This text doesn’t seem AI generated to me.
It's also one of the reasons its insanely popular in ESL countries and frustrating/disliked in English-speaking countries because it makes things easier in one and harder in the other.
It was never the goal, but it is the reality. The same style people call AI, was often called being a pedant or being wordy 10 years ago.
The thing that frustrates me the most about AI is how every thread in every forum spend half the time arguing whether an article is AI or not, as if bad writing only started to exist with AI. Just fucking don't read it.
Em-dashes as the signal is the most-upsetting for me. I have been using them properly and frequently for decades.
Slop is slop. If it is AI-slop then fine, go ahead and call it out.
To me, it's all fairly human-ai neutral except for this sentence which is oh-so AI cliche and casts doubt on the rest of it:
> This volume of The Art of 64-Bit Assembly closes the gap between a plausible explanation and genuine understanding.
"closes the gap" is a favored phrase by our artificial friends and the phrases "plausible explanation" and "genuine understanding" are just... so ... dramatic for the context.
The rest of it is pretty tame in comparison. In my armchair opinion, I'd guess it's mostly a composite of (professional) human-written/ai-revised and/or vice versa. Which is not necessarily a bad thing.