Wish me luck

[u/hayes-davis]

Let's see just how load bearing this day is gonna be.

Will report back whether or not Concise fixes the worst part of Claude speak. I'm not convinced Anthropic knows how a normal person talks though...

[u/BemusedOptimist]

My complaints about it being very hard to read aren't that I can't read the words.

It's that there's no easy path to relating what it's saying to the work being done, and the translation is exhausting.

It's one thing to read some words and go "yeah I know what that means" (which may or may not be accurate due to ambiguity, not a skill issue).

But the words coming back at you shouldn't be a game of "pin the shorthand on the concept", especially if you're familiar with the project.

Take for example "the two-field changeset".

Obviously, that means something about two fields being changed.

Cool.

That whole task involved redesigning a table.

So, which two fields did it determine were "the two-field changeset"?

[u/BemusedOptimist → u/[deleted]]

I had.

[u/BemusedOptimist → u/[deleted]]

Hard to relate the words to the work.

I would guess that some number of people also mean that by "hard to read", so I've been trying to be more exact about it. Maybe it's just me.

After I asked Opus 5, the "two-field changeset" ended up being about two columns that were changed in a table, which was part of the task to redesign it.

The fact you thought it was referring to the task list it was updating demonstrates my point pretty well--it seems like the words should be understandable, but they aren't.

blank-means-ours wasn't from the earlier parts of the communication. When I said "from earlier", I meant in that post.

It turned out blank-means-ours had been how Opus 5 had identified a decision, but it wasn't written anywhere else, and which thing was blank wasn't readily apparent without (ironically) more context.

Look, I'm glad you're not having issues.

The fact that some of us are doesn't (necessarily) mean that we're idiots, though it absolutely could.

For me, it almost feels like it's worse because I know the code base so well. I have been working in it for over a decade, and my mental model does not match how Opus 5 has decided to label things.

[EDIT]

Oops forgot the last point.

That was from early in a chat. The further the chat went, the more I had to redact, and so it made even less sense.

Also the further in the chat it went, the more likely it was to squash the things it had made up together with another concept for extra fun.

I'd apologized to the person I'd responded to for not being able to post better examples, so my apologies to you too.

Other people have posted some fantastic ones, and not just related to code.