This reads less like LLM output than it does someone just transcribing their brief notes as they did their research. Lot of missing subject nouns, which is not something I'd expect to see from AI output.
When I use an LLM, it tries to sound like me but there are still tendencies it falls back on, especially when the context window begins to expand.
The 'missing subject nouns' is probably the LLM's way of sounding like an authoritative source in a technical field since many programmers like to write that way.
https://lalitm.com/post/building-syntaqlite-ai/
Flags for LLM vs human drafting:
- Subtitles have the rhetoric turned to 11 with LLMs. (Note: Who has ever had multiple sentences as a blog post heading? It's bizarre) :
- LLM "The Demo Works. Production Does Not."
- Human "AI is why this project exist, and why it's as complete as it is"
- LLM "Six months ago, a practitioner could name a preferred OCR engine with confidence. Based on what I read, that confidence is gone." - *What was read?*
- Human "AI coding tools and playing slot machines"[ref]
- LLM *Scroll through—each thing is about the same length*
There are lots of tells like this. This is a moment to get good at detecting LLM text in case it's surreptitiously used to your detriment.
> Who has ever had multiple sentences?
Many? https://forum.wordreference.com/threads/two-sentences-in-a-t...
> Sources for claims that call for evidence
Absolutely. You got the joke, or? This was the main point of the full article. No primary sources. Only unverified aggregates. Strong contrast to what I did normally once per month.
> Variable paragraph lengths
I tried to compare it to the URL you posted. It's quite similar. I would have rather have said. Shorter sentences. Shorter Paragraphs. But let's not fight on this ;)