[byko3y]

Funny question, considering the fact I've posted a link to my recent article onto the main page. I employ LLM-s a lot.

Few days ago I made an experiment — put my article into Qwen and asked to evaluate it for LLM-generated content. To my amazement it told me the article is 70-90% AI-generated. Which is even more weird considering the fact I know I wrote it all top to bottom. I think I spend so much time in LLM conversations I actually started copying LLM style.

I mean if you look into the article https://bykozy.me/blog/rust-is-a-disappointment/ — it's structured exactly like LLM implicit templates (a.k.a. fine tuning training datasets) do: short reiteration of the question, list of key points, key points explained exactly one by one, final summary. However, why would I not write the article this way? Just to make sure a person skimming the article would not pattern-match it to "formatted as LLM output"?

If I wanted to disguise an AI-generated article as a 100% human content — I would do it. But thanks for the suggestion — might be viable to consider doing so, because I just scare too many people away this way.