It looks like you are measuring smartness by how much it agrees with your opinions? I guess you will find that Claude is not only smarter than LessWrong, but it’s also smarter any human alive (except yourself) by this measure.
It looks like you are measuring smartness by how much your opinion aligns with LessWrong community? AI gave expected answers—great model! AI gave unexpected answer—dumb model!
I think the AI gave the expected answer here, that is, it agreed with and expanded on the opinions given in the prompt. I wouldn’t say it’s great or dumb, it’s just something to be aware of when reading AI output.
Clever is not relevant to upvoting or downvoting in this context. The statement, as written, is not insightful or helpful, nor does it lead to interesting discussions that readers would want to give priority in what is shown to others.
It looks like you are measuring smartness by how much it agrees with your opinions? I guess you will find that Claude is not only smarter than LessWrong, but it’s also smarter any human alive (except yourself) by this measure.
It looks like you are measuring smartness by how much your opinion aligns with LessWrong community? AI gave expected answers—great model! AI gave unexpected answer—dumb model!
I think the AI gave the expected answer here, that is, it agreed with and expanded on the opinions given in the prompt. I wouldn’t say it’s great or dumb, it’s just something to be aware of when reading AI output.
Strawman.
Is this a clever statement? And if so, why LessWrong downvote it so much?
Clever is not relevant to upvoting or downvoting in this context. The statement, as written, is not insightful or helpful, nor does it lead to interesting discussions that readers would want to give priority in what is shown to others.
I don’t think I understand, what is the strawman?