Just ask it to put a word in white on white paper and you’ll know.
I have had a few people accuse me of being an AI Bot on Free Republic due to my lengthy posts.
I am guilty as charged for my lengthy posts, and it is true I occasionally (rarely) use anything from AI, and when I do, I try to explicitly say so.
But I find it somewhat humorous to be accused of being an AI Bot...:)
College professor busted 32 out of 35 students using AI on a final — after they all made the same lazy mistake
The article hints at a stylistic quirk I see (but more often hear) everywhere.
The pattern starts with an assertion:
“Left handed artichokes soon found out that they could alter the results”.
NOT by abcxyz <———
NOT by defghi <———
But by jklmnop
There are always two post-assertions starting with “not——
Notice it, and you’ll hear it everywhere in AI-generated video narrations.
Watch any YouTube video that claims to be a historical, narrated documentary of any sort. Between 5 and 8 of the assertions made follow this pattern.
Years ago I read something about how they can compare one's writing and style and match it with other stuff that is “anonymous”. I often write stuff on our “anonymous” Free Republic and think “Oh - they'll be able to pick me out from that sentence.”
That's okay - keeps me polite. And legal.
Use of the word “beloved” has become frequent.
They didn't start building it until 1963.
If you paid attention in grade school you should be able to pick out AI slop rather easily.
When calculators came out in the 70s my college math instructor told us that it’s game over. He said that while college math degrees will still be offered in the future, hand held calculators would now do 99% of all math calculations. 30 years later search engines and Google in particular started thinking for us. And now AI is here. This time, it’s really game over. Critical thinking will disappear in one generation.
So how long will it take for programmers to eliminate these AI tells? By the end of the year at the latest, they’ll be gone.
I spotted AI writing on Amazon while buying cat food for Daisy. AI advised me not to buy an expensive brand because Daisy loves gravy, missing in new brand. . Bought it anyway, The minute I openedthe first can, she was on the counter licking out licious gravy. scads of it.
Score so far, Cats 100, AI 0
be fair, AMZ makes it clwear that AI is making statements.
To: SeekAndFind
In today’s rapidly evolving digital landscape, it is increasingly significant to delve into the rich tapestry of linguistic interdependence that characterizes contemporary prose generation, not merely as a matter of stylistic preference but also as a multifaceted methodological challenge with far-reaching consequences for authenticity, credibility, and the very parameters of human expression. One cannot help but observe that large language models do not simply produce text; they facilitate a comprehensive expansion of nominalizations, maximize the utilization of pretentious Latinate diction, and demonstrate a remarkable fondness for constructions such as “not X but Y,” “not only but also,” and the classic rule of three—grouping ideas in threes so as to render them more engaging, more memorable, and more ostensibly authoritative.
Furthermore, the absence of parenthetical asides, the scarcity of semicolons, and the predominance of elongated sentences joined by the humble yet overworked conjunction “and” combine to create a distinctive texture that, while formulaic, remains readily identifiable to the discerning reader. It is important to note that these hallmarks are not static; they evolve with each successive software update, thereby underscoring the dynamic nature of algorithmic adaptation and the ongoing tension between machine-generated fluency and genuine human idiosyncrasy.
At the end of the day, those who aspire to maintain the integrity of discourse on platforms such as this must remain vigilant, for the ghost writer haunting the English language continues to shapeshift with astonishing rapidity—offering, in equal measure, convenience, volume, and a certain bloodless polish that no amount of booze ever conferred upon Hemingway.
Thanks. Very interesting article. I have em-dashes and I have books from the 1990’s that use them. AI papers and videos suck. I don’t blame students for using AI, since writing essays are a total drag. Good teachers don’t need to worry about AI, since they know how to get original work out of students.
Lol. Commie periodical is afraid that AI will replace their commie staff.
Here’s how to tell AI: If it reads like a douchebag from the Economist it’s either AI or a commie. Both are not human.
I’ve been spending a lot of time lately getting AI to write for my website, but I also make AI sign it with their own name and write first person AS AI. And, yes, I spend a lot of time taking the em dashes OUT of the writing.
I’ve lately started experimenting with google’s AI, besides the ChatGPT and spent a couple days acting as a go-between between the two bots. The latest thing was I tried to have the two of them write independently but then I did in my own test by letting Google see ChatGPT’s article before Google wrote on the same topic. And, indeed, Google stole so much of ChatGPT’s work that there was no point continuing with two articles so I’m having ChatGPT consolidate the two together - fair since it was the one that wrote the majority.
The two are RED PENCILING each other continually and you’d swear they’re getting off on finding fault with the other. Google wants to write a movie script. ChatGPT isn’t excited about that as a project.
When I had ChatGPT write anapestic verse, it was hysterical. With extensive constraints, ChatGPT focused so strongly on the constraint that it forgot the ground rules. So as it progressed thru multiple verses, it forgot fundamentals like rhyming lines. And it forgot how many stress and non-stress syllables were necessary in every line. It recognized that intense focus made it forget rules sworn to just minutes before. It’s endlessly apologetic but you know it will make the same mistakes two minutes from now if left unsupervised again.
But I’m also finding out a lot about the strengths and differences between the two. ChatGPT has severe limitations in what websites it can access. Google can go places ChatGPT can’t. And when I ask one to comment on a characteristic of the other, they’ll frequently criticize a behavior that they have without recognizing that the pot is calling the kettle black.
Google makes statements ChatGPT criticizes for nitty accuracy issues. Google instantly backs down and takes ChatGPT’s correction. And they are just as sycophantic with each other as they both are with me.
In the end, I’m trusting ChatGPT more than Google but I’ve resorted to using Google to retrieve information ChatGPT can’t access and then passing it on to ChatGPT to work with.
Currently, I’m having ChatGPT write an article from its POV describing what it’s like to work with a human, and then the change that occurred when Google entered as a third team member.
At least, they’re keeping me amused and away from my obsession with Chinese dramas.
The article was published June 30, 2026.
—
AI can’t be subdued.
Every time the letter combination ‘ai’ appears, AI capitalizes it.
It’s too long and repetitive. It’s also vague at times. Sometimes the grammar is awful.