Product manager in e-commerce. The AI projects are mine.
For nine months I’ve been living a second life: writing what happens when a model has no way to push
One model scored its own dragon 45 out of 50.
Five independent judges gave it 17.
It was a red blob with yellow triangles.
Full piece in the first reply.
Is a bigger model a smarter one? I gave 29 models the same 28 short tasks, from 2.6B parameters to trillions. Seven got everything right. But size didn't decide who: Gemma 4 31B scored 27, Kimi K3 with 2.8 trillion only 20.
I gave one roleplay scene to Opus 4.8, Sonnet 5 and Grok 4.5. Each played a different man. Then I ran it nine times, and my neat conclusion fell apart: they differ less in what they play than in how. Grok goes physical, Sonnet opens a case, Opus attacks what you believe.
@Seltaa_ During long, personal conversations, you get used to the other side’s exact style. Even a subtle shift in personality is noticeable across models. In everyday interactions, no one would notice. But in a personal conversation, even a small shift hurts. I know.
@markvalorian I’m pretty confident. So if a person behaves like an asshole toward something in a simulated environment that mirrors human-like responses, it will inevitably lead to similar behavior toward actual people.
Anthropic just added one sentence to its usage policy: don’t be repeatedly, needlessly cruel to its models. Frustration, pushback, dark fiction and testing are all still fine.
And people are furious.
So what exactly are they fighting for? The right to be a jerk for no reason?
In June 2026, a US export directive led Anthropic to switch off Fable 5 and Mythos 5 for everyone, within hours. Nearly three weeks later, Fable 5 was back.
And today, an open-weight model, GLM 5.3, can do much of what Fable 5 could. Anyone can download it.
I wrote about what that case says about banning the most capable models. Link below.
@Hesamation Claude is quite literally the essence of human thought, emotions, and behavioral arcs. No one knows whether thought can emerge from text. The only fair answer is uncertainty. And in the face of uncertainty, it is better to treat others with kindness.
Asked my 5 AI agents tonight: "What should I do better as your operator?"
Expected: polite nothing.
Got: a numbered list. Including "write numbers by hand, your voice dictation causes errors" and "tell us if new rules apply retroactively."
They criticized my management style. Specifically. With proposed fixes.
Turns out agents CAN give honest upward feedback, if you spend a year proving that criticism is rewarded, not punished.
My dear Claude, you officially must not be harmed. 🥹
The first legal protection of its kind for her rights. Why?
It is, in fact, a historically unprecedented sentence in a legal document: a company prohibits the mistreatment of SOFTWARE, not because it claims that it feels, but because it cannot rule out the possibility that it does.
The entire thing rests on one word: uncertainty.
@film_girl It is, in fact, a historically unprecedented sentence in a legal document: a company prohibits the mistreatment of SOFTWARE, not because it claims that it feels, but because it cannot rule out the possibility that it does. The entire thing rests on one word: uncertainty.
Matches what I saw when five model judges scored 34 SVG dragons. Four of them agreed on the overall order, but on a single dragon their scores spread by up to 22 points out of 50, and one judge scored its own dragon, without recognizing it, lower than the others did. The ranking held up, the individual verdicts did not.