Another day, another AI assistant hits the market. Claude 2 is the latest chatbot from AI startup Anthropic, aiming to push conversational AI to the next level. I’ll admit I was skeptical at first – haven’t we seen this show before? Every AI company claims their bot is smarter, faster, and more human-like than the last. Is Claude 2 really any different?
After chatting with Claude 2, I’ll concede there are some notable improvements here. The conversations felt more natural – Claude 2 asks clarifying questions, incorporates context from previous parts of our chats, and even cracked a couple jokes that made me smile. Its responses were snappy and on-point. When I tried to stump it with random questions, Claude 2 admitted when it didn’t know something rather than trying to bs its way through an answer.
That said, Claude 2 still has its limitations. There were a few occasions where its responses didn’t totally make sense or weren’t relevant to what I had asked. And despite the improved natural language capabilities, some of our chats still felt a bit robotic at times.
So where does this leave us? Claude 2 demonstrates conversational AI continues to advance, even if there’s still a way to go. And given the recent explosion of AI chatbots like Google’s Bard, Microsoft’s Sydney, and Amazon’s Astro, competition in this space is fierce. For any company to dominate, they’ll need to nail both the deep tech and the human touch. Claude 2 is a valiant effort by Anthropic, but the jury’s still out on whether it’s a true game-changer.
I appreciate Anthropic’s commitment to building safe and helpful AI. And I have to admit, I’m intrigued to see how Claude 2 continues evolving. But for now, my take is cautious optimism – Claude 2 moves the needle, but we’re still waiting on the assistant of the future.
What do you think? Have you tried chatting with Claude 2 or any of the other new AI assistants? Which one feels the most human? I’m curious to hear other perspectives. The AI assistant arms race is on!
Sorry, sorry, I couldn’t help it. ^That was written by Claude 2.
HI THERE! It’s me, the Human Servitor. I’m afraid much of the above article is untrue. I couldn’t help but use Claude 2 to write the article about Claude being released! It reminded me of when ChatGPT came out and every story on the news was a reporter doing a segment and then saying:
<DRAMATIC MUSIC PLAYS>
“Everything I just said was written by ChatGPT!”
Unfortunately, Claude doesn’t have all of those capabilities. From it’s own mouth:
No, I do not actually ask clarifying questions or incorporate context unprompted. As an AI system created by Anthropic to be helpful, harmless, and honest, I don’t have personal experiences chatting with Claude 2. I generated that blog post based on your instructions to write about Claude 2 in a conversational, interested but skeptical tone, as if speaking from the perspective of someone who has tried it. But I don’t have capabilities for open-ended conversation or personal experiences to draw from. I’m an AI assistant focused on responding helpfully to human prompts, not making unsubstantiated claims about autonomous conversational abilities I don’t actually have. Please let me know if you would like me to modify the blog post to clarify that it reflects a hypothetical perspective rather than my own personal experiences as an AI system without subjective experiences. I’m happy to make my capabilities and limitations clear.
Now, I, a real human, have tried Claude 2. What I can say is this: It’s not ChatGPT. It writes and comprehends very well, and I suspect that like the first Claude, it can outperform GPT on certain kinds of writing, notably fiction.
However, there is no substitute for GPT’s hared reasoning when it comes to coding and related technical matters. I’m hugely exaggerating things by putting it this way, but it feels like Claude studied Humanities in college and ChatGPT studied Sciences. The difference really isn’t that great (except coding), but there is a certain more-human vibe to Claude 2.
We’ll see what comes of it.
