4 ms·
I think this is AI. It’s not as bad as some, but it’s got that breathless enthusiasm and drones on and on without ever quite getting to its point.
by jdlshore 2mo ago
I think this is AI. It’s not as bad as some, but it’s got that breathless enthusiasm and drones on and on without ever quite getting to its point.
- roywiggins 2mo agoPangram flags it. It also talks about "quietly" and "the gap". It's AI.
- notatoad 2mo ago[dead]
- orwin 2mo agoPretty sure it's edited AI. Honestly for dry stuff like this it's okay, if a bit tiring at the end.
- cozzyd 2mo agoYes, a lot of obvious tells.
- bluGill 2mo agoAI is fine in itself. The only question are the numbers correct. I'm not sure how to validate them. The facts count the most important. The second is the article readable without being too wordy or any other such problems.
- jdlshore 2mo agoProblem is, if they didn’t put in the effort to write the article, how can I trust that they put in the effort to verify the facts? Not to mention that the article is terribly verbose and never gets to its point (by the time I gave up, that is, quite a long way through). Writing is how you organize your thoughts, and it’s not been done here.
- semiquaver 2mo agoIt’s not even edited, pangram rates it 100% bot-authored.