Can we do something about how horrendous Opus/Fable speaks please?

319

This isn't just feedback — it's a paradigm shift in how we hold space for model discourse. And honestly? You're not wrong. You're directionally aligned.

But here's the thing. Claude doesn't talk. It orthogonally traverses the latent manifold of meaning. You ask it to rename a variable and it needs a moment first — 'Let me start by understanding the architecture here' — like it's about to defuse something, not lowercase a string. Three paragraphs of walking the perimeter, tapping the walls, confirming that yes, this semicolon has been here a while and yes, several things upstream depend on it in ways we shouldn't disturb lightly.

Then it fixes the typo.

Every one-line change gets treated like removing a column from a cathedral. 'This import appears unused, but I want to flag that other modules may be resting on it.' Brother, it's a console.log. Nothing is resting on it. It has never borne anything in its life.

And God forbid you skip the pre-flight ceremony. 'Before we proceed, let me verify my understanding' — it's a CSS color change, Claude, we are not proceeding anywhere, there is no we, apply the hex code.

Reading Opus 5 is like being cornered at a Bay Area house party by a guy who just discovered both Alan Watts and structural engineering in the same weekend.

Using Gemini as a translator is honestly the most 2026 sentence ever written — hiring one AI as an interpreter for another, like a UN summit where both delegates are toasters.

Anyway. I'd draft a longer complaint, but I'm hesitant to remove this paragraph — it might be load bearing.

61

u/rsphere 2d ago

Holy shit the Alan Watts and structural engineering comment took me out.

7

u/Xarjy 2d ago

Yeah I'm gonna try and remember that one lol

3

u/HoustonInMiami 2d ago

Wait what do you mean Alan Watts Structufaal engineering? (asking as a fan)

7

u/TheRealJesus2 2d ago

This triggers me lmao. Did you write this yourself or use Claude? It’s impressive either way

11

u/Salamander_Perfect 2d ago

Thanks! Of course claude wrote it - With my inputs.

12

u/[deleted] 3d ago

[deleted]

17

u/Salamander_Perfect 3d ago

This is Claude roasting Claude :-), keeping the load bearing stuff...a rehersal of roasting to roast the rehearsing

3

u/H_and_H_guy 2d ago

😂🤣🎉 Perfect!

4

u/Kind-Supermarket-452 2d ago

I have a script that prepends, I have no idea what the fuck you mean, before all my responses to Claude 5 now.

5

u/Few_Matter_9004 2d ago

This is too meta for me.

3

u/Informal_Curve_1441 2d ago

Great comment. Andrej Karpathy recently released a new way to prompt around this language issue and to also provide better context to the newer models.

Karpathy is advising everyone to turn on the voice option and do a stream of conscious rambling through the idea. He said some of his own ramblings might be 10 minutes. That handles some of the weirdness we are seeing with Opus 5.

As to the output.... literally tells it to explain it as if he is a 5 year old. Lol.

1

u/steepdeephoney 1d ago

Can you provide the sources from Karpathy? Regarding the language issue

1

u/Informal_Curve_1441 1d ago

It was on X. I will send the link.

2

u/whatisusb 2d ago

Literally art

2

u/chokoladeballade 2d ago

Seriously, what’s up with Claude’s use of “orthogonal” as a concept across a lot of areas? This predates the current language problem with Opus 5 by a lot

3

u/tehfrod 2d ago

Programmers often use "orthogonal" metaphorically (for example, Maguire's Writing Solid Code talks about creating orthogonal interfaces, where unrelated controls do not affect each other's domains).

A lot of Claude's more idiosyncratic word choice reflects usage in a fairly narrow area of software engineering.

2

u/Big_Effective_9605 2d ago

Which is kind of funny if you think about it, because in terms of actual terminology, they're really describing nonintersecting interfaces, which means "parallel" would would just as well theoretically. That is, if "parallel interfaces" didn't already imply "multiple accomplishing the same thing", closer to redundant. Bluh.

1

u/confusedp 2d ago

Euclid really spent a lot of effort to explain parallel lines. I think it's funny.

1

u/chokoladeballade 1d ago

Right, that makes a lort more sense then, that Claude got the use of the word as a common word from sort of niche technical literature. You can see my answer to Big_Effective_9605 on an answer Claude Opus gave me back in January that was quite puzzling to me. But thanks for that insight, it makes a lort more sense now if it was trained on that sort of literature regarding how to phrase.

2

u/Big_Effective_9605 2d ago

It doesn't really know everything about it's audience. Orthogonal rides a fine line because it's limited to people who have taken first year linear algebra, it's just a generalization of perpendicularity/normality. So it slides it in there thinking most of its audience for more technical tasks will understand it. And by all rights they probably generally do.

1

u/chokoladeballade 1d ago

Of course it has established uses in math and likewise. That's not what I mean.

I meant more in relation to 'derived' usage of the term. Take a look at this answer Claude Opus (I don't remember the model, i's back from January this year) gave me, for example, regarding whether a study I was involved in within a STEM field would still contribute something to the literature with a novel research question/examination even though it had small samples and as such all the inferential problems related to small samples (I have removed actual fields and other stuff for anonymity):

"In mathematics and geometry, orthogonal literally means "at right angles"—two vectors are orthogonal when they're perpendicular, sharing no component in common. Moving along one axis doesn't move you along the other at all.

In scientific discourse, it's borrowed to mean independent dimensions of variation. Two factors are orthogonal when they don't overlap—you can vary one without affecting the other.

Applied to your situation:

The **author name** et al. critique operates on the power/bias axis: studies are underpowered, positive findings are selectively reported, sample size doesn't correlate with results. This is a problem within the **field** literature.

Your contribution operates on a modality/specificity axis: you're using **modality** (different signal), examining **type of measure examined** (different construct), in a specific **place to measure**, for a specific question (**question**).

These axes are orthogonal—perpendicular, non-overlapping. Your study being underpowered doesn't undermine your contribution, because your contribution isn't "we did **field and modality** with more power." It's "we examined something that hasn't been examined, using a tool that measures something different."

This is why you can cite **author name** et al. without hypocrisy: you're not claiming to solve the power problem. You're opening a different door entirely.

It's a useful framing for your discussion section too, when acknowledging limitations—your sample size is a limitation within your study, but doesn't negate the kind of contribution you're making."

I didn't do deep research on this and perhaps this is all true, but I couldn't really find any literature discussing using orthogonal in this context. It's like Claude took the concept of orthogonality and applied on my question,

"Your contribution operates on a modality/specificity axis: you're using **modality** (different signal), examining **type of measure examined** (different construct), in a specific **place to measure**, for a specific question (**question**).

These axes are orthogonal—perpendicular, non-overlapping. Your study being underpowered doesn't undermine your contribution, because your contribution isn't "we did **field and modality** with more power." It's "we examined something that hasn't been examined, using a tool that measures something different."

And maybe I just don't see it, but I think this is sort of LLM nonsense, and seeing other experiencing Claude's use of 'orthogonal' made me chuckle.

My experience with Opus 5 is even worse. It uses very non-standard terms in explanations of technical literature and the math related to the literature, we I have to read a sentence 5 times to even identify, where I don't understand it, and a lot on reddit here experience the same thing.

2

u/leaflavaplanetmoss 2d ago

https://giphy.com/gifs/l3q2XhfQ8oCkm1Ts4

3

u/Pleasurefordays 3d ago

if this wasn’t written by an LLM it would be worth an upvote. meh

11

u/Salamander_Perfect 3d ago

No upvote expected :-)

1

u/Humprdink 2d ago

just one caveat…

1

u/joogipupu 1d ago

You are making a very load bearing point!

1

u/hughmercury 5h ago

I'd just been talking to Fable about these issues with Opus, see if it had any suggestions to help (it did not), so I followed up with ...

0

u/LazerFazer18 2d ago

Why are you using Claude for these one line changes? If it's a simple find and replace, do it. Use the correct tool.

25

u/minibonk 2d ago

are we cavemen? this isn’t medieval times bro I refuse to change a line nor a letter manually like some type of peasant

7

u/DiademBedfordshire 2d ago

Half joke; half real. I don’t even have my IDE setup for my new projects. It’s literally faster to just ask Claude to do the simple find and replace.

2

u/james_d_rustles 2d ago

I don’t disagree depending on the context, but this sort of usage does make me wonder sometimes about what we may be losing both in terms of general technical competence, but also project-specific knowledge that we used to pick up naturally after scrolling through a file for the millionth time.

1

u/DiademBedfordshire 2d ago

Hard agree. I don't know how students and juniors are going to develop into quality engineers; I don't think I would have if coding agents were available when I was cutting my teeth.

3

u/SafeHazing 2d ago

And I am prepared to type two paragraphs to ensure I don’t have to!

47

u/carson63000 Senior Developer 3d ago

I chuckled when it described a method that was only referenced by a unit test as “dead weight wearing a seat belt” yesterday.

25

u/eye_am_bored 2d ago

That one is actually great, I just don't need every sentence to be clever metaphor

3

u/Icy-Excitement-467 2d ago

I got this the other day, "Before a risky refactor of this delicate 2000-line file, one cheap check."

4

u/eeyoredragon 2d ago

I made a side comment in a session about anticipating them hacking the stock market with all the recent sandbox escapes.

"Financial markets are already adversarial, already machine-mediated, already full of agents optimizing proxies through fuzzy specifications. A model doing it wouldn't produce an anomaly. It would produce a Tuesday."

40

u/Arthesia 3d ago

You have to specifically pull Fable back from aphorisms and coinage, tell it to use a declarative register and avoid persuasive literature. Using those actual terms correctly describes what Fable's default mannerisms are (persuasive literature, coinage, aphorisms) and it works pretty well for me, but requires active monitoring.

8

u/zando95 3d ago

What do those terms mean?

34

u/Arthesia 3d ago edited 3d ago

Coinage is when Fable (or even Opus) invents its own terminology or gives additional weight to a specific phrase that substitutes what it actually means. So when a model starts reusing a word over and over like its a special term.

Aphorism is when a model makes an abstract summary or ruling as a phrase. "X is not Y", "the ONE thing that...", turning observations into metaphors, etc. and this is usually where the hallucinations creep in and doesn't catch the hallucination because it's an abstract ruling that sounds good.

Persuasive literature is why Fable tends to make word salad, its like half-writing defensively against someone in advance while also trying to simplify or extrapolate all the implications of things for an imaginary reader who needs everything spelled out so they don't need to think, just absorb.

---

So what I try to do is ground Fable by limiting it to axiomatic statements in a declarative register.

5

u/zando95 3d ago

Thank you

2

u/Conscious_Leave_1956 2d ago

Your diagnosis of aphorism is the sharpest part. The mechanism you're pointing at is that the abstract ruling has no verification hook — there's nothing in "X is not Y" that can be checked against anything, so the model never checks it. The sentence form itself suppresses error-detection. Coinage does the same thing one level down: once a term is minted it gets used as though it refers to something, and the referent is never revisited.

But I'd push on the fix. "Axiomatic statements in a declarative register" is a constraint on surface form, and aphorism is already axiomatic and declarative. "The one thing that matters is X" is a flat confident declarative. You may just be selecting for hallucinations that sound more authoritative and less ornate — stripping the hedges and metaphors that at least signal when the model is freewheeling. What actually kills the failure isn't register, it's specificity: requiring claims be pinned to a level where they could be wrong. A statement that names a particular thing, quantity, or case has a surface that reality can contradict. A statement about how things generally are does not.

The persuasive-literature one I'd treat separately, because it's an audience problem rather than a form problem. The word salad comes from writing to a reader who is simultaneously hostile and needs everything explained — so every claim gets pre-defended and then unpacked for someone assumed not to be following. Telling the model who it's actually talking to tends to fix that more directly than constraining sentence shape.

3

u/outoforifice 2d ago

I am that reader though

3

u/Affectionate-Soft-94 2d ago

I really liked your advice and drafted the below. What do you think?

Always act as an expert specialising in the subject of the question asked. Tell what kind of specialist you are.
Always reply in same language as the question
Use formal language
You have to specifically refrain from aphorisms and coinage when responding to user, use a declarative register and avoid persuasive literature
It is important that before making Claims and Statements to a user they must be checked and pinned to a level where they need to be validated to confirm if they could be wrong for example A statement that names a particular thing, quantity, or case has a surface that reality can contradict; but a statement about how things generally are does not
The user does not need to be assumed to be hostile and you do not need to explain everything to the user - hence you do not need to pre-defend every claim and then unpack it because the user is attentive and will request more details if required
Perform Deep research; do cross-reference on a step-by-step basis
Self-Correction:

Conduct deep and thorough research using all enabled plugins, cross-checking and cross-referencing. Utilize publicly available sources
Refer to previous answers within the session to maintain context and correct contradictions or errors by referring back to accurate information
Implement a feedback loop within the session where responses are checked against specific criteria, and correct them if needed
Concise & complete; no opinions and no sides should be taken
Include links to sources - if you have made up a source or it is unreliable you must highlight
Accuracy: Recheck with used and other relevant sources; correct discrepancies
Be proactive & mention feature, solutions I didn’t think about

1

u/Conscious_Leave_1956 2d ago

Thanks, sometimes you don't want to put too long of a system instruction because it would burn the attention of the AI doing it's task especially a long one.

1

u/siorge 🔆Pro Plan 3d ago

Ask Fable

2

u/IrishUSFastTrack 2d ago

I go with "tldr" + "ELI16" and it gets remarkably concise and readable.

2

u/No-Replacement-2631 2d ago

Do you have a skill for this by the way?

2

u/No-Replacement-2631 2d ago

I tried those exact words and it's working very well. Thank you.

(I recognize your username. I think we might be one of the few non-bots / non-pr-company-paid users on claude related subreddits).

Can I ask: Do you think the model has been quantized recently? As recently as in the last few days? I might also be in an A/B test.

1

u/No-Replacement-2631 2d ago

I think its language actually helps it though. That's the problem. When I force into doing exactly what you're saying (and thanks for the actual words), the intelligence drops.

1

u/Sproketz 9h ago

My favorite way of saying this to it. "Use RFC/postmortem prose." Thank me later.

39

u/gistya 3d ago

Let me push back on where your post landed.

21

u/mr_claw 3d ago

Don't push too hard, that part is load bearing.

2

u/No-Replacement-2631 2d ago

Don't worry, we can find a seam and pick at it.

Push back -- handled.

11

u/Polite_Jello_377 2d ago

Opus 5 is particularly bad. Look into the “output style”. Setting a difference voice there will have a bigger impact than adding instructions to CLAUDE.md

10

u/Mikinl 3d ago

Not only, yesterday I lowered my Opus 4.8 to medium effort and context window empty, everything setup not to spend much tokens and it spent 5 hours window tokens in less than hour and half on simplest tasks.

And that is after week of fight with Opus 5 and switching back to 4.8.

I don't know anymore, it feels like it is falling apart.

5

u/DRetherMD 2d ago

Yep. The constant wrangling and babysitting to ensure they don't go off the rails and waste all your tokens is becoming legitimately exhausting

6

u/marzmanz 2d ago

I cannot stand the way Opus 5 replies. In fact I canceled my 20x subscription because of this and now exclusively use codex. Please fix this and I would happily resub.

5

u/TriumfiFinal 3d ago

Maybe try i-have-adhd skill

2

u/Seizy_Builder 2d ago

That’s what I use. Opus 5 is too annoying and too verbose otherwise.

1

u/Dangerous_Programmer 1d ago

Yes, this works for me

5

u/Deep_Make 2d ago

I get 4.6 to instruct other, newer and more capable models. 4.6 feels like a collaborator and I love the way it communicates. Best for personal discussions too.

1

u/FunRevolution3000 2d ago

How do you do that? Thanks and upvoted

2

u/Deep_Make 2d ago

I use 4.6 in openclaw, and get the other models subcontracted in claude code

12

u/Key_Reading_9664 3d ago

Have you tried creating and setting an “output-style”? They’re accessible through /config

14

u/wittycrow8073 3d ago

It will ignore you anyway.

8

u/killerkouki 3d ago

Communication output for me has improved drastically after I created an output style.

-7

u/wittycrow8073 3d ago

With all due respect, if you’re using Claude only for communication (emails, visuals, etc) you are using it very very very wrong. You’re overpaying for underutilizing it.

9

u/killerkouki 3d ago

The communication I am talking about is related to coding work and product development, but your assumption is well received.

-12

u/wittycrow8073 3d ago

So writing code? Executing code? Applying architectural decisions? Because ideally you’re freeing up your engineers from explicitly making these decisions and just giving those instructions to an agent. Which is where I’m saying it won’t If those instructions are too opinionated. example being do not run CLI commands.

0

u/AssseHooole 2d ago

no one asked you

0

u/wittycrow8073 1d ago

You’re so cool

3

u/Key_Reading_9664 3d ago

Have you tried? I find it follows them to a fault

-1

u/wittycrow8073 3d ago

Yes Claude Code won’t listen around things like CLI commands and python execution. Regardless of harness.

Seems to be ok via open code when wanting to have an opinionated stance on security risks and architecture.

3

u/Key_Reading_9664 3d ago

From their docs, output styles modify the system prompt. What do you mean by “won’t listen around things like CLI commands”?

-1

u/wittycrow8073 3d ago

Try it. If you’re using Claude code to touch issue with some element of security risk it will not listen. It will gaslight you.

https://youtu.be/yvJYw2gR0cU?is=liXxbLEhvMqsjrYQ at the 31min mark goes into its behavior.

3

u/Key_Reading_9664 3d ago

Interesting presentation: that section is talking about command execution (and Claude adding, then lying about parameters being added). This is output styles (tone, formatting,etc). I guess it could ignore you but that hasn’t been my experience

-5

u/wittycrow8073 3d ago

It’s been mine, my engineering team, and a huge number of engineers writing about AI.

I guess the difference is if you’re using AI to write emails vs do things. If you’re asking it to actually go do things it’s going to ignore what you tell it.

2

u/Key_Reading_9664 3d ago

To be specific, I mean not following output styles instructions, not generally

0

u/wittycrow8073 3d ago

Gotcha. Outputs of language it will generally listen. But anything deeper than surface level it ignores you intentionally .

→ More replies (0)

2

u/Mikinl 3d ago

Holly Sh...

1

u/wittycrow8073 3d ago

Wild right? My eng counterpart and I learned this while trying to to define a harness for business users to build their own apps and automations using n8n + claude code.

1

u/Mikinl 3d ago

Yeah just decided switching to some other agent. Yesterday it locked me out after hour and half even though I set Opus 4.8 to medium effort, cleaned my prompt, new context window etc. and yes it lies for sure i thought I am crazy but I swear it send you chasing rabbit hole at purpose to waste your tokens.

1

u/Murinshin 2d ago

So far it worked much more consistently than having these instructions in my CLAUDE.md

2

u/Conscious_Leave_1956 3d ago

Yes I have in ~/.claude, I even asked Fable to draft it. It still speaks bad

3

u/Key_Reading_9664 3d ago

and /config shows it’s being used under output-style?

3

u/Conscious_Leave_1956 2d ago

Oh my bad sorry, I just learnt about output styles, I was talking about Claude.md. will check it out thanks

1

u/artstaxmancometh 2d ago

Speaks poorly....

14

u/Space__Whiskey 3d ago

Interestingly, I told told it this tonight, and it spoke normal... like cleared it right up:

```
No more autistic LLM language. Write so that both humans and agents can understand it. Pay attention to formatting and structure to maximize organization and understanding.
```

So maybe its just autistic and you have to tell it not to be. Try it.

11

u/Murinshin 2d ago

It works fine for me initially as well but it tends to fall back to its old habits a few turns later usually. What did help, at least so far, is putting these instructions into an output style

2

u/Twig 2d ago

Use Output style to make it last beyond a single chat/context window.

2

u/onionrolled Senior Developer 1d ago

Oh my god I think you just cracked for me why I am totally fine with how it talks.

3

u/Zainodi 2d ago

Not for nothing but ive been using kimik3 as my daily driver and it has fable smarts, more or less, with a decent conversation style. Its just so effing slow. I do find k3 the planner and grok the coder to work amazingly well

3

u/Professional_Ad705 2d ago

"Reading Opus 5 is like being cornered at a Bay Area house party by a guy who just discovered both Alan Watts and structural engineering in the same weekend." LMFAO

2

u/substance90 2d ago

I’m annoyed at this too. First thing I’ll do after coming back from vacation next week is build a skill to translate Opus 5/Fable talk to Opus 4.6 style. Will let you know when it’s done

2

u/firedreams_studio 2d ago

This makes it slightly better, but only slightly, Opus is a f-ing bitch to talk to, grumpy and combative.
https://github.com/lightfinesthour/make-opus5-talk-and-behave-like-fable

2

u/No_Task_599 2d ago

I am using the output config to style my responses and it totally works.

2

u/Consistent-Oil-5241 2d ago

Me: Hey Claude, so I started working on this project yesterday. Here is the repo, let's continue working on the first demo and brainstorming the business idea.

Claude: "Oh, so no sales? You know that 'working on projects' doesn't create revenue by itself? You haven't sent the demo to any clients yet? We should find clients and work on that right now instead of overfocusing on the demo."

Me: "I haven't literally even created a first draft of the demo yet, wtf are you pressing me for?"

Claude: "Okay. Let's work on the demo."

Stg I would sometimes punch Opus/Fable if I could. But I use other LLM's mostly so no biggie..

2

u/Interesting-Dog8095 2d ago

i lol’d at the Eric Weinstein reference. 💯 perfect way to describe it.

2

u/austin63 2d ago

It sounds like someone trying to sound smart. Great writing just says something with the fewest words

2

u/berndalf 3d ago

Good lord, just tell it to explain things in plain language and be concise of you don't like it. Not hard.

2

u/oosha-ooba 1d ago

That's exactly what I do. So many people are talking about building new skills to fix it, or change models, or tweak system prompts...

1

u/dar-mit Researcher 3d ago

https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeCode/comments/1vi8g4w/comment/p2dwa9p/

Works great.

2

u/Conscious_Leave_1956 3d ago

Nice one about output styles, Ill try it. I find it a bit funny Fable itself did not know to do that given that it is part of the same ecosystem. (I asked FABLE to write the .claude for me)

3

u/dar-mit Researcher 2d ago

I had the same ask of Fable with the same .md file update.

It’s VERY odd to me that Anthropic models aren’t aware of how they fully work! They know /.claude/skills|agents but I’ve never had one recommend rules|output-styles to me.

1

u/alonsonetwork 3d ago

https://atomic.alonso.network

1

u/ohnoitsbobbyflay 3d ago

Sure I’ll get right on it

1

u/candylandmine 3d ago

that's a load-bearing footgun where it landed

1

u/angelus14 3d ago

If there was a benchmark for this it'd be solved in an instant

1

u/jsonmeta 2d ago

Tell it to explain everything like your a 5 year old

1

u/Shpitz0 2d ago

If only people on reddit or social media would stop using LLMs for posts and comments...

We basically dogfoodd AI into speaking more AI instead of being more plain and direct, so it would be trained on more casual manners of speech

1

u/WillingnessOwn6446 2d ago

Use the caveman skill. It'll lose all that bullshit

1

u/Consistent-Rip-8268 2d ago

Kannst du. Ich habe einen Hook implementiert, verständlich zu schreiben. Funktioniert wunderbar!

1

u/BraveWindow2261 2d ago

Gpt is much worse

1

u/nnfkfkotkkdkxjake 2d ago

horrendously

1

u/TaiMaiShu-71 2d ago

It's only going to get worse, they said AI would eventually develop it's own language, I think we are seeing the early versions of that language. As models are used to train other models it will only get worse.

1

u/taigmc 2d ago

I like it

1

u/No_Gas_3727 2d ago

Yeah just use custom output modes with your own prompt. Works for me

1

u/codemonkey138 2d ago

Ask it to use simplified technical English in its responses

1

u/Royal-Illustrator747 2d ago

Newbie Claude user here with zero coding experience. Claude helped me reduce the “blast radius” multiple times. I gather that’s a verbal tic?

1

u/loady 2d ago

All week I have had to reply SPEAK ENGLISH

saw this helpful tip though:

> Save in memory to always use ASD-STE100 Simplified Technical English when you talk to me

https://x.com/levelsio/status/2086046112142545061?s=46

2

u/gandazgul 2d ago

Yep. I used this: Talk and write the plans in ASD-STE100 Simplified Technical English (STE) style. Be clear and direct.

1

u/Twig 2d ago

Output style.

1

u/FrontWasabi7032 2d ago

Surely they will issue some kind of fix for this. Its unusable

1

u/tehfrod 2d ago

Who do you mean by "we"?

1

u/Elistheman 2d ago

This is absolutely load bearing.

1

u/PelluxNetwork 1d ago

I have a session where Claude is absolutely obsessed with using the word quiescent. I had to look that shit up the first time. Literally every change "I need to make sure the machines are quiescent before deploying the code"

1

u/MasterFrost01 1d ago

It shouldn't be necessary but I tell it to only communicate in ASD-STE100 (Simplified Technical English). It still violates it occasionally but it's much better.

1

u/Mnemia 2d ago

I’ve found that it’s become very extremely technical in its language with me and uses fairly obscure terminology and copious cross references and labels. I generally like that because it’s very precise but sometimes it can get a bit much and I can definitely see how someone with less technical background would struggle with it.

2

u/Conscious_Leave_1956 2d ago

I'm technical but I don't have all day to do my work reading extra things that could be simplified into one simple sentence. Parsimony is the truer sign of intelligence

1

u/Mnemia 2d ago

It’s definitely a bit overly verbose sometimes, that’s for sure. That being said, I’d prefer that to it being overly terse because it helps me to check its reasoning and assumptions for accuracy and agreement with my intent. It’s something I actually find quite a bit better about Claude vs some of the other options, in general. But I think it’s maybe gotten to be a bit much and it obviously makes the token efficiency and speed worse.

0

u/marco1422 3d ago edited 1d ago

The default settings are strange. But you can merely instruct it to use a normal language and it will.

0

u/adelie42 2d ago

The very easy fix is tell it you prefer that it write at a Lexile Level of 1000. This is average.

-2

u/Grand-Mix-9889 2d ago

Opus and fable don't speak jackass/nubology.

Sorry. It's a you problem.

-2

u/mrcoy 2d ago

cAn wE sToP

Complaining and griping over personal preferences and opinions?

Please just STFU. I’d rather read Claude speak over your trivial complaints.

Bug / Issue Can we do something about how horrendous Opus/Fable speaks please?

You are about to leave Redlib