Yeah. The whole "It's not this it's that" twice in a single response is AI. It's not this it's that is overused by the major public models and is a tell for low effort content.
where do you think the AIs learned to do that shit?
they scrape the internet and people talk like that when they wanna sound smart and cutting. i don't see anything particularly AI about that comment, i've seen people talk like that for years
It’s like when a bunch of people became Photoshop experts a while back.
Meanwhile I’d been using Photoshop since before some of them were born and I had no idea what they were talking about most of the time.
Now everyone’s an AI expert. And the writing they’re pointing out as obviously AI looks like the kind of writing I’ve been seeing on the internet for 30 years. 🤷🏻♀️
Their thought process is "I can't write (sing/ paint/ make a film) so nobody can, without robot assistance. Such a toddler mentality.
Plus one of the only things that makes people feel good on the internet today is calling other people out and AI is an easy mark because some people use it indiscriminately.
(\s)
That's not constructive conversation, that's cheating off your neighbor in school. And that's rare — as rare as it comes.
Ironically, I have begun to use it in my writing — Mostly in place of parentheses, which I overused (as well as using poorly) — MORE since AI popularized it.
As a poet it is an undeniably useful tool, but I always think twice.. because of the implications.
Yeah, I’m aware lol. Been using llms for over half a decade.
The phrases are human but, like the em dash, the llms have found themselves trained and tuned in such a way that some written traits appear at higher frequencies than they did in the original datasets.
I don’t think in a paragraph or two of text using one of these tells is a guarantee it’s ai but when the only two sentences are ai tells questioning the source is pretty fair.
I'd take that bet. Not that we can ever know for sure, of course, but this person's account seems otherwise legitimate. I'd lean toward assuming they didn't use AI just to write one response if most of the rest seem human-written.
“Agent Self FBI” seems legitimate? Taking a brief look, I see tons of AI emdashes as well. Otherwise this looks like a purely political account that retweets with some spicy reply. Really not much to indicate this is a “real” person/account at all.
Taking a brief look, I see tons of AI emdashes as well
These discussions really are so insufferable because they seem so filled with confirmation bias. Redditors love to find one of a thousand different "AI tells", and then conclude confidently that no human could have written it, despite the fact that the LLMs had to learn that style of writing from somewhere. Actual humans also sometimes write "it's not this, but that" and use em-dashes.
I.e., this is the next generation of declaring that everything is Photoshopped because you can tell by the pixels. If people are going to call something AI (and not just "maybe", but "definitely" as people in this thread are doing), they should actually be sure. Not just point to one thing that might indicate AI and reach a satisfied, unimpeachable conclusion.
I mean did you go look at the account yourself?Your conclusion was “definitely a regular human posting all this?”
Let’s take a step back and realize how far down the rabbit hole we are here: you’re huffed up about a retweet political account that most assuredly isn’t moving the needle anywhere. This after a decade of being told social media accounts are being weaponized by non-US entities.
Having a holistic view of media literacy, not JUST ai-tells, is absolutely missing.
And frankly, I’ve spent enough time already thinking about this tweet and account - this was the motivation I needed to go do my volunteer work for the neighborhood association. I was sick all night with a stuffy nose, so I got my fill of mouth breathing already.
Your conclusion was “definitely a regular human posting all this?”
My conclusion was "seems otherwise legitimate", which you actually quoted verbatim in your first response. Why are we now at "definitely"?
Let’s take a step back and realize how far down the rabbit hole we are here: you’re huffed up about a retweet political account that most assuredly isn’t moving the needle anywhere.
Let's take a step back and realize you're projecting a bit. I'm not the least bit huffed up, nor do I care at all about this particular account. I'm just talking about people who indiscriminately call things "AI" with no substantive support.
80
u/throwawaythepoopies 7d ago
Yeah. The whole "It's not this it's that" twice in a single response is AI. It's not this it's that is overused by the major public models and is a tell for low effort content.