3 ms·

We all have to accept that people will look at perfectly innocuous, clear, well-written prose and assume that AI wrote it.

by azernik 12d ago

psychoslave 11d ago
One can still suspect that something might not have been uttered through some AI assistance. There might even be still some living humans outside, who knows.
kakacik 11d ago
Yeah its getting annoying how people discuss endlessly how some text is AI or not... like some extra imaginative points are awarded to those who spot the most. People seem to keep getting triggered by little insignificant things in the text. LLMs average human writing thats out there, its not making up new expressions or language constructs so just move on if you (anybody) can and put that little obsessive pedantic part of you behind you. I couldn't care less, why be a prick and not just enjoy & discuss the content, not this ultra focus on the form. If content is crap then thats another story altogether. I wish there would be some plugin/feature to just block those rather empty subthreads.
- deleted 11d ago
  [deleted]
- chmod775 11d ago
  > LLMs average human writing thats out there Not really, and also they do not vary their writing like humans would. Human writers do not repeat the same pattern over and over as much as LLMs do. They'd get bored of their own writing. People as a whole are always going to be sick of whichever affectation current popular LLMs have, since they'd be reading a fair bit of that. As a writer you should steer clear of things that would elicit groans in a contemporary audience and "LLM prose" is just the latest addition. So, as the person you're replying to said, you'll have to get used to this being a new angle from which writing is critiqued. You'll live happier if you don't let your cortisol spike over it. If it is any comfort, writers will eventually adjust and you'll encounter less of it.
  - fennecfoxy 11d ago
    Interesting. I agree that it seems that LLMs are wont to fall into recognisable patterns much more readily than humans however I asked a model to evaluate your comment history and it found loads of patterns such as: “I’m not sure…” / “I don’t…” hedges before disagreement Negation followed by correction/reframing is a recurring structure: essentially “It’s not X, it’s Y”. And dozens of other examples. I wonder if LLMs really are more liable for it or if it simply seems that way purely because when you use a model it's almost as if you're speaking to the same "person". I think that human language is naturally formed by common agreed meanings of words first, and then phrases.
    - chmod775 11d ago
      And in your estimation, is the LLM correct in qualifying that as a pattern, or is it full of shit? I could ask an LLM to generate something arguing against whatever yours put out, but I won't. I come here to talk to other people, not their electronic sycophants.
    - fc417fc802 11d ago
      Any given person will have phrases or ways of organizing things that they tend towards. But that isn't the same thing. Those patterns are the exception with lots of variance all around them. LLMs lack the same general variance while also going beyond merely favoring a few patterns to the point where you could describe it more as a production line stamping them out. They're also remarkably inefficient with their prose. I think I'm pretty bad on a first pass (see this comment I'm typing right now) but they put me to shame by a huge margin.
    - chownie 11d ago
      > I asked a model to evaluate your comment history and it found loads of patterns such as > “I’m not sure…” / “I don’t…” hedges before disagreement Negation followed by correction/reframing is a recurring structure: essentially “It’s not X, it’s Y”. I did a manual human dig through GP's profile and I don't see any evidence supporting this. The literal strings "I'm not sure" and "I don't" do appear a lot (also in replies, which I'm hoping your LLM was intelligent enough to exclude?), and they are used to hedge before making a statement, but not a single one of them even approaches the "It's not X, it's Y" thing your LLM has claimed they do. Your LLM did not find dozens of examples, it told you it did and you didn't even bother to check.
- pjmlp 11d ago
  While at the same time bragging to have exhausted their AI tokens in coding, yeah really annoying.
fennecfoxy 11d ago
For sure. If you write with a casual conversational tone people don't get triggered. But if you are eloquent and use an extended vocabulary thanks to large amounts of reading then that seems to make people think you're using AI. As someone who loves to read (well, on and off) I wonder what the median vocabulary is and how I and other readers compare. I guess language has always been functional for most people.

We all have to accept that people will look at perfectly innocuous, clear, well-written prose and assume that AI wrote it.

by azernik 12d ago

We all have to accept that people will look at perfectly innocuous, clear, well-written prose and assume that AI wrote it.

psychoslave 11d ago

One can still suspect that something might not have been uttered through some AI assistance. There might even be still some living humans outside, who knows.

kakacik 11d ago

Yeah its getting annoying how people discuss endlessly how some text is AI or not... like some extra imaginative points are awarded to those who spot the most. People seem to keep getting triggered by little insignificant things in the text. LLMs average human writing thats out there, its not making up new expressions or language constructs so just move on if you (anybody) can and put that little obsessive pedantic part of you behind you. I couldn't care less, why be a prick and not just enjoy & discuss the content, not this ultra focus on the form. If content is crap then thats another story altogether. I wish there would be some plugin/feature to just block those rather empty subthreads.

deleted 11d ago
[deleted]
chmod775 11d ago
> LLMs average human writing thats out there Not really, and also they do not vary their writing like humans would. Human writers do not repeat the same pattern over and over as much as LLMs do. They'd get bored of their own writing. People as a whole are always going to be sick of whichever affectation current popular LLMs have, since they'd be reading a fair bit of that. As a writer you should steer clear of things that would elicit groans in a contemporary audience and "LLM prose" is just the latest addition. So, as the person you're replying to said, you'll have to get used to this being a new angle from which writing is critiqued. You'll live happier if you don't let your cortisol spike over it. If it is any comfort, writers will eventually adjust and you'll encounter less of it.
- fennecfoxy 11d ago
  Interesting. I agree that it seems that LLMs are wont to fall into recognisable patterns much more readily than humans however I asked a model to evaluate your comment history and it found loads of patterns such as: “I’m not sure…” / “I don’t…” hedges before disagreement Negation followed by correction/reframing is a recurring structure: essentially “It’s not X, it’s Y”. And dozens of other examples. I wonder if LLMs really are more liable for it or if it simply seems that way purely because when you use a model it's almost as if you're speaking to the same "person". I think that human language is naturally formed by common agreed meanings of words first, and then phrases.
  - chmod775 11d ago
    And in your estimation, is the LLM correct in qualifying that as a pattern, or is it full of shit? I could ask an LLM to generate something arguing against whatever yours put out, but I won't. I come here to talk to other people, not their electronic sycophants.
  - fc417fc802 11d ago
    Any given person will have phrases or ways of organizing things that they tend towards. But that isn't the same thing. Those patterns are the exception with lots of variance all around them. LLMs lack the same general variance while also going beyond merely favoring a few patterns to the point where you could describe it more as a production line stamping them out. They're also remarkably inefficient with their prose. I think I'm pretty bad on a first pass (see this comment I'm typing right now) but they put me to shame by a huge margin.
  - chownie 11d ago
    > I asked a model to evaluate your comment history and it found loads of patterns such as > “I’m not sure…” / “I don’t…” hedges before disagreement Negation followed by correction/reframing is a recurring structure: essentially “It’s not X, it’s Y”. I did a manual human dig through GP's profile and I don't see any evidence supporting this. The literal strings "I'm not sure" and "I don't" do appear a lot (also in replies, which I'm hoping your LLM was intelligent enough to exclude?), and they are used to hedge before making a statement, but not a single one of them even approaches the "It's not X, it's Y" thing your LLM has claimed they do. Your LLM did not find dozens of examples, it told you it did and you didn't even bother to check.
pjmlp 11d ago
While at the same time bragging to have exhausted their AI tokens in coding, yeah really annoying.

fennecfoxy 11d ago

For sure. If you write with a casual conversational tone people don't get triggered. But if you are eloquent and use an extended vocabulary thanks to large amounts of reading then that seems to make people think you're using AI. As someone who loves to read (well, on and off) I wonder what the median vocabulary is and how I and other readers compare. I guess language has always been functional for most people.