I believe both stories are wrong, and wrong for the same reason.
In this day and age, anyone who writes their own essays would never write that.
I believe both stories are wrong, and wrong for the same reason.
In this day and age, anyone who writes their own essays would never write that.
I'd put it as, the very best writing can just use a lot of simple, declarative sentences. Decent, not extraordinary writing may need a few such constructs to take the reader in the direction the author intend. And you can use these constructs in a sort-of "poetic" way if you want to land in the land of conceptionality or something.
But the key thing is that with AIs, their output is subtly wrong everywhere, in a way that most human action doesn't follow (usually coherent syntax implies coherent semantics but not so much with AI). And so there really isn't good glue-phrase to use keep those semi-thoughts together.
...and you're right, it's not the idiosyncrasies, it's the fluffy meandering meaningless purposeless vapidity.
“ This week is our argument for that claim, and we are making it in code rather than in prose.”
> With agents, research per projects have become easy and quick.
Either my English is failing me or that is a weird sentence.
And then there is 'wee' in
> If you ask me what a small lab can do today, wee will show you three things:
Which I'm more confident is an error.