4 ms·
It's clearly written by AI. I find it interesting that some people recognize it immediately and others do not. I don't know what to make of it.
by ekelsen 3mo ago
It's clearly written by AI. I find it interesting that some people recognize it immediately and others do not. I don't know what to make of it.
- fragmede 3mo agoNo it's not, your detector is broken.
- ekelsen 3mo agoSeems like yours is? FWIW, on your own blog, the most recent post also reads as at least AI helped "Navigator Theory". This sentence in particular sticks out: "They affect what the person notices, what they dismiss, what they measure, what they trust, and what they do when reality pushes back." The one earlier post I read does not ("toxicity of ideas"). And fwiw, online detectors seems to agree with my own judgement here.
- fellowniusmonk 3mo agoI am absolutely shocked and freaked out by the number of long lived accounts on this thread that can't detect the fact that this is Ai composed.
- fragmede 3mo agoCunningham's law. :)
- eightysixfour 3mo agoIt absolutely was written with Claude. There are so many Claude-isms in the second half that it was hard for me to digest, despite enjoying the ideas.
- fragmede 3mo agoLike what?
- eightysixfour 3mo ago> Hesiod felt it. Plato theorized it. Polybius mechanized it. Sallust prosecuted it (while guilty). Ibn Khaldun put it on a timer. Five civilizations, twenty-one centuries, one diagnosis. The only thing missing was proof. > For most of history, “too many assholes ruin everything” remained a vibe. A well-documented, five-civilization vibe, but a vibe. Then, in the twentieth century, it became math. > Sallust, it turns out, was doing game theory in a toga. He just didn’t have the notation. > That’s not my characterization — it’s the title of the paper. And the researchers defined the term with clinical precision > That single belief turns out to be a genetic marker. Everything else travels with it. ^^ that one in particular is a VERY strong Claude-ism > Now, the finding inside the finding > The study is not a catalog of monsters [...] It’s a measurement [...] with polling-grade precision > Political violence wasn’t rhetorical; it was a body count There are a lot in here, I could keep going...
- IIsi50MHz 3mo agoEvery one of those is also an example of how people have written and spoken since before AI existed. But then, I don't 'Claude', so I'm not sensitised by exposure.
- eightysixfour 3mo agoSure, LLMs learned them from somewhere, but when you use it a lot you see that it has very specific, very repetitive writing patterns. This article makes little effort to adapt the writing away from those patterns. It is like a code smell, when you see it, it is obvious.
- toddmorey 3mo agoAlso: load-bearing!
- Cpoll 3mo agoYeah, I've changed my evaluation. The lists didn't do it for me, because they don't follow the usual rule-of-three, but the "genetic marker ... travels" line seems egregious. And the "not X, but Y".
- jdlshore 3mo agoYep. Very slop-like. I found it grating and had to stop reading, even though I thought the subject was interesting.
- disgruntledphd2 3mo agoI made it through because the content was interesting, but I am definitely not going to read more from this author because the AI-wordsmithing is so grating (I read loads of it at work, don't need to read any more of it).