[hnav]

it’s not a psychological phenomenon. If a human engineer constantly used pompous language to deliver unvetted information (the number of claude slop root-cause analyses i’ve read where “the smoking gun” is a red herring) we’d rightly consider them a moron

[queenkjuul]

"Here's why this version is bulletproof" right before it fails in exactly the same way as the previous bulletproof implementation...

[whattheheckheck]

Who is we? Own your insults and the consequences of them sir.

When prompting an autoregressive token generator entity to do reasoning on a word logic puzzle you may find value in preferring it to produce rigorous predicate logic step notation with explicit delineation of its generated claims/hypotheses on where to look before wasting 30 dollars on a "debug this" prompt.

The industry will probably will probably coalesce around including the chat history in git MRs to reduce this shenanigans.

[danielvaughn]

I didn't articulate it, but what I meant was that I think we could swap these expressions out for _anything_, and we'd still find them irritating.

[sublinear]

People do swap out their expressions all the time. There are influences everywhere that we absorb.

That doesn't matter. The underlying ideas are more important than the words. That's what people are frustrated with. I don't understand why this has to be reiterated for years on end, but LLMs are not intelligent. They just model language.