[n42]

  No ___, no ____. Just _____

or using "honest" to describe an approach.

[knollimar]

Honest, straight, genuine, actual, real are all words that paper over a weak claim to me. Im thinking about a hook that injects a subagent fact checking in an "are you sure" style here because it's so bad.

Also the false not X it's Y is used in a similar way for faux distinctions like a sov cit claiming "it's not driving, it's traveling in a car"

[GrinningFool]

Jab, jab, thrust is how I think about that pattern. Or tap tap whack, if you prefer. And it shows up for for positives too:

"Smooth. Effortless. A perfect fit for your needs".

In any style of informal or persuasive writing this shows up , as if it has to drive the point in.

I kind of wish we'd stop talking openly about what the tells are. It's nice to be able to determine with fair accuracy - but it couldn't last forever.

[Barbing]

> I kind of wish we'd stop talking openly about what the tells are.

Least this way it’s out in the open perhaps, since enough users have training enabled labs will naturally learn what annoys us.

Had the same thought though

[left-struck]

Yeah, I think in this case, pointing out what’s obviously llm is genuinely useful since it will lead to more diversity in websites and a better tool. I mean I don’t usually care if a website is LLM generated as long as the copy is human written

[rmellow]

Ironically, your entire post can be read as such, almost perfectly!

Labeling each sentence (J)ab and (T)hrust, and using colon ":" to indicate arguments, one gets:

```

J: J. J. T.

J: "J. J. T".

T: T.

T: J. J. T.

```

[cootsnuck]

I call it "I'm not like other girls" writing.

[ares623]

Imagine a world where everyone talks like an Apple product page.

[userbinator]

I think that's been a tired marketing trope for many years before LLMs, and they just picked it up from the training data.

[overgard]

Don't forget the uncomfortable truth