[tzs]

Where is "it's not X. It's Y"? I didn't notice it.

[duskwuff]

The negative parallelism pattern is broader than the literal phrasing "not X, but Y". Here are some examples from the article:

- "A new lawsuit doesn’t just revisit the $40 billion Terra-Luna meltdown; it questions whether..."

- "Ten minutes is not a coincidence. It is a trade."

- "It reads less like a rescue offer and more like a firm positioning itself..."

- "These are not isolated; they are part of Snyder’s broader efforts..."

- "Not just as bystanders, but as alleged participants..."

[energy123]

Math papers using LLMs: It's not true, it's false

[tzs]

Thanks. I probably didn't notice them because they don't seem at all unnatural.

[wzdd]

Not seeming unnatural is literally what the LLM is trained to be, but it's pretty interesting how little sense they make when you dig in. Goes to how little attention we pay normally, and/or how much weight we put on text seeming natural.

"A new lawsuit doesn’t just revisit the $40 billion Terra-Luna meltdown; it questions whether..." -- the purpose of a lawsuit is to question something (by making an allegation), you don't sue someone to "revisit".

"Ten minutes is not a coincidence. It is a trade." So is an hour, or thirty seconds, or...?

"Not just as bystanders, but as alleged participants" -- the "just" doesn't make sense; participants aren't bystanders.

Of the list, only "It reads less like a rescue offer" and "These are not isolated; they are part of Snyder’s broader efforts..." makes any sense in context.

[duskwuff]

> Not seeming unnatural is literally what the LLM is trained to be, but it's pretty interesting how little sense they make when you dig in.

It's as if they're optimizing for all the surface-level indicators of well-formed, meaningful thought, without the actual substance to back that up.