If LLMs are trained on written information, that pattern of speech was present before they got there. It's a good way to add emphasis.
If LLMs are trained on written information, that pattern of speech was present before they got there. It's a good way to add emphasis.
Plus, the author admitted to using AI to write it.
It feels like the slightest occurrence of a less-than-ubiquitous pattern or any word not regularly used by the majority of the population instantly spawns a sleuth of newfound linguists who'll pitch in to explain how this certain marker ought to be proof of AI origin.
This does nothing for the conservation, except helping the claim that AI will erode and dumb down our language become a self-fulfilling prophecy when people start feeling pressured to use the most dumbed down, simplistic and rhetorically bland way of expressing themselves to avoid any "suspicion"
It feels like AI has suddenly given a platform for people who previously were unable to properly write blog content. But it immediately feels unoriginal and generic.
I’m just not interested in that type of content and immediately put off by it.
The only reason I mentioned this is because of the comment about Gemini 3 being in the comments.
I’m just really, really tired of all the AI content everywhere nowadays and crave some authenticity.
It just feels like cheap remakes / imitations to of original content.
And of course also that mediocrity has now become so cheap that it is now the overwhelming majority.
So no, it’s not all due to human language, LLMs do really write content in a specific style.
One recent study also showed something interesting: AIs aren’t very good at recognizing AI generated content either, which is likely related; they’re unaware of these patterns.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S147738802...