> My current hypothesis: the more familiar you are with a topic the worse the results from any LLM.
That's not really true, since your prompts are also getting better. Better input leads to better output remains true, even with LLMs (when you see it as a tool).
Being more familiar with the topic definitely doesn't always make your prompts better. For a lot of things it doesn't really change (explain X, compare X and Y...) - and this is what is being discussed it. For giving "building" instructions (like writing code) it helps a bit, but even if you know exactly what you want it to write, getting it to do that is pretty much trial and errror (too much detail makes it follow word-for-word and produce bad code, too little and it misses important parts or makes dumb mistakes).
The opposite may be true, the more effective the model the lazier the prompting as it can seemingly handle not being micromanaged as with earlier versions.
That's not really true, since your prompts are also getting better. Better input leads to better output remains true, even with LLMs (when you see it as a tool).