What exactly indicates the post was AI generated?

i've been using AI for as long as GPT has been out, so if you can't see through the rambling, overly complex to make you sound smarter kind of text, as well as the written patterns that are always used ad nauseam like "this thing isn't JUST this, it's THIS" -- i dunno how else to prove it to you. IYKYK.

▲

tannerc 12 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I have also used GPTs since 2020. I am also a writer. Much of the writing equated with “generated by AI” is so precisely because it’s broadly trained on real writing.

So the claim of “AI slop” without proof is little more than heresy. It would be helpful to have any evidence.

It’s not about just the writing in one example, it’s about writing patterns—which are common—being equated with AI simply because they’re common.

▲

volkk 12 hours ago | parent [-]

if you're a writer, and you're using GPT for so long and you can't see it as obvious, i dunno what to tell you at this point. i guess LLMs are trained particularly on this guy's writing.

▲

tannerc 12 hours ago | parent | next [-]

So you have zero evidence to convey something you claim is “obvious”? Got it.

▲

volkk 7 hours ago | parent [-]

here's your evidence, tanner https://xcancel.com/PlumbNick/status/2016590894485385347#m

I'm not going to say i told you so, but you should utilize these tools more before you start arguing, especially when it's so goddamn obvious

▲

tannerc 6 hours ago | parent [-]

If you read his original draft you can see how much of it was still carried over, as well as how his original writing conveys much of your same arguments that an AI wrote the final text.

I don’t think your point is as strong as you believe it is.

Lastly, I work directly with AI models and utilize all popular generators every single day, so I don’t know why you think you’re the expert here.

	▲	volkk 6 hours ago \| parent [-]
		my point was that its AI slop. whether his original point is intact doesn't matter to me. the fact that you're now defensively doubling down and steering the conversation into a direction which serves you better is just cringe. i bet you're a pleasure to work with. c ya later nerd.

▲

layer8 11 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

If you can’t explain it, then you don’t actually understand it.

▲

volkk 10 hours ago | parent [-]

i just don't feel like enumerating all of the common patterns ai slop produces. again, if you don't see this as obvious, i can tell you're clearly not using this stuff often enough (which might be a good thing)

▲

layer8 10 hours ago | parent [-]

The thing is, these stylistic patterns existed before AI, and weren’t completely atypical. Maybe you’re using LLMs so much that you’re over-associating them with AI now. Or maybe the author is using LLMs so much that he’s unconsciously adopted some of the patterns in his own writing.

▲

toraway 7 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Well he literally confirms it was from ChatGPT in a later reply, so there's that.

And his original draft is conspicuously missing the telltale "it's not X -- it's Y" and overall breathless dramatic flair that people like the poster you're replying to (correctly) picked up on.

https://xcancel.com/PlumbNick/status/2016590894485385347#m

▲

volkk 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

i think the much higher probability isn't that this guy wrote literally like an LLM before LLMs came out, but rather that he just used an LLM to write all of it. You can see even more of these examples directly on his campaign site.

▲

toraway 7 hours ago | parent [-]

And despite the downvotes, you were correct.

https://xcancel.com/PlumbNick/status/2016590894485385347#m

▲

volkk 6 hours ago | parent [-]

thank you. even without this tweet, i was willing to die on this hill. certainly feels nice to place these obnoxious HN know-it-alls into their place.

	▲	GibbonBreath 4 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		> certainly feels nice to place these obnoxious HN know-it-alls into their place. You don't have to take the time to explain your reasoning if you don't want to, but "obnoxious know it all" is not a stone you should throw while at the same time refusing to explain yourself and saying anyone who can't see what you see is necessarily missing the obvious.
	▲	6 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		[deleted]

▲

duckmysick 11 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> i dunno how else to prove it to you

A prompt to generate similar output would be a good start.

	▲	volkk 7 hours ago \| parent [-]
		how's this for your prompt, pal https://xcancel.com/PlumbNick/status/2016590894485385347#m hopefully that's enough of a good start and a good end for this conversation

▲

esseph 11 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I've been writing in a contrasting style like that since probably 5th or 6th grade.

... I wonder how much the writings of a lot of autistic / borderline folks impacted the LLM writing style.

▲

Rebelgecko 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

$foo isn't just $bar, it's actually $baz