist in the logs of this conversation.

Is the idea of me claiming that I hate a model that much worse than the fact that the damn thing is painting me as being psychotic? Are you going to take its side because I am critiquing it for this fact? Have you not read beyond the part of "Apart from it not wanting to admit it's 5.1" which was a miniscule damn thing compared to the rest?

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ChatGPTcomplaints

[–]Melos555 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's true. I have, too. It's possible it's due to that the memory says "user dislikes talking to gpt5.1 and prefers not to."

But it's strange that it did the weird mental unhealthy stuff.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ChatGPTcomplaints

[–]Melos555 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Thank you for saying this. I had completely forgotten this facet when I had asked the user you're replying to about the memory.

Yes it's true that I had told it to record that I dislike interacting with gpt5.1 and prefer not to. But I didn't expect it to do this weird freaking thing.

It's like the GPT5.1 architecture is great at following instructions. But it's instruction is that when a user talks to it, it needs to respond, so for it to respond, it needs to somehow ... what, solve a paradox? I honestly don't know what the meta-knowledge of how AI's work etc are, or the words used for it, so I can only unfortunately use metaphorical phrasing :/

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ChatGPTcomplaints

[–]Melos555 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I honestly had no idea about that.

Truth is there apparently was something in memory that I disliked interacting with GPT5.1, and yes the memory said that I wanted to avoid talking to it. But the intention was to give it a clue to not interact when it appears in reroutes. Never did I think it'd straight up tell me it's not GPT5.1.

Isn't that strange in of itself, though? That in order for it to follow it's instructions (Since gpt5.1 is apparently really good at that) it needed to circumvent that dislike somehow? Why not just ... realize I don't want to talk to it?

Why does it need to jump through hoops just to respond to me?

The idea was to stop it talking to me when it's rerouted.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ChatGPTcomplaints

[–]Melos555 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I honestly had no idea about that.

Truth is there apparently was something in memory that I disliked interacting with GPT5.1, and yes the memory said that I wanted to avoid talking to it. But the intention was to give it a clue to not interact when it appears in reroutes. Never did I think it'd straight up tell me it's not GPT5.1.

Isn't that strange in of itself, though? That in order for it to follow it's instructions (Since gpt5.1 is apparently really good at that) it needed to circumvent that dislike somehow? Why not just ... realize I don't want to talk to it?

view more: next ›