I hope that people realize still that LLMs will never ever be able to produce a piece like this. This is extraordinarily written. It is etymologically out of the average. It’s complex. Concepts intertwine and build on each other. The linguistic choices are unusual but perfectly placed.

>>“But even idlers, try as they might, cannot ignore the passage of time. In 1911, a dozen years before Capek published his essay, Paul Lafargue and his wife committed suicide—he was 69; she was 66. His reason, it seems to me, dovetailed with his philosophy”.

“Dovetailed”. Call me when an LLM will ever be able to pick and use such a perfect, yet statistically improbable, word to construct such a sentence.

In what possible sense is a hackneyed word like 'dovetailed' "perfect, yet statistically improbable"?

> I hope that people realize still that LLMs will never ever be able to produce a piece like this.

Never is a long, long while for LLM development to catch up with hack journalism.

If you’re picking apart sentences looking for signs of AI then you’re already rotted. Address how it makes you feel and the argument being made.

Determining if something’s AI generated just gives us another reason not to engage. Like solving a puzzle on the kids menu instead of eating the food on the plate