[MonkeyClub]

The irony of using a LLM to write a text that complains of the pervasiveness of automated tooling for web design is hard to miss.

But perhaps it’s just that the author has internalized copywriting formulas to a degree that their text appears machine generated?

[sokoloff]

The GPT-detector is fascinating (and seemed to work pretty well on some inputs I tested)

On the other hand, this next paragraph is scored as 84% fake and I'm quite sure Churchill didn't have Chat-GPT to help:

> We shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender, and even if, which I do not for a moment believe, this island or a large part of it were subjugated and starving, then our Empire beyond the seas, armed and guarded by the British fleet, would carry on the struggle, until, in God's good time, the new world, with all its power and might, steps forth to the rescue and the liberation of the old.

IMO, we must not be too quick to conclude that any given text was created/assisted by an LLM based on a scoring algorithm alone. (A low GPT likelihood is probably reliable [for now, until that starts being gamed].)

If you offered me even odds, I'd wager that the subject comment was 100% hand-written.

[Applejinx]

We are the hollow men We are the stuffed men Leaning together Headpiece filled with straw. Alas! Our dried voices, when We whisper together Are quiet and meaningless As wind in dry grass Or rats' feet over broken glass In our dry cellar

[TeMPOraL]

Or Reddit. Let's not forget what LLMs are trained on. It's not just Wikipedia and some official text corpora, it's Reddit dumps and other regular Internet conversations. If you learned how to write English on-line, there's a chance you've internalized a style similar to how LLMs often respond.

(In fact, I often feel like I sound too much like ChatGPT myself.)