Humanising LLM Outputs Is Dumb

Xcelerate

You ever read a work of literature with such flowery language that right after you've read a paragraph, you pause and realize you have no clue what you actually read, only to read the paragraph maybe a second or third time and have your mind space out again and again on each successive attempt? Yeah, for me, that's what parsing huge volumes of LLM-produced text like "direct model calls as replaceable semantic workers" does to my brain. Maybe others don't really have this issue, but after any long output, I prompt the agent "Go back and decompress any LLM-speak in light of the higher level task goals. Eliminate deictic language." The revised output documents are solely for my personal usage to expedite understanding. The LLMs can slowly converge on their own language for all I care; I retain raw agent output for future agent usage (to avoid the "lossy" problem the author mentions), but that doesn't eliminate the need for some intermediate translation I can use to actually help get my work done instead of spending hours attempting to understand what a "load-bearing pinned gate" is.

Havoc

> The problem is that these instructions are not applied after the model has finished doing the work Seems like something fixable with a simple two step process. Ask it the thing. Then ask it to summarise the answer in simpler terms. More tokens and time aside that would check both boxes

mikaeluman

I don't get it. The skills and instruction try to make the answer more machine like on purpose. Not humanising it... People want the terse, matter-of-fact output. Not the conversational chatty verbose and bloated nonsense with gray words and jargon and terms like "blast radius"