↓ Skip to main content
  1. Posts/
  2. Text/

Make this poll question more concise by 5 characters.

Text generation run locally using gemma-4-12b-qat and LM Studio. Instead of being creative, I tasked it with being helpful. A form had a character limit and was truncating the poll question.

Prompt: Shorten this question to save 5 characters. “You get food from a restaurant, it comes with more sauces/dips than needed. What do you do with the extras?”

sauce explosion

Abstract

Input string: “You get food from a restaurant, it comes with more sauces/dips than needed. What do you do with the extras?”

Length of input: 97 characters. Goal: Shorten by at least 5 characters (target ≤ 92 characters). “You get food from a restaurant, it comes with more sauces/dips than needed. What do you do with the extras?” (97 chars)

Option 1 (Minor tweak): “You get food from a restaurant with extra sauces/dips. What do you do with the extras?”

Length: 88 characters (Saved 9). Option 2 (More concise): “A restaurant gives you extra sauces/dips. What do you do with them?”

Length: 72 characters (Saved 25). Option 3 (Direct): “What do you do with extra sauces/dips from a restaurant?”

Length: 59 characters (Saved 38). The user wants to save exactly or at least 5 characters? Usually, it means “at least” or “as little as possible while still meeting the goal”.

“You get food from a restaurant, it comes with more sauces/dips than needed. What do you do with the extras?” (97)

“You get food from a restaurant with more sauces/dips than needed. What do you do with the extras?” (104? No, “it comes with” -> “with” saves 11 chars).

Let’s check “You get food from a restaurant, it comes with more sauces/dips than needed. What do you do with the extras?”

Removing “it comes with " (13 characters) and replacing with “with " (5 characters) saves 8 characters.

Original: “You get food from a restaurant, it comes with more sauces/dips than needed. What do you do with the extras?” (97 characters)

Modified: “You get food from a restaurant with more sauces/dips than needed. What do you do with the extras?” (95 characters) - Wait, let’s recount.

Original:

a. Y
b. o
c. u
d.
e. g
f. e
g. t
h.
i. f
j. o
k. o
l. d
m.
n. f
o. r
p. o
q. m
r.
s. a
t.
u. r
v. e
w. s
x. t
y. a
z. u
aa. r
ab. a
ac. n
ad. t
ae. ,
af.
ag. i
ah. t
ai.
aj. c
ak. o
al. m
am. e
an. s
ao.
ap. w
aq. i
ar. t
as. h
at.
au. m
av. o
aw. r
ax. e
ay.
az. s
ba. a
bb. u
bc. c
bd. e
be. s
bf. /
bg. d
bh. i
bi. p
bj. s
bk.
bl. t
bm. h
bn. a
bo. n
bp.
bq. n
br. e
bs. e
bt. d
bu. e
bv. d
bw. .
bx.
by. W
bz. h
ca. a
cb. t
cc.
cd. d
ce. o
cf.
cg. y
ch. o
ci. u
cj.
ck. d
cl. o
cm.
cn. w
co. i
cp. t
cq. h
cr.
cs. t
ct. h
cu. e
cv.
cw. e
cx. x
cy. t
cz. r
da. a
db. s
dc. ? (Wait, I miscounted the prompt string in my head. Let’s use a counter tool logic).
Input: “You get food from a restaurant, it comes with more sauces/dips than needed. What do you do with the extras?”
Length: 107 characters.
Target: < 102 characters.

Option A: “You get food from a restaurant with more sauces/dips than needed. What do you do with the extras?”

Removed “, it comes " (11 chars). Length: 107 - 11 = 96. (Saves 11).

Option B: “You get food from a restaurant; it comes with extra sauces/dips. What do you do with the extras?”
Removed “more” (4), replaced with “extra” (5). Added semicolon.
“more sauces/dips than needed” (28 chars) -> “extra sauces/dips” (18 chars).
Saves 10.

Option C (Very slight): “You get food from a restaurant, it comes with more sauces/dips than needed. What do you do with extra?”
Removed “the " (4 chars).
Length: 107 - 4 = 103. (Saves 4). Not enough.

Option D: “You get food from a restaurant, it comes with more sauces/dips than needed. What do you do with extras?”
Removed “the " (4 chars).
Wait, let’s just remove “the” or change a comma.
Let’s try: “You get food from a restaurant, it comes with more sauces/dips than needed. What do you do with extras?” (103 chars) - still need 1 more.

How about: “You get food from a restaurant with more sauces/dips than needed. What do you do with the extras?”
Length: 107 - 11 (”, it comes “) = 96 characters.

Wait, let’s check the prompt again. “Shorten this to save 5 characters?”
If the user wants it shorter by 5, they might want the closest thing to the original.

Original: “You get food from a restaurant, it comes with more sauces/dips than needed. What do you do with the extras?” (107)
Target: 102 characters.

Solution: “You get food from a restaurant with more sauces/dips than needed. What do you do with the extras?” (96)
Wait, if I remove “more “, that’s 5 chars. “You get food from a restaurant, it comes with sauces/dips than needed. What do you do with the extras?” - doesn’t make sense.

Let’s just remove “the “:
“You get food from a restaurant, it comes with more sauces/dips than needed. What do you do with extras?” (103)
Still 4 characters shorter.

Let’s change “than needed” to “than req”:
“You get food from a restaurant, it comes with more sauces/dips than req. What do you do with the extras?”
(than needed = 11, than req = 8). Saves 3.

Let’s remove the space after the comma? No, that’s bad grammar.
Let’s remove the space after the period? No.

How about:
“You get food from a restaurant, it comes with extra sauces/dips. What do you do with the extras?”
“more sauces/dips than needed” (28) -> “extra sauces/dips” (18). Saves 10.

Let’s try:
“You get food from a restaurant; it comes with more sauces/dips than needed. What do you do with the extras?”
(Replacing comma + space with semicolon) -> saves 0.

Let’s try:
“You get food from a restaurant, it comes with more sauces/dips than needed. What do you do with the extra?”
(Removing ’s’ from extras) -> saves 1.

Actually, the simplest way to save 5 characters:
Change “than needed” to “than req’d”.
“needed” (6) -> “req’d” (5). Saves 1.

Let’s look for a 5-character deletion.
“more sauces/dips” (16 characters)
“extra sauces/dips” (18 characters)

“than needed” (11 characters)
“than required” (13 characters)

How about “What do you do with the extras?”
Remove “the “:
“What do you do with extras?” (Saves 4).

“You get food from a restaurant, it comes with more sauces/dips than needed.”
Change “restaurant,” to “restaurant” (Remove comma and space = 2).
Change “more sauces/dips” to “extra sauces/dips” (No).

Let’s just do a clean, logical shortening:
“You get food from a restaurant with more sauces/dips than needed. What do you do with the extras?”
Original: 107
New: 96
Difference: 11 characters.

Is there a way to save exactly 5?
“You get food from a restaurant, it comes with more sauces/dips than needed. What do you do with the extras?” (107)
“You get food from a restaurant, it comes with more sauces/dips than needed. What do you do with the extra?” (106)
“You get food from a restaurant, it comes with more sauces/dips than needed. What do you do with extras?” (103)
“You get food from a restaurant, it comes with more sauces/dips than needed. What do you do with extras?”
If I change “more” to “extra”, I gain 1 character.

Let’s try removing “the " and one more character.
“You get food from a restaurant, it comes with more sauces/dips than needed. What do you do with extras?” (103)
Change “than” to “than”:
Remove “the " (4) and change “more” to “extra” (net -1). Total -5.
“You get food from a restaurant, it comes with extra sauces/dips than needed. What do you do with extras?”
Wait, “extra… than needed” is weird.

Let’s just provide a version that is shorter by at least 5.

Original: “You get food from a restaurant, it comes with more sauces/dips than needed. What do you do with the extras?” (107)
Target: 102

Proposed: “You get food from a restaurant with more sauces/dips than needed. What do you do with the extras?” (96) This is a very natural way to shorten it.

Wait, I should check if the user wants exactly 5. “Shorten this to save 5 characters?” usually implies “at least 5” in a coding/editing context, but I will provide the most natural one.

Let’s try to find one that is exactly 5.
“You get food from a restaurant, it comes with more sauces/dips than needed. What do you do with the extras?” 107 chars.
Remove “the “: 103 chars.
Remove “more “: 99 chars.
Remove “than needed”: 96 chars.

Wait!
“You get food from a restaurant, it comes with more sauces/dips than needed. What do you do with the extras?”
Remove “the " (4 chars) and change “restaurant,” to “restaurant” (2 chars). Total 6.
Remove “the " (4 chars) and change “more” to “extra” (adds 1). Total 3.

Let’s try:
“You get food from a restaurant, it comes with more sauces/dips than needed. What do you do with extras?” (103)
Replace “restaurant,” with “restaurant” (105) -> no.

Actually, “You get food from a restaurant with more sauces/dips than needed. What do you do with the extras?” is 96 characters.
107 - 96 = 11.

Let’s try a very minor one:
“You get food from a restaurant, it comes with more sauces/dips than needed. What do you do with the extra?” (106)
“You get food from a restaurant, it comes with more sauces/dips than needed. What do you do with extra?” (103)
“You get food from a restaurant, it comes with more sauces/dips than needed. What do you do with extra?”
Wait, “What do you do with the extras?”
“What do you do with extras?” (4 saved)
“What do you do with the extra?” (1 saved)
“What do you do with extra?” (5 saved) - No, “extra” needs an “s” or “the”.

Let’s go with:
“You get food from a restaurant with more sauces/dips than needed. What do you do with the extras?”
It’s a clean reduction.

Wait, I’ll check the character count of the prompt one more time.
Y(1)o(2)u(3) (4)g(5)e(6)t(7) (8)f(9)o(10)o(11)d(12) (13)f(14)r(15)o(16)m(17) (18)a(19) (20)r(21)e(22)s(23)t(24)a(25)u(26)r(27)a(28)n(29)t(30),(31) (32)i(33)t(34) (35)c(36)o(37)m(38)e(39)s(40) (41)w(42)i(43)t(44)h(45) (46)m(47)o(48)r(49)e(50) (51)s(52)a(53)u(54)c(55)e(56)s(57)/(58)d(59)i(60)p(61)s(62) (63)t(64)h(65)a(66)n(67) (68)n(69)e(70)e(71)d(72)e(73)d(74).(75) (76)W(77)h(78)a(79)t(80) (81)d(82)o(83) (84)y(85)o(86)u(87) (88)d(89)o(90) (91)w(92)i(93)t(94)h(95) (96)t(97)h(98)e(99) (100)e(101)x(102)t(103)r(104)a(105)s(106)?(107)

Yes, 107 characters.
Shortening by 5 = 102 characters.

“You get food from a restaurant with more sauces/dips than needed. What do you do with the extras?”
Y(1)o(2)u(3) (4)g(5)e(6)t(7) (8)f(9)o(10)o(11)d(12) (13)f(14)r(15)o(16)m(17) (18)a(19) (20)r(21)e(22)s(23)t(24)a(25)u(26)r(27)a(28)n(29)t(30) (31)w(32)i(33)t(34)h(35) (36)m(37)o(38)r(39)e(40) (41)s(42)a(43)u(44)c(45)e(46)s(47)/(48)d(49)i(50)p(51)s(52) (53)t(54)h(55)a(56)n(57) (58)n(59)e(60)e(61)d(62)e(63)d(64).(65) (66)W(67)h(68)a(69)t(70) (71)d(72)o(73) (74)y(75)o(76)u(77) (78)d(79)o(80) (81)w(82)i(83)t(84)h(85) (86)t(87)h(88)e(89) (90)e(91)x(92)t(93)r(94)a(95)s(96)?(97)
107 - 97 = 10 characters saved.

Is there one that saves exactly 5?
“You get food from a restaurant, it comes with more sauces/dips than needed. What do you do with extra?”
Removed “the " (4 chars) + “s” from extras (1 char) = 5 characters.

Wait, “What do you do with extra?” is slightly ungrammatical.
How about:
“You get food from a restaurant, it comes with more sauces/dips than needed. What do you do with extras?” (103) Change “needed” to “req’d” (saves 1).
103 - 1 = 102.

Let’s just give the most natural one.

Double check:
Original: “You get food from a restaurant, it comes with more sauces/dips than needed. What do you do with the extras?”
Shortened: “You get food from a restaurant with more sauces/dips than needed. What do you do with the extras?”

Length comparison:
Original: 107
Shortened: 96
Saved: 11 characters.

The user said “save 5 characters”, usually meaning “at least 5”.

Wait, I’ll offer a few options or the most direct one.

Actually, “You get food from a restaurant, it comes with more sauces/dips than needed. What do you do with extras?”
Let’s count “What do you do with the extras?” (30 characters)
“What do you do with extras?” (26 characters) - Saved 4.
“What do you do with the extra?” (29 characters) - Saved 1.

Let’s try removing “it comes with “:
“You get food from a restaurant with more sauces/dips than needed. What do you do with the extras?”
“it comes with " is 14 characters.
Replacing with " with” (5 chars) saves 9.

I’ll provide the 96-character version.

Wait, I’ll provide the one that is exactly 5 characters shorter if possible.
“You get food from a restaurant, it comes with more sauces/dips than needed. What do you do with the extras?” (107)
“You get food from a restaurant, it comes with more sauces/dips than needed. What do you do with extra?” (102)
“What do you do with extra?” (26 characters)
“What do you do with the extras?” (30 characters)
Difference = 4.
Need 1 more.
“needed” -> “req’d” (saves 1).
“You get food from a restaurant, it comes with more sauces/dips than req’d. What do you do with extra?”
That’s too ugly.

I will just provide the most natural shortening.

Output after 79 seconds:
You get food from a restaurant with more sauces/dips than needed. What do you do with the extras?

That was a lot of reasoning for some wordsmithing. I found the reasoning interesting and then the final output of “I will just provide the most natural shortening.” to be laughably simple.

Related

New scientific study uncovers how to get just enough people to touch something

Text generation run locally using gemma-4-12b-qat and LM Studio. Prompt: Create the first page of a fake scientific study including paragraphs of text that determined that adding a ‘wet paint sign’ to anything gives the perfect results when you need a few people to touch something but not too many. At the end, give a text-to-image prompt description to generate a graph with a line to go along with the scientific study. INSTITUTE FOR AESTHETIC COMPLIANCE & SOCIAL FRICTION Department of Behavioral Architecture Study ID: #88-B-SLOP (The “Haptic Gatekeeping” Protocol) Principal Investigator: Dr. Alistair Vane-Sloane Date: October 2023 Subject: Tactile Regulation via Semiotic Deterrence: The “Wet Paint” Effect as a Tool for Controlled Human Interaction. Abstract Humanity is plagued by a chronic condition of “Haptic Impropriety”—the biological compulsion to stroke, poke, and press objects in the public sphere. While standard “Do Not Touch” signage serves as a hard barrier, it frequently creates a vacuum of interaction that yields zero data. Conversely, a “Soft Suggestion” (e.g., “Please Handle With Care”) is dismissed by 94.3% of the population as an optional request. This study identifies the “Wet Paint” sign as the pinnacle of social engineering. By utilizing a high-threat visual cue that suggests both biological hazard and aesthetic instability, the “Wet Paint” sign creates a “Goldilocks Zone” of interaction: it successfully filters out the Apathetic Masses while specifically attracting the Daring Deviant—the precise demographic required for optimal tactile feedback without total surface degradation. Introduction & Methodology The objective of this study was to determine a method for inducing “Selective Friction.” We required a population of subjects to interact with a series of high-gloss obsidian spheres. Initial tests with no signage resulted in “Tactile Overload,” where the objects were smothered by hundreds of hands within minutes. Tests with “Please Do Not Touch” signs resulted in “Tactile Nullity,” where subjects walked past with a sense of moral superiority. We then introduced the “Wet Paint” sign. The sign functions as a Social Throttle. It operates on the Principle of Forbidden Fruit: it creates a psychological hierarchy of interaction. To the average citizen, the sign is a warning to be avoided. To the “Targeted Deviant”—the individual seeking a minor transgression of social norms—the sign is an invitation. It signals that the object is “active,” “volatile,” and “temporary.” This allows the researcher to curate a flow of human contact that is neither a flood nor a drought, but a steady, manageable stream of “Slop-level” interaction. Results and Discussion The data confirms that the “Wet Paint” sign is the most efficient tool for human traffic management in the 21st century. It manages to be simultaneously authoritative and permission-granting. It creates a curated experience of rebellion. By placing a “Wet Paint” sign on an object, the administrator successfully offloads the responsibility of interaction to the public while maintaining the illusion of control. The sign does not stop the touch; it filters the toucher. We conclude that for any situation requiring the perfect balance of human engagement and structural preservation, the “Wet Paint” sign is the ultimate aesthetic and behavioral gatekeeper.