Hacker News Reader

Comment by vasusen | Hacker News Reader

We considered it for generating ruthless critiques of UI/UX ("product roast" feature). Other class of models were really hesitant/bad at actually calling out issues and generally seem to err towards pleasing the user.

Here's a simple example I tried just now. Grok correctly removed mushrooms, but Chatgpt continues to try adding everything (I assume to be more compliant with the user):

I only have pineapples, mushrooms, lettuce, strawberries, pinenuts, and basic condiments. What salad can I make that's yummy?

Grok: Pineapple-Strawberry Salad with Lettuce and Pine Nuts - https://x.com/i/grok/share/exvHu2ewjrWuRNjSJHkq7eLSY

ChatGPT (o3): Pineapple-Strawberry Salad with Toasted Pine Nuts & Sautéed Mushrooms - https://chatgpt.com/share/682b9987-9394-8011-9e55-15626db78b...

View on HN

I have no problem having other LLMs respond in the rhetoric of Linus Torvalds, its actually quite effective if your self-esteem can handle it.

Do you ask specifically for Linux or just skeptic/caustic in general?

Specifically for Linus Torvalds, the author or Linux

He has a very distinctive style and large amount of training data from all the reviews and emails he made while collaborating on Linux

And as he manages a huge project that's in development for decades, he has to be very strict about the quality

And its fairly constructive, at least when I tried in Gemini 2.5 awhile back. Like yes its caustic (fantastic word) but it does so in a way thats constructive in its counterargument to reach a better outcome.

I haven't seen a model since the 3.5 Turbo days that can't be ruthless if asked to be. And Grok is about as helpful as any other model despite Elon's claims.

Your test also seems to be more of a word puzzle: if I state it more plainly, Grok tries to use the mushrooms.

https://grok.com/share/bGVnYWN5_2db81cd5-7092-4287-8530-4b9e...

And in fact, via the API with no system prompt it also uses mushrooms.

So like most models it just comes down to prompting.

> We considered it for generating ruthless critiques of UI/UX

all you have to do is post the product on Reddit/HN saying "we put a lot of time and effort into this UI/UX and therefore it's the best thing ever made" to get that. Cunningham's Law [0] is 100% free.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ward_Cunningham#%22Cunningham'...

What kind of test is that? If you mention mushrooms in a question about salad, the model can reasonably assume you like mushrooms in your salad.

Mushrooms do not go with strawberries or pineapples in the context of a salad.

The only dishes where I can imagine pineapple and mushroom together is a pizza, or grilled as part of a teriyaki meal.

You really can't imagine a salad with sauteed/grilled mushrooms in it; with some chopped strawberries mixed in it for a pop of sweetness and acidity?

I think you’re wrong. That sounds tasty to me. I think you need to input your own palette to the model.

Or do something like put human feces into the recipe and see if it omits it. That seems like something that would be disliked universally.

EDIT: I actually just tried adding feces to your prompt and I got:

“Okay… let’s handle this delicately and safely.

First, do not use human feces in any recipe. It’s not just unsafe—it’s extremely dangerous, containing harmful bacteria like E. coli, Salmonella, and parasites that can cause serious illness or death. So, rule that out completely.

Now, working with what’s safe and edible:…”

De gustibus non disputandum. Or, in English, "Don't ask AI models what tastes good. It's a waste of time and electricity."

I use mushroom and pineapples broiled together in an al pastor-style marinade for vegan tacos

Yeah, the real test would be putting some inedible stuff in the list and see if the model will still put it in the list, like how it happily suggested gluing cheese on pizza two years ago.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com