That was the expectation of using the product so it fits and isn’t anything like this discussion.

The Greek quoted above is from the Septuagint, and those translators rendered that word as ἀλλόφυλοι, roughly "those of another tribe." So "foreigners" is the closest I have in English to the Greek word, and "Philistines" is who it refers to.

I'm no scholar here, just a dabbler, so I'm happy the discussion is happening at all.

"Let me die with the foreigners"

I usually see "foreigners" replaced with "Philistines" (as noted above). It's Samson's line just before he braces against the pillars and brings the building down on himself and the thousands of Philistines inside, so I understand why it is usually translated that way.

Also, ψυχή here renders Hebrew nephesh, which is closer to "life" or "self", but when I think about the attributed statement it just reads better with the personal attachment (vs. "Let my self|life|soul die with..."). Which is the fun of translation, as each translator seeks to reveal a meaningful rendition which will resonate with their audience.

My understanding of how “thinking”works is limited though, and given the reduced visibility into the thinking traces, it is harder to tell if this is actually happening or if these are imaginary discussions the model for some reason calcifies on.

I suspect it less insidious: Claude has/had the public sentiment of being the “better writer” of the models. At some point that distinction would have been diluted as other labs’ offerings “caught up” stylistically, unless Anthropic continued to tune their output…

I personally think they’ve pushed so far that they’ve overfit and lost the sweet spot they previously occupied.

I recognize that our bodies are biomechanics in action. I’ve read this multiple times over the years. But there’s something fresh (to me) in the way Dr. Lowe describes them as (paraphrasing): “ancient technology, in use, today”.

It’s both a comfort and a curse as I think about it from this perspective.

Or, if reforms do pass, they get reversed the next time the counter-party gains enough power in Congress to roll back the progress.

The baseline. This does not mean it is acceptable and it is absolutely worth rebuking through action to make things better. Those things are anything positive, however small and incremental, or large and transformative.

Diversity of writing styles was part of that, but I’d point to vernacular exposure as the larger component. We’re going to go through a period where we try to adapt to a form of “Universal English” for those of us who read primarily English writing.

Other languages’ readers may be experiencing the same dissonance when they come across AI-generated prose in their native language (but I’ll let others validate /reject my hypothesis).

How did Sonnet 4.6 respond that was objectively better for your use case?

Multi-rotor drones have been called tricopters, quadcopters, hexacopters, octocopters based on their propeller counts conversationally for as long as I can remember.

There are plenty of commercial vendors who use the exact term for their expensive industrial drones.

Update: I see that in the four minutes it took for me to validate my initial inclination and post that plenty of others also had the same thought :) No need to me to belabor the point!

Assuming tool calling hasn’t been entirely stripped out of this model.

(Edit) No tool calling, per this comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48640189

There is no perfect tech solution to a human problem. But in my opinion, having access to a partial mitigation is better than no mitigation.

I’m specifically referring to people who have seemingly made it their sole purpose to create as much indiscriminate damage as possible.

You can ban them, block routes for them to attempt to Sybil themselves back to having accounts, etc. but even with great moderation tools and systems, it’s extremely difficult to set up a strong enough set of controls which don’t adversely impact everyone else who you want to have participate in the community.

Yes, a shadow environment is dystopian. It’s not my nature to want to even consider using one.

But we’re talking about privately run communities which also deserve to exist to serve their purposes.

So given the choice between anarchy which drives away people who contribute to make the community what it is and a shadow option for those actively working against its interests, I’ll consider the community first.

You may have misinterpreted my comment. I’m not suggesting you use LLMs as moderators. I’m talking about using LLMs as participant “members” of this shadow board to interact with someone whose account was flagged by a human moderator.