4 ms·

This article was so incredibly difficult to read. I couldn’t tell why until I skimmed back through it and saw the incredibly rough tells of LLM-speak throughout

This article was so incredibly difficult to read. I couldn’t tell why until I skimmed back through it and saw the incredibly rough tells of LLM-speak throughout it.

cryzinger 1y ago
Agreed. Insane amounts of "Not just X, but Y" or "This isn't about A. It's B." constructions that ping to me as LLM-generated but, at best, were the work of a repetitious human writer in dire need of a (human) editor. > Not remember it. Not discuss it. Live it. > No drugs. No surgeries. No medical interventions at all. [...] Just a shift in context. A different story to inhabit. > These aren't just throwaway comments. They're programming. > ...health isn't just physiological but narrative. [...] Not because we're hypochondriacs, but because expectation is itself an intervention that shapes our biology. > Not to pretend, but to remember through their bodies what vitality felt like. > The men at the retreat weren't cured of aging. They were temporarily freed from the cultural story that aging means inevitable, passive deterioration. > She's not peddling the fantasy that positive thoughts can overcome all illness. She's not suggesting we can think our way to immortality or that serious medical conditions respond to attitude adjustments. [...] What she's demonstrating is more subtle and perhaps more powerful[...] > This is about epistemic flexibility, not magical thinking. It's about loosening our grip on stories that may be limiting us unnecessarily, not abandoning medical care or scientific understanding. > The most radical aspect of Langer's work isn't that belief affects biology, but that she treats this connection as a therapeutic tool rather than an inconvenient complication. And that's just from the first two sections!
- sebmellen 1y ago
  You could use this as a good training set for an AI usage detector…

This article was so incredibly difficult to read. I couldn’t tell why until I skimmed back through it and saw the incredibly rough tells of LLM-speak throughout it.

cryzinger 1y ago

Agreed. Insane amounts of "Not just X, but Y" or "This isn't about A. It's B." constructions that ping to me as LLM-generated but, at best, were the work of a repetitious human writer in dire need of a (human) editor. > Not remember it. Not discuss it. Live it. > No drugs. No surgeries. No medical interventions at all. [...] Just a shift in context. A different story to inhabit. > These aren't just throwaway comments. They're programming. > ...health isn't just physiological but narrative. [...] Not because we're hypochondriacs, but because expectation is itself an intervention that shapes our biology. > Not to pretend, but to remember through their bodies what vitality felt like. > The men at the retreat weren't cured of aging. They were temporarily freed from the cultural story that aging means inevitable, passive deterioration. > She's not peddling the fantasy that positive thoughts can overcome all illness. She's not suggesting we can think our way to immortality or that serious medical conditions respond to attitude adjustments. [...] What she's demonstrating is more subtle and perhaps more powerful[...] > This is about epistemic flexibility, not magical thinking. It's about loosening our grip on stories that may be limiting us unnecessarily, not abandoning medical care or scientific understanding. > The most radical aspect of Langer's work isn't that belief affects biology, but that she treats this connection as a therapeutic tool rather than an inconvenient complication. And that's just from the first two sections!

sebmellen 1y ago
You could use this as a good training set for an AI usage detector…