[A_D_E_P_T]

Counterpoint: GPT-4 and later variants, such as o3 and 4.5, have such a characteristic style that it's hard not to spot them.

Em dashes, "it's not just (x), it's (y)," "underscoring (z)," the limited number of ways it structures sentences and paragraphs and likes to end things with an emphasized conclusion, and I could go on all day.

DeepSeek is a little bit better at writing in a generic and uncharacteristic tone, but still... it's not good.

[bpodgursky]

If you ask them to speak in a different voice, they will. It's only characteristic if the user has made no effort at all to mask that it is AI generated content.

[A_D_E_P_T]

Sure, but 99% of them don't bother, even when they ought to know better.

And even when the most obvious "tells" are removed, articles can sometimes nevertheless seem AI-written. Just check this one out:

> https://searchengineland.com/ai-visibility-aexecution-proble...

[vonunov]

ChatGPT voice: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44243641