What signals this as being LLM writing for you? I'm crap at noticing specifics here

tokenscoper 11 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

For me, it was this part of the paragraph: > There is no atlas, so a hundred thousand CJK glyphs cost a font's worth of outline data, not an atlas the size of a video. Text can change every frame at no baking cost, which is exactly what you want for live data, user input, and localized content. And it all happens in a single draw with an ordinary fragment shader, no vendor extension required.

Specifically, these sentence structures: 1. ... so <blah> costs <blah>, not <blah>. 2. And <blah>, no <blah>. 3. ... fixed resolution ahead of time, which quietly ...

▲

nuxi 11 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Stuff like this is a giveaway for me:

> Drawing it on a GPU, crisply, at any size, under any 3D transform, while the text changes every frame, is not.

> One small texture, resolution independent within reason, one cheap shader.

English is not my native language, so I may be wrong here.

▲

nurumaik 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

For me it was "head to head" table. Typical complete nonsense llm-generated comparison table. Rest of the content is still quite good tbh, generated or not

	▲	JoshTriplett 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Not arguing whether this article is or isn't LLM-generated, but I've seen skewed comparison tables like that in marketing since before LLMs. Pick a bunch of qualities skewed towards the new thing being proposed, highlight all the ways the new thing wins.

▲

poly2it 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> A note on fairness, because the technical reader will ask.

I think it's a mix of human and LLM writing.