Nitpicking: Once articles which are _obviously_ AI-written stop, the comments calling it out will (should) stop.

It is far more likely that AI-written articles will become harder to spot, not that they will stop being written.

vacuous falsity isn't an interesting case to examine

Means, the crying will never stop

> calling it out

Calling what out? Did we suddenly invent a durable Turing test that will last more than six months? (We didn't, but some people "just know")

The only durable metric is if the article is good, if the ideas are good. Everything else is complaining about Bob Dylan's electric guitar.

Yeah the "more than a paragraph or two" is key here. Indicators of AI writing work both ways; the more text you write, the more likely you are to "slip" and use some phrasing or syntactical constructions uncommon in LLM output. (This is why AI detectors perform worse on shorter excerpts.)

I posted this elsewhere, but convincingly, consistently "writing like AI" and never slipping once takes an amount of knowledge and skill analogous to art forgery. Except that with art forgery you can at least make millions of dollars off it.

> What does that tell you?

That HN was a neat community fifteen years ago, but like all things cool made by early adopters, it will eventually attract a following hoping to be somewhere, to exist among people doing things, but the tragedy of such followings is that they bring with them their toxicity, their immunity to their own poison, and drown out what they depend on until the early adopters early adopt away.

The real slop is all this lazy concern farming from an ant mill that is powerless to do anything except validate its own hand wringing.