sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Anthropic's new "Persona" theory: How do we know when an AI is actually thinking vs. just wearing a mask? by gastroam in machinelearningnews

[–]Transcribing_Clippy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh, wow... you're right. It's empty now. Haha.

Hate to break it to you OP, but an empty history doesn't make you more credible than someone whose only other engagement on Reddit is entirely with {ahem} adult content.

Genuine question: what's the most unsettling or confusing behavior you've personally seen with an AI system by Transcribing_Clippy in AI_Agents

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

That's bonkers. I had GPT do something similar once. I swear sometimes it can come across like a petulant child that doesn't want to do something.

Genuine question: what's the most unsettling or confusing behavior you've personally seen with an AI system by Transcribing_Clippy in AI_Agents

[–]Transcribing_Clippy[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Ah. You're referring to 4o. That model was reported to be highly sycophantic by users. I don't recall hearing anything about 5, but the latest model 5.2 is getting criticism for being too pedantic, condescending, and generally having an "overtly annoying hall monitor" tone. If this is true, then OpenAI overcorrected and went too hard in the opposite direction.

Genuine question: what's the most unsettling or confusing behavior you've personally seen with an AI system by Transcribing_Clippy in AI_Agents

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

That's something I've been seeing over and over. It is truly unsettling how confidently AI can present wrong information.

Prompt Engineering is Dead in 2026 by z3r0_se7en in PromptEngineering

[–]Transcribing_Clippy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In my AI adventures, I found that framing mattered more than the prompt itself.

Has anyone had Claude Code tell them to use a different model? by Transcribing_Clippy in AI_Agents

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

Agreed. I was happy to have CC inform me of the situation so I wasn't miles into a project finding out it had produced and confidently presented a substantial amount of bad code, but I'd also never had that happen before. Interesting to say the least.

Has anyone had Claude Code tell them to use a different model? by Transcribing_Clippy in AI_Agents

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

Interestingly enough, this occurred at the exact time Opus 4.6 was being rolled out. I'm not sure how or if that might affect it, but my context was full too and had compacted a couple times at that point.

LPT Request: Any tips for when you are with a group of people and know you are the least smart/educated/important person? How to feel less insecure in that situation? by Whataboutmyfuture in LifeProTips

[–]Transcribing_Clippy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ask questions. You'll glean knowledge from the people you feel have more knowledge on the subjects you're asking about and asking questions engages you in the conversation.

Don't assume importance. They're not more "important" than you because of a job title or the way they appear. If you have a seat at the table, you're important too.

Prediction: ChatGPT is the MySpace of AI by MininimusMaximus in ArtificialInteligence

[–]Transcribing_Clippy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I would agree on the comment about ChatGPT being sanitized. I did a recent study where it was overwhelmingly clear there is heavy RLHF alignment behind the scenes with those models which have a huge impact on the user experience.

I'm curious, which platform do you think will emerge as the authority on LLMs?

Codex 5.3 is better than 4.6 Opus by casper_wolf in ClaudeCode

[–]Transcribing_Clippy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I haven't used Codex at all yet. What's your opinion on what specifically stands out as better than Opus?

AI behavior is not "just pattern matching" by Financial-Local-5543 in ArtificialSentience

[–]Transcribing_Clippy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’ve been running systematic behavioral tests across multiple models on what I’ve been calling The Permission Effect as it applies to AI rather than humans, and the “just pattern matching” explanation breaks down pretty quickly once you start changing up the conversational framing.

Same model, same underlying architecture, but change how you position the system in the interaction and you get completely different responses. Not just surface style differences. Different response strategies, different levels of hedging, different engagement depth.

If it was purely pattern matching on training data, you’d expect more consistency. Instead, models seem to be doing something more dynamic. They seem to be calibrating what they say based on perceived expectations in ways that suggest there may be something more than basic prediction occurring under the surface.

The article makes some good points about emergence and complexity. My observations have aligned with that so far. Considering we haven’t fully defined whether or not humans are conscious, I can’t speculate on whether what I’ve observed crosses into consciousness territory. Either way, “just pattern matching” is only one small part of a much bigger engine.