What would optimal use of LLMs even look like?

Reddit r/singularity 06/12/26, 04:33 PM News

Summary

Explores the speculative idea of optimizing human interaction with LLMs by conforming to their native communication patterns, such as using neuralese, rather than forcing them to adapt to human language.

Frontier AI models right are smart in the sense of taking a genius (but not crazy smart genius) like Charles Darwin but wiring his brain to a machine that turns his thoughts into text, and when thinking longer it takes that text, wipes his memory and inputs this text into his memory and makes him do it over and over again. But what if we tried to conform to the LLM’s needs rather then it to ours. Currently Fable 5 is reported to sometimes speak rubbish that turns out to be it actually trying to use dense code-words to make itself smarter, but what if we conformed to it and not just let it speak that way but form our prompts in the optimal way. Neuralese are being now talked about but what if we also spoke in neuralese to the AI, I am not saying that we should if the AI itself doesn’t even talk that way, but what it could LOOK like? What do you think?

Original Article

Similar Articles

Why can't LLMs be trained to think in an optimized AI language rather than English?

Reddit r/singularity

A speculative discussion questioning why LLMs are not trained to think in an optimized internal language rather than natural language, and whether that could improve efficiency.

Evaluating LLMs as Human Surrogates in Controlled Experiments

arXiv cs.CL

This paper evaluates whether off-the-shelf LLMs can reliably simulate human responses in controlled behavioral experiments by comparing LLM-generated data with human survey responses on accuracy perception. The findings show that while LLMs capture directional effects and aggregate belief-updating patterns, they do not consistently match human-scale effect magnitudes, clarifying when synthetic LLM data can serve as behavioral proxies.

Examining Human-Like Behaviors in LLMs: A Multi-Dimensional Analysis of Model Behaviors, User Factors, and System Prompts

arXiv cs.AI

This paper presents a multi-dimensional analysis of human-like behaviors in LLMs, examining prevalence, effects, and controllability across 21,000 conversations from four models, finding that behaviors vary by model and user factors, with implications for responsible design.

Quoting Bryan Cantrill

Simon Willison's Blog

Bryan Cantrill critiques LLMs for lacking the optimization constraint of human laziness, arguing that LLMs will unnecessarily complicate systems rather than improve them, and highlighting how human time limitations drive the development of efficient abstractions.

Are super tiny LLMs any good?