I really don't want this to be AI writing because I enjoyed it, but as other commenters have pointed out, the rate of publishing (according to the linked Twitter account) is very rapid. I'm worried that I can't tell.
> a subtype — not in the object-oriented sense of a type that extends another, but in the mathematical sense of a constrained set
A number of em dashes and "not X, but Y" constructs unfortunately, sometimes even right next to each other like the above.
I'm not convinced this work is wholly AI but it has at least the smell of augmentation or assistance, and a sloppy mindset in terms overseeing it. That indicates a lack of investment from the author which I always think is... unfortunate as a reader, to say the least.
I've written almost 50 blog posts in the last 3 years. All in draft, never published mostly because a crippling imposter syndrome and fear of criticism. But every now and then I wake up full of confidence and think "this is it. today I'll click publish I don't give a fuck. All in". Never happens. Maybe this author was in the same boat until a month ago. I know there's a high chance that's just a bot but I can understand if it's not and how devastating has to be to overcome the fear of showing your thoughts to the world and being labeled a bot. If it's not already obvious English is not my first language and I've used LLMs to check my grammar and improve the style. Maybe all my posts smell like chatpgt now and this just adds to the fear of being dismissed as slop.
The main problem with this article is that it appears to have been basically written out of whole cloth by the LLM, there’s no novel insight here about Ada beyond what you could fit in a short prompt + the Wikipedia article.
I really enjoyed the essay, only checked afterwards when I started reading comments.
I hate that I'm starting to develop a media literacy immune system for blog posts of all things.
Most longform readers will assume an author has deep expertise and spent a lot of time organizing their thoughts, which lends their ideas some legitimacy and trust. For a small blog, an 8,000 word essay is a passion project.
But if AI is detected in the phrasing and not disclosed, it begs a lot of questions. Did AI write the whole thing, or just light edits? Are the facts AI generated, too, and not from personal experience? What motivated someone to produce this content if they were going to automate parts of its creation; why would they value the output more than the process?
absolutely zero questions from me. If I see two exactly same writings: one - by human, another - by AI. For me its doesn't matter.
> Most longform readers will assume an author has deep expertise and spent a lot of time organizing their thoughts, which lends their ideas some legitimacy and trust.
It's the incorrect assumption of "most readers". Before AI there are enough methods to throw a long read. So, AI isn't really a gamechanger here