Where’s the ambition? This reads like a long ad for Claude, from an EM with AI psychosis.
> I want a deeper version of this task, not a bigger one. Before rewriting it: (1) say what a top professional in this field would do here that I’m not asking for; (2) name the rawest material they would start from instead of what has already been digested for me; (3) name the specific methods and tools they would use; (4) say what, other than you or me, would show the result is right. Then rewrite my prompt to ask for exactly that.
Sorry, but this is along the same vein as “make no mistakes”. Don’t give Anthropic even more of your money to burn tokens on stuff like this.
> This isn’t a particularly unique insight, every single heist movie spends the first 30 minutes assembling a diverse cast of characters and talents. As AI products make it easier and easier to run multi-agent systems (with multiple threads, orchestrators, or simply subagents), I’ve seen really interesting results by imploring Claude to bring in additional fields.
Again, this is an ad to get you to burn more tokens.
> Meetings (the good kind, anyway) ideally end with some decisions. Ask Claude: “Work out which three decisions are most urgent in the face of everything you’ve learned, and start working on potential directions with for/against arguments.”
Jesus, man, weren’t you just in the meeting? Just send your Claude next time, please don’t bother attending. This isn’t even ambition, it’s laziness.
—-
Use AI all you want: let it unblock you and move on to the next thing.
Anthropic employees just need to practice being normal human beings. Outside of their cult, the stuff they say is just weird.
“Work out which three decisions are most urgent” sounds like it is inviting horribly embarrassing mistakes. What will you do if, in three months, it transpires that Claude overlooked an obviously urgent decision, and you didn't notice because you didn't actually analyze or even look at the data?
I like this article, it's a gentle reminder that there's always something more to achieve. It's akin to the book The Magic of Thinking Big by David J. Schwartz.
Although I feel it's missing substance to help backup the idea that generic ambitious prompts are more effective.
> Eventually I asked Claude to simply keep our apps crash-free
And did it work? What % fewer crashes are there now?
Yeah, the more ambitious I get the more Claude doesn't follow the plan and just makes up random stuff to get the tests to pass instead of following the design...
Where’s the ambition? This reads like a long ad for Claude, from an EM with AI psychosis.
> I want a deeper version of this task, not a bigger one. Before rewriting it: (1) say what a top professional in this field would do here that I’m not asking for; (2) name the rawest material they would start from instead of what has already been digested for me; (3) name the specific methods and tools they would use; (4) say what, other than you or me, would show the result is right. Then rewrite my prompt to ask for exactly that.
Sorry, but this is along the same vein as “make no mistakes”. Don’t give Anthropic even more of your money to burn tokens on stuff like this.
> This isn’t a particularly unique insight, every single heist movie spends the first 30 minutes assembling a diverse cast of characters and talents. As AI products make it easier and easier to run multi-agent systems (with multiple threads, orchestrators, or simply subagents), I’ve seen really interesting results by imploring Claude to bring in additional fields.
Again, this is an ad to get you to burn more tokens.
> Meetings (the good kind, anyway) ideally end with some decisions. Ask Claude: “Work out which three decisions are most urgent in the face of everything you’ve learned, and start working on potential directions with for/against arguments.”
Jesus, man, weren’t you just in the meeting? Just send your Claude next time, please don’t bother attending. This isn’t even ambition, it’s laziness.
—-
Use AI all you want: let it unblock you and move on to the next thing.
Anthropic employees just need to practice being normal human beings. Outside of their cult, the stuff they say is just weird.
“Work out which three decisions are most urgent” sounds like it is inviting horribly embarrassing mistakes. What will you do if, in three months, it transpires that Claude overlooked an obviously urgent decision, and you didn't notice because you didn't actually analyze or even look at the data?
> What will you do if
He will ask Claude.
The concept of altitude in this context makes a lot of sense
I like this article, it's a gentle reminder that there's always something more to achieve. It's akin to the book The Magic of Thinking Big by David J. Schwartz.
Although I feel it's missing substance to help backup the idea that generic ambitious prompts are more effective.
> Eventually I asked Claude to simply keep our apps crash-free
And did it work? What % fewer crashes are there now?
Yeah, the more ambitious I get the more Claude doesn't follow the plan and just makes up random stuff to get the tests to pass instead of following the design...