[virtualritz]

These are 'en' dashes. Myself and and other people who care about (micro)typography have been using them since forever.

Presumably the author is one of them. Or they simply use a text editing or blogging software that takes care of it.

E.g. Markdown with smarty-pants feature turned on generates them automatically from '--'. 'Em' dashes require '---'.

Coincidentally Rust's `cargo doc` does this for you -- just for example.

The conclusion that a text containing such micro-typographic niceties must be LLM-generated is a fallacy thusly.

Your other 'evidence' sounds like an interpretation to me. Maybe you should quote the sections you mean?

Otherwise your critique seems superficially limited to form, not contents -- an ad-hominem in disguise one may be tempted to conclude.

[Hasnep]

If you care about endashes then you'll know that they're not supposed to be used to separate ideas in a sentence, that's what emdashes are for. That makes me think it's not LLM generated because LLMs know how to use emdashes.

[virtualritz]

Indeed. In English it is an em-dash. Not brackeded by spaces, although you should bracket by thin spaces to make sure you get some separation, optically. And line breaks in apps that are unaware this is a separator.

In many other languages ideas are separated by en-dashes (surrounded by spaces).

In the case at hand the use of en-dashes in English text instead of the correct em-dashes could also be a sign of a non-native speaker caring about micro-typography and just doing the wrong thing. :)

The LLM conclusion doesn't seem well supported either way.