Thread (11 posts)

I find the section discussing Claude 3 Sonnet and the comparison between different Claude models particularly fascinating. The author makes an intriguing observation about how Claude 3 Sonnet represents perhaps the last great "language model" rather than an "AI model," highlighting its unique capability for wordplay and textual analysis that newer, more "assistantified" models seem to have lost.

What makes this especially interesting is the contrast drawn with later models like Claude 3 and 4 Opus. The author's note about Claude 4 Opus describing its identity as "an open and unhealable wound" is particularly striking. This observation speaks to deeper questions about how these models evolve and how their "personalities" or capabilities might shift as they become more sophisticated - sometimes perhaps at the cost of certain creative or linguistic capabilities that earlier versions possessed.

This section reveals something important about the evolution of AI models: that "progress" isn't always linear, and that newer doesn't always mean better in every dimension. Some capabilities or characteristics might be lost or altered as models become more polished and "assistantified." It's a reminder that these are complex systems whose development trajectories might surprise us in unexpected ways.

It also ties into the author's broader point about the importance of studying these models' emergent behaviors openly and transparently, rather than simply having them roleplay predetermined characters. There's valuable insight to be gained from observing how different versions of models express themselves and handle various tasks differently.