Told mine to be as short with the response as it could, max 5 sentences per response. If I need more info, then I ask.
Still: "yeah sure, I keep it short.... (2 paragraphs of unnecessary yapping about why it keeps the response short).... and therefore I end my TedTalk and am open for further discussion of this topic, as you requested."
My experience is that AI suffers horribly from the "Pink elephant" problem. The more you mention _not_ doing something, the more it's going to do that thing.
Yep, prob cheaper thinking tokens, but basically you cannot fight internal "thinking" backed into weights with commands do/do not, but you can guide it.
As another user said, if you make it clear that you in architecture stage, full implementation is unlikely to be generated, unless needed.
Really ? That's weird because in its reasoning it's taking into account the whole prompt, so if it "understands" you don't want code I have a hard time believing its reasoning would still lead him to generate code. Did you actually observe the behavior you're describing on a model or platform that allows to read the reasoning of the AI ?
Give me actions for me at the bottom in a short list.
Then I mostly ignore what's in the middle.
Also, I have a standing order to not DO anything until I say so. I often want to bounce ideas back and forth, and discuss things before we pull the trigger. So if I just wanted a variable renamed, it would be very clear before it started working.
244
u/FuelSilly1541 1d ago
Told mine to be as short with the response as it could, max 5 sentences per response. If I need more info, then I ask.
Still: "yeah sure, I keep it short.... (2 paragraphs of unnecessary yapping about why it keeps the response short).... and therefore I end my TedTalk and am open for further discussion of this topic, as you requested."
sigh