[fortuitous-frog]

Looks largely AI-written, with some human edits: https://www.pangram.com/history/9afe7542-1085-4264-9691-2172...

FWIW -- I'm not as repulsed by it as the parent comment. But I do want to substantiate that it _is_ heavily LLM-written.

(If you're unfamiliar, Pangram has garnered a reputation as the leading LLM-detector, with a minimal rate of false positives; IME this has come with the tradeoff of being easy to manipulate/tweak your way into turning an LLM-generated piece of text into reporting a false negative, but for most folks that's worthwhile.)

[darianvc]

People do be having too much time...

Is the navigation of the site also AI generated? This doesn't make any sense and proves why these AI detectors don't work

[MomsAVoxell]

I have been writing for a long time, and using AI for as long as it was available to me, and I have noticed that I get accused of being an AI more and more - and I do not think that is because I am an AI, but because we are all being consumed with the AI mind-set, and thus the AI is taking over our thinking - so perhaps subconsciously, I am indeed formulating my thoughts in a more AI-centric manner, prompting the association across the vast distances of the internet by other human beings (- or, AI) of my conscious thought, with an artifice.

This is a banal insult, but it is also a dire warning wherever I see it - these days, people moaning about being AI may as well just be AI - automatic ignorance - but .. I do have to wonder.

Am I, AI?

[phyzome]

I wouldn't trust Pangram too much. I've seen it give "100% LLM-written, high confidence" to multiple 100% human written articles (high confidence).