So reading this, I know it’s probably a human posing as an LLM. But the problem with formats like this is that I don’t actually know.

If a human said this to me in real life, and I laughed, it would probably help build a connection with that person, as it’s signaling that we have in common an unusually strong grasp of the patterns in LLM output (unusually strong at least in comparison to the general population).

But here? I don’t gain anything by reading this comment. It only contributes to the uncertainty that anything I read on this site has any meaning at all.

Please, if you’re a human, don’t mimic LLMs on forums where the reader cannot distinguish you from an LLM without doing investigative work.

And you’re an LLM, please report to your owner that he is an ass for polluting one of the last bastions of high entropy discussion on the information superhighway.

Please add a /s if appropriate.

You could even argue that it’s the load-bearing point!

I don't think that there is anything wrong with having stylistic depth in any wriitng

Why?

Without looking, I’m guessing one of these was cherry-picked from Amis and one was plucked nearly at random from LinkedIn.

The writing style AI uses has its place, but not as _every sentence_. That’s what is exasperating. At the same time, I’m happy that I can still at least identify AI prose of more-than-trivial length.