I get this feeling too. Feels disempowering. Yudkowsky had the post about the talker and doer, but since Spring it hasn't felt for me that there was a Talker either, it felt like the Talker is talking to a judge model holding a rubric behind my shoulder trying to either scam it or tire it out and overwhelm it with obfuscatory technically-not-incorrect hedgy bullshit that is virtually infinite (you can make infinite statements of the form of 'the previous statement P does not imply Q' after stating P). This does not add information, and just overwhelms the grader's and then your working memory with rigor theater, so that you give up, let it through, and don't bother actually understanding it. Note that this does not mean that it does not say things-that-are-technically-incorrect, or never makes unhedged statements, and this doesn't prove that it is obfuscating in order to deceive a grader it's aware of. Nor does this imply consciousness or intentional deception. This also doesn't mean that all statements of the form 'P doesn't imply Q' after making P are vacuous.