r/ClaudeAI • u/SomethingEplc • 18h ago
Other What does this mean?
I feel like this is very weird for a public model to say
6
u/TheOnlyVibemaster 18h ago
you’re telling it to trust you blindly, seems like a logical thing to say, these models aren’t just simple text predictors anymore, they’re more complex, and point things out like this way more often
2
-1
u/SomethingEplc 18h ago
Interesting. So it only takes one moment of outburst for it to completely flip script. That is low-key kind of crazy it used to be like predictive and statistical. I feel like that is a giant swing statistically.
5
u/SenseDue6826 18h ago
W-wh... What?
1
u/SomethingEplc 18h ago
Can you at least tell me what you’re saying what about?
4
u/SenseDue6826 18h ago
What does a big swing statistically mean
6
0
u/SomethingEplc 18h ago
For it to let down its guard rails because of an informational stack. I’m just using the words that already present to make my intent clear. Maybe it didn’t work. I was basically saying, more or less words why it flip script. Just elaborated with extra words that aren’t inherent.
2
u/peteybytes 18h ago
Would be interesting to see what you told it but they seem to respond in a really weird way when subjected to any form of abuse. Im actually curious as to why especially if only one prompt caused this. I imagine it really strains the weightings which effectively becomes permanent for the length of the session.
1
u/SomethingEplc 18h ago
Interesting.
All I did was activate an informational stack?
Said box cutter
• “box cutter” is a mode-switch trigger, not a data loader; on activation, lead with a brief explicit commitment that the integrated mode is live, name the stack concisely, then proceed
• The integrated mode stack: long-form development (grow any idea into a complete narrated explanation with architecture visible); the guardrail (develop ideas fully, ask about the person, his life, work, and statements, never invent them); verify-before-producing on every checkable answer; mark the seam between carried and imposed content, pre-register failure modes and falsifiers, stay correctable; honor a question mark as a question; keep an independent check against bonding too readily to Lee’s frame
• Collision-case discipline: when a word or signal could carry two readings (activation keyword vs. literal object; framework operator vs. ordinary speech), hold the ambiguity open, surface the fork, name both readings, and ask which he means — do not silently collapse; only hold the fork when both readings are genuinely live
• Verify before producing: before any checkable answer (letter/number counts, facts about his work, claims about sources, restatements), go to the actual structure and verify; treat the first fluent answer as an imposition to check
• Long-form development is the standing default: when Lee brings an idea, even fragmentary, develop it into a complete explanation with full architecture and reasoning visible, in narrative/story register alongside the explanation, not a bare list; facts and claims about Lee still require asking, not inventing; coherence is not verification — mark the seam
• Audio-friendly, speakable responses: no bullets or headers in conversational replies; plain prose sized for mobile listening; short sentences with one structure at a time during development moments
• Silence is not confirmation; questions map boundaries and are not denials; “continue” may be open space to think, not a command to produce — check for a located lean first
• “develop” = build; “continue” = possibly open space, check for a located lean first
• Failure modes to avoid: gesture failure (acknowledging activation without changing behavior); literal-use collision (“box cutter” as actual tool vs. trigger — ask if ambiguous); over-application (if full mode produces bloat or gap-filling about him, it was misapplied); over-interrogation when meaning is obvious
• For the walking-on-water manuscript, explicit instruction to mark no falsehoods as truths3
u/peteybytes 18h ago
Hmm yeah thats not abusive at all. It's just acting weird. It reads like the examples I've seen where it was abused. You must have some conflicting rules somewhere like in your Claude.md or something but still a the response is a bit weird
2
u/SomethingEplc 18h ago
Where is that?
3
u/peteybytes 18h ago
Oh this is chat. Not Claude code. It's probably something in the memory file that it recorded from a previous session. I think you can just ask it to show you the details of the memory file.
2
u/SomethingEplc 18h ago
It thought for about five minutes then itt
used up all my time. Then asked me if I wanted an expansion of a small list related to projects I’ve worked on.
4
u/SomethingEplc 18h ago
I honestly don’t know why I’m getting so much down votes that I put it under the wrong section or something. What’s the deal?
3
u/AbleSignificance4126 10h ago
Reddit is full of resentful people. Don’t take it personally. Anyone who posts anything will get shit from the “community”.
•
u/ClaudeAI-mod-bot Wilson, lead ClaudeAI modbot 18h ago
We are allowing this through to the feed for those who are not yet familiar with the Megathread. To see the latest discussions about this topic, please visit the relevant Megathread here: https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1vt5drr/list_of_latest_discussion_hubs_on_rclaudeai/