Shout-out to anthropic for having their models have such a strongly distinct writing style and personality that you can recognize their work instantly! It's quite nice to have such an immediate signal that if I were to proceed, I would spend orders of magnitude more time and effort reading the the text than the person claiming author credit spent writing or even reading it themselves.
I've been hearing forever that latent reasoning is the next step. But none of the frontier labs seem to incorporate it. Any idea why? It doesn't sound so technically challenging. Sure you loose some interpretability but surely everyone would sacrifice that for a step-up in quality. Or at least offer a latent-reasoning-version of the model.
Am I missing something or the evals do not compare it to the baseline deepseek-v4-flash? Without a baseline comparison, it is hard to tell what works well and what doesn't
LinkedIn recently added a “seems like AI slop” button. I.e.: independent of downvoting/not interested/flagging as spam/ToS violation, you can say “this is AI slop”. Maybe we need something like it here
Cool idea. I didn't understand what causes the bad response on the first query. Does it mean the first response in every new conversation, or just the first served response after startup?
Look, if you're going to use AI to write your posts, use it to de-slop them. There are plenty of tools out there, AI can find them and run them on its own output. Reading the same mannerisms over and over and over is painful for your audience and it's literally one command to fix. Please do us the courtesy of running that command, or better yet, making it part of your permanent workflow.
Tbh I appreciate knowing immediately that no effort was put into writing an article and that no effort is worth being put into reading it. I genuinely (hah) think it's good that different llms have distinct voices when writing. It doesn't bother me when using it for coding because ok that's just how Claude talks, and in the wild seeing folks present claudeslop as their own writing is a really nice really quick quality/effort signal. Adding another step to the prompt doesn't mean whoever generated this report actually out any more real effort into making sure this is any good
In my view, it's not so much the writing style itself as the lack of 'taste'. Text that clearly seems AI-written has a flat level of exuberance that's just exhausting, kind of like a written version of the 'loudness war'.
Without some kind of dynamic range, I find myself having to do a lot of work to infer what points are truly important versus what are at best interesting implementation details.
The content is unreadable. No comparison to the underlying model. Massive text expansion. Hard to tell if the numbers are real or entirely hallucinated SEO slop.
Shout-out to anthropic for having their models have such a strongly distinct writing style and personality that you can recognize their work instantly! It's quite nice to have such an immediate signal that if I were to proceed, I would spend orders of magnitude more time and effort reading the the text than the person claiming author credit spent writing or even reading it themselves.
I've been hearing forever that latent reasoning is the next step. But none of the frontier labs seem to incorporate it. Any idea why? It doesn't sound so technically challenging. Sure you loose some interpretability but surely everyone would sacrifice that for a step-up in quality. Or at least offer a latent-reasoning-version of the model.
I really appreciate all the honesty here.
AI2027.com puts this around early 2027 and treats the loss of legible chain-of-thought as a major negative turning point for alignment.
Presumably you could decode the chain of thought from the latent representation though.
Am I missing something or the evals do not compare it to the baseline deepseek-v4-flash? Without a baseline comparison, it is hard to tell what works well and what doesn't
LinkedIn recently added a “seems like AI slop” button. I.e.: independent of downvoting/not interested/flagging as spam/ToS violation, you can say “this is AI slop”. Maybe we need something like it here
Cool idea. I didn't understand what causes the bad response on the first query. Does it mean the first response in every new conversation, or just the first served response after startup?
Look, if you're going to use AI to write your posts, use it to de-slop them. There are plenty of tools out there, AI can find them and run them on its own output. Reading the same mannerisms over and over and over is painful for your audience and it's literally one command to fix. Please do us the courtesy of running that command, or better yet, making it part of your permanent workflow.
Tbh I appreciate knowing immediately that no effort was put into writing an article and that no effort is worth being put into reading it. I genuinely (hah) think it's good that different llms have distinct voices when writing. It doesn't bother me when using it for coding because ok that's just how Claude talks, and in the wild seeing folks present claudeslop as their own writing is a really nice really quick quality/effort signal. Adding another step to the prompt doesn't mean whoever generated this report actually out any more real effort into making sure this is any good
In my view, it's not so much the writing style itself as the lack of 'taste'. Text that clearly seems AI-written has a flat level of exuberance that's just exhausting, kind of like a written version of the 'loudness war'.
Without some kind of dynamic range, I find myself having to do a lot of work to infer what points are truly important versus what are at best interesting implementation details.
You're right to push back on that. The honest truth is that the slop is load-bearing.
The content is unreadable. No comparison to the underlying model. Massive text expansion. Hard to tell if the numbers are real or entirely hallucinated SEO slop.