[volkk]

i've been using AI for as long as GPT has been out, so if you can't see through the rambling, overly complex to make you sound smarter kind of text, as well as the written patterns that are always used ad nauseam like "this thing isn't JUST this, it's THIS" -- i dunno how else to prove it to you. IYKYK.

[tannerc]

I have also used GPTs since 2020. I am also a writer. Much of the writing equated with “generated by AI” is so precisely because it’s broadly trained on real writing.

So the claim of “AI slop” without proof is little more than heresy. It would be helpful to have any evidence.

It’s not about just the writing in one example, it’s about writing patterns—which are common—being equated with AI simply because they’re common.

[volkk]

if you're a writer, and you're using GPT for so long and you can't see it as obvious, i dunno what to tell you at this point. i guess LLMs are trained particularly on this guy's writing.

[tannerc]

So you have zero evidence to convey something you claim is “obvious”? Got it.

[volkk]

here's your evidence, tanner https://xcancel.com/PlumbNick/status/2016590894485385347#m

I'm not going to say i told you so, but you should utilize these tools more before you start arguing, especially when it's so goddamn obvious

[tannerc]

If you read his original draft you can see how much of it was still carried over, as well as how his original writing conveys much of your same arguments that an AI wrote the final text.

I don’t think your point is as strong as you believe it is.

Lastly, I work directly with AI models and utilize all popular generators every single day, so I don’t know why you think you’re the expert here.

[volkk]

my point was that its AI slop. whether his original point is intact doesn't matter to me. the fact that you're now defensively doubling down and steering the conversation into a direction which serves you better is just cringe. i bet you're a pleasure to work with. c ya later nerd.

[layer8]

If you can’t explain it, then you don’t actually understand it.

[volkk]

i just don't feel like enumerating all of the common patterns ai slop produces. again, if you don't see this as obvious, i can tell you're clearly not using this stuff often enough (which might be a good thing)

[layer8]

The thing is, these stylistic patterns existed before AI, and weren’t completely atypical. Maybe you’re using LLMs so much that you’re over-associating them with AI now. Or maybe the author is using LLMs so much that he’s unconsciously adopted some of the patterns in his own writing.

[toraway]

Well he literally confirms it was from ChatGPT in a later reply, so there's that.

And his original draft is conspicuously missing the telltale "it's not X -- it's Y" and overall breathless dramatic flair that people like the poster you're replying to (correctly) picked up on.

https://xcancel.com/PlumbNick/status/2016590894485385347#m

[volkk]

i think the much higher probability isn't that this guy wrote literally like an LLM before LLMs came out, but rather that he just used an LLM to write all of it. You can see even more of these examples directly on his campaign site.

[duckmysick]

> i dunno how else to prove it to you

A prompt to generate similar output would be a good start.

[volkk]

how's this for your prompt, pal https://xcancel.com/PlumbNick/status/2016590894485385347#m

hopefully that's enough of a good start and a good end for this conversation

[esseph]

I've been writing in a contrasting style like that since probably 5th or 6th grade.

... I wonder how much the writings of a lot of autistic / borderline folks impacted the LLM writing style.