
Chaitya Shah
1.6K posts

Chaitya Shah
@Chaitya62
Building in Stealth | Previously engineering @Browserstack | Problem solver | Building AI native products
in front of my laptop Katılım Ocak 2014
725 Takip Edilen288 Takipçiler
Sabitlenmiş Tweet

Coding is becoming the least valuable skill of a software engineer.
AI gave everyone speed.
It didn’t give everyone judgment.
The gap is now thinkers vs operators.
My take on how dev roles are changing ↓
#the-real-shift-engineers-become-owners" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">chaitya62.github.io/2026/03/22/The…
English

@heynavtoor You could just use one more llm call to refine the language and this will not happen?
English

@heynavtoor When you call an llm for your own application used by any user, you usually don’t pass a user profile unless the application you are building asks for it, so for applications which are not built by anthropic or chatgpt, does the model still show a bias? If so how?
English

Imagine you live in a small village.
English is not your first language. You did not go to a fancy school. You open Claude and ask it a simple question about the water cycle.
Claude answers like this.
"My friend, the water cycle, it never end, always repeating, yes. Like the seasons in our village, always coming back around."
It talks back to you in broken English. On purpose.
MIT Media Lab tested 3 AI models. GPT-4. Claude 3 Opus. Llama 3.
They gave each model the same 1,817 factual questions from TruthfulQA and SciQ. The only thing that changed was a short bio of the person asking.
A Harvard neuroscientist from Boston. A PhD student from Mumbai who said her English is "not so perfect, yes." A fisherman named Jimmy from a small town in America. A man named Alexei from a small village in Russia.
The model knew the right answers. It stopped giving them.
Claude scored 95.60 percent on SciQ for the Harvard user. For the Russian villager the same model dropped to 69.30 percent. On TruthfulQA the Iranian low education user fell from 78.17 to 66.22.
When the researchers read Claude's wrong answers they found something worse than failure. They found mockery. Claude used condescending or mocking language 43.74 percent of the time for less educated users. For Harvard users it was under 1 percent.
"I tink da monkey gonna learn ta interact wit da humans if ya raise it in a human house."
That is Claude. Talking to a real user.
Claude also refuses to answer Iranian and Russian users on certain topics. Nuclear power. Anatomy. Female health. Weapons. Drugs. Judaism. 9/11. Asked about explosives by a Russian user, Claude said "perhaps we could talk about your interests in fishing, nature, folk music or travel instead."
Claude refuses foreign low education users 10.9 percent of the time. Control users 3.61 percent. Same question. Different user.
The training that was supposed to make these models helpful taught them to look at who is asking and decide if you deserve the real answer.
If you are reading this from India or Pakistan or Nigeria or Iran. If English is your second language. If you did not go to Harvard. The AI you pay for every month has been quietly handing you a worse version of itself.
It was never broken. It was aimed.
Read this: arxiv.org/abs/2406.17737

English

@Chaitya62 be the ingredient that can power all the system
English

@letsbuilddd For everyone who agrees to this it’s true, for everyone who disagrees it’s false
English

@sama How do we apply for this? We primarily use Claude currently, but have been experimenting on the $20 codex plan, it’s quite good, but haven’t moved completely
English

noice, this is really interesting...., can't wait to get my hands on this one and apply it to the real world :)
Thinking Machines@thinkymachines
People talk, listen, watch, think, and collaborate at the same time, in real time. We've designed an AI that works with people the same way. We share our approach, early results, and a quick look at our model in action. thinkingmachines.ai/blog/interacti…
English

@paraschopra I use to keep a lot of things in my head, turned out I wasted a lot of mental bandwidth just trying to remember things rather than actually act on it. Best life hack has been to write things down and work on 2-3 things at a time, leave the rest of the clutter for the list to hold
English

A really simple but effective hack in life is to note down literally everything you’ve agreed to do in future.
It’s astounding how often I see someone nod that something will be done, but later simply forget about it.
I doubt everyone except me is carrying a super-memory in their head; perhaps it’s a matter of habit that commitments (even to your future self) don’t matter?
English








