At this point it might be easier to point out articles not written by LLM. Most of them are, I just can't bring myself to read them anymore, it feels like a waste of time. I want to read original thoughts and it's almost impossible to know if this kind of content contains any. I'm tired.

>"And notice what that question actually is: not an accusation, but a catch."

>"This is not bad luck. It’s a structure."

>"We just don’t control it. The vendor does."

Clearly written by an LLM, so many tells.

I actually find it hard to read. Something about it is hard to follow, and I have to think very hard to keep the ‘story’ straight in my head. I keep having to re-read sections, which it not normal for me.

This doesn’t make much intuitive sense to me because shouldn’t output based on statistics have a very strong through line?

This is where I really first got lost:

“You can’t run a greenhouse without gas unless you can see the moments it slips — a fault, a silent fallback — and close them one at a time. The monitoring doesn’t undermine the gas-free promise. It’s what makes the promise keepable.”

Instant turn-off, couldn't finish it. The moment I sense this style, now, I have to close the tab

I was growing suspicious when I was four paragraphs in with about one sentence of content, but that phrase sealed it for me.

The empty phrases are one thing, but LLM articles like this seem almost perversely designed to take longer to read then they did to write.

Possibly a case of a non-native English speaker using AI to translate or help them do their write up. In either case, it sadly makes the reading experience less enjoyable.

Those whole article is very interesting, but it’s AI-slop writing. It’s very off putting, like reading LinkedIn self promoting wankery.