Are comments like this productive? What is the point of just vaguely guessing that someone used AI to write something, with 0 proof other than some dim pattern-recognition comment? Is it possible that the opposite is true, ChatGPT was trained on writing (like this) and now mimics how good writers speak?

These "that seems like AI" comments are extremely interesting. Seems like the "singularity" crap is overhyped; we should be talking about ai-powered solipsism.

Definitely seems like the whole thing has been given the AI treatment, but who knows, maybe people have just internalized the way it sounds by having too much dialectic with it. The sad thing is most people (even here) cannot detect AI writing anymore. In fact, I've seen some glaringly obvious posts which people in the comments even called the best writing they've seen. I guess ease of transmission is the basis for good writing now. I prefer for writing to have life in it, but I suppose I'm a dying breed.

It would be astonishingly hypocritical if the author (https://www.maalvikabhat.com/ who btw does academic research on societal influences of AI) wrote the following using AI (a quote from beyond the paywall follows). If anything I wonder whether she picked up a ChatGPT speech pattern herself from so much exposure to it.

"This is why AI can write but cannot create. It can remix existing patterns with mechanical precision, but it cannot sit in the fertile void where genuinely new ideas are born. It cannot endure the months of terrible drafts that make you question your sanity, the years of failure that feel like slow starvation, the decades of practice that transform a human into an artist through accumulated scar tissue and hard-won wisdom. AI has never stared at a blank page at 3 AM, coffee cold, wondering if anything will ever come. It has never had to choose between the easy metaphor and the one that makes your chest tight with recognition. It has never experienced the moment when disparate ideas suddenly fuse into something that didn't exist before, something that surprises even its creator. It can simulate the surface of creativity (the clever turns of phrase, the familiar structures), but it cannot access the underground rivers of human experience that feed genuine innovation. It writes like someone who has read about love but never been heartbroken, someone who can describe the ocean but has never tasted salt water."