They are not written by an LLM lol, I have severe ADHD, this is how I write and there is plenty of my material out there spanning the last 20+ years (long before LLMs existed) to illustrate that.
> The reply I received a few days later did me the favour of putting the violation on the record. Their position, in their own words, was that "in order to receive marketing / offers, it is a condition to be a member of the customer club." That one sentence is the whole case. They had taken a right I am entitled to exercise for free and turned it into the price of admission.
I bet pangram would flag it. Humans don’t write like this. ADHD doesn’t cause this style of phrasing.
Pretty unsurprising for a modern text like this to be honest. Or as one should say “Those two sections are the whole case. We took a free technology and made it the price of a blog post”.
i sent the article to an AI detection tool and it said that 22% are AI generated. (that tool distinguishes between AI generated, AI assisted, and human) it marks the first few paragraphs as such. i have no idea how accurate that tool generally is. it is clearly failing here. (part of the reason for checking articles is to learn how reliable those tools are, not to gather evidence against a writer)
what could help though is if you could find a way to have your articles proof read by someone else to at least weed out some of the more difficult to read constructs, like this one:
any Consent Management Platform (CMP) which sets a cookie for anything other than cookies which are not strictly necessary that the user has consented to
i would write that as:
any Consent Management Platform (CMP) which sets a cookie that is not strictly necessary but that the user has not consented to
i had to read your version three times to make sure i understood it correctly.
> The reply I received a few days later did me the favour of putting the violation on the record. Their position, in their own words, was that "in order to receive marketing / offers, it is a condition to be a member of the customer club." That one sentence is the whole case. They had taken a right I am entitled to exercise for free and turned it into the price of admission.
I bet pangram would flag it. Humans don’t write like this. ADHD doesn’t cause this style of phrasing.
EDIT: Pangram predictably did in fact find it so: https://www.pangram.com/history/2e549b09-072d-4fe8-a000-e165...
Pretty unsurprising for a modern text like this to be honest. Or as one should say “Those two sections are the whole case. We took a free technology and made it the price of a blog post”.