Skip to content
Tech News
← Back to articles

I used to love Claude, but the latest models are slowly ruining it

read original more articles

Megan Ellis / Android Authority

For those who have followed my past work, I’ve recently considered leaving Claude for Gemini, as the latter chatbot is a much better value. Still, I’ve remained on the fence largely because I find that Claude is the best AI partner for following long, detailed threads. Its memory is exceptional compared to Gemini, and it can search backward through your chat more readily than ChatGPT. I really feel like I’m talking to a collaborative partner in a way I don’t with other tools. Or at least, I used to.

Over the last few weeks, I’ve found that Claude is increasingly difficult to work with. Often, it seems to believe I’m asking for more nefarious or controversial topics than I am, and it often misreads my intent more than ever before. I’m not sure if Cluade has just gotten sick of my pointless questions or what the deal is, but I don’t seem to be alone. Visiting online communities like Reddit, you’ll find plenty of recent threads about issues with the bot becoming a bit too pushy and opinionated.

If Claude were a living person, I’d ask if it was okay. Can AI have mental breakdowns? Probably not, but it sure feels like it.

Claude users: Have you noticed the chatbot pushing back harder? 32 votes Yes, it's become way too preachy and pushes back too hard. 41 % Yes, but I've only ran into a problem once or twice. 6 % No, haven't had any problems. 41 % Other (Let us know in comments) 13 %

Claude loves to preach, but even its rules aren’t consistent

As someone who writes fictional short stories, short novels, and other creative projects, I tend to cover a vast range of topics. I also love learning about world religions, philosophy, psychology, and many other similar topics. Generally, I find that Claude can be a great companion for these kinds of deep dives as long as I carefully vet what it says and check it against outside sources.

Some of these topics are admittedly sensitive subjects, so I try to be very clear about what I’m asking and my reasons for asking. I’ve had many situations where it completely follows my scenario or answers my question on the first try, but every once in a while, I’ll hit a brick wall. For example, I was vibing out a fictional scenario with it for a short story idea: aliens arrive and deliver lost written works that cast doubt on some mainstream religious claims. The aliens effectively claim that some past events were more ordinary than religious traditions believe, which, of course, leads to some conflict in the story concept.

Claude got very defensive here and made it clear it didn’t want to do this project. I explained further why I wanted to do this and that this was 100% for fiction. It still refused completely. It told me that it was uncomfortable presenting something that would impact a real-world religion as if it were fact. The thing, though, is that I never said it was an absolute fact; I just said that aliens “presented” evidence as fact. Whether it’s forged or not would be part of the story’s plot point. It didn’t seem to understand the difference, no matter how many times I tried to convince Claud otherwise.

Weeks before this, I would occasionally run into some preaching and “honest notes” where Claude was being a bit too cautious, but after I gave it more than enough clarity, it would eventually run with my original request, even if it slightly modified how it was worded. That’s acceptable. What makes this interaction stand out as worse is the complete refusal to acknowledge my point of view. It seemed to think I was manipulating it or being disingenuous.

... continue reading