4 ms·

I'm not dropping emdashes -- though you can always tell mine by their two-hyphen form lol I've also never used an AI detector, and probably never will. In my

I'm not dropping emdashes -- though you can always tell mine by their two-hyphen form lol I've also never used an AI detector, and probably never will. In my experience: 1. The people who rely the most on AI writing don't like to admit it. I catch obvious AI hallucinations in my boss's "documentation," and he always insists it was his own human oversight, despite it being very obviously a mistake I've caught Claude (and importantly, no human coworker) making repeatedly 2. I don't trust a machine more than myself to judge writing 3. Obvious AI "tells" just make it clear i don't need to keep reading, not that i need some kind of validation. In some sense, i guess that might save me time? But i still have to have read enough to know what it is... In general, i think the author makes great points about how _LLM "thinking" is just the reproduction of the language of reasoning_, that is not necessarily a replacement for actual reasoning. It'll take a lot more than that for me to believe an AI is "thinking" and not just giving statistically reasonable answers (reasonable or actionable though they may be)

vonunov 5mo ago
> I'm not dropping emdashes -- though you can always tell mine by their two-hyphen form lol I think of this as a dash (abstract function of punctuation) but not an em dash (concrete typographical form). I see the double hyphen as one of the possible representations of the dash¹ -- and a perfectly well-established one, to be sure² -- along with the em dash and the en dash, either of which can also be used to do the same job, depending on where you are and who you're writing for (the US uses em dashes of varying format (spacing) for that, while much of the UK uses en dashes with spaces to represent the same punctuation abstract). Are you instead conceptualizing the double hyphen as a representation of the em dash glyph? If that makes sense then I'll leave it at that, but if it doesn't quite, then I have a somewhat longer hair-split I can send if you care for it. 1. A pseudo-glyph, maybe 2. Still acknowledged by Garner's as recently as 2003

vonunov 5mo ago

> I'm not dropping emdashes -- though you can always tell mine by their two-hyphen form lol I think of this as a dash (abstract function of punctuation) but not an em dash (concrete typographical form). I see the double hyphen as one of the possible representations of the dash¹ -- and a perfectly well-established one, to be sure² -- along with the em dash and the en dash, either of which can also be used to do the same job, depending on where you are and who you're writing for (the US uses em dashes of varying format (spacing) for that, while much of the UK uses en dashes with spaces to represent the same punctuation abstract). Are you instead conceptualizing the double hyphen as a representation of the em dash glyph? If that makes sense then I'll leave it at that, but if it doesn't quite, then I have a somewhat longer hair-split I can send if you care for it. 1. A pseudo-glyph, maybe 2. Still acknowledged by Garner's as recently as 2003