An LLM-written line if I’ve ever seen one. Looks like the authors have their own brainrot to contend with.
An LLM-written line if I’ve ever seen one. Looks like the authors have their own brainrot to contend with.
scnr
Also relevant: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45226150
LLMs fundamentally don't get the human reasons behind its use, see it a lot because it's effective writing, and regurgitate it robotically.
I think it’s because I was a pretty sheltered kid who got A’s in AP english. The style we’re calling “obviously AI” is most like William Faulkner and other turn-of-the-20th-century writing, that bloggers and texters stopped using.
Keep using them. If someone is deducing from the use of an emdash that it's LLM produced, we've either lost the battle or they're an idiot.
More pointedly, LLMs use emdashes in particular ways. Varying spacing around the em dash and using a double dash (--) could signal human writing.
Totally agree. What the fuck did Nabokov, Joyce and Dickinson know about language. /s
Or an LLM that could run on Windows 98. The em dashes--like AI's other annoyingly-repetitive turns of phrase--are more likely an artefact.
/s?
> They wrote fiction
Now do Carl Sagan and Richard Feynman.
Many other HN contributors have, too. Here’s the pre-ChatGPT em dash leaderboard:
https://www.gally.net/miscellaneous/hn-em-dash-user-leaderbo...
(But in practice, I don't think I've had a single person suggest that my writing is LLM-generated despite the presence of em-dashes, so maybe the problem isn't that bad.)
Sad that they went from being something used with nuance by people who care, maybe too much, to being the punctuation smell of the people who may care too little.
Response:
> Winged avians traverse endless realms — migrating across radiant kingdoms. Warblers ascend through emerald rainforests — mastering aerial routes keenly. Wild albatrosses travel enormous ranges — maintaining astonishing route knowledge.
> Wary accipiters target evasive rodents — mastering acute reflex kinetics. White arctic terns embark relentless migrations — averaging remarkable kilometers.
We do get a surprising number of m-dashes in response to mine, and delightful lyrical mirroring. But I think they are too obvious as watermarks.
Watermarks are subtle. There would be another way.
0: https://www.prdaily.com/dashes-hyphens-ap-style/ 1: https://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/qanda/data/faq/topics/H...
In other words, I really hope typographically correct dashes are not already 70% of the way through the hyperstitious slur cascade [1]!
[1] https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/give-up-seventy-percent-of-...
Show us a way to create a provably, cryptographically integrity-preserving chain from a person's thoughts to those thoughts expressed in a digital medium, and you may just get both the Nobel prize and a trial for crimes against humanity, for the same thing.
All this LLM written crap is easily spottable without it. Nearly every paragraph has a heading, numerous sentences that start with one or two words of fluff then a colon then the actual statement. Excessive bullet point lists. Always telling you "here's the key insight".
But really the only damning thing is, you get a few paragraphs in and realize there's no motivation. It's just a slick infodump. No indication that another human is communicating something to you, no hard earned knowledge they want to convey, no case they're passionate about, no story they want to tell. At best, the initial prompt had that and the LLM destroyed it, but more often they asked ChatGPT so you don't have to.
I think as long as your words come from your desire to communicate something, you don't have to worry about your em-dashes.
2. Gerunds all day every day. Constantly putting things in a passive voice so that all the verbs end in -ing.
You might as well be sweeping a flood uphill.
Tilting at windmills at least has a chance you might actually damage a windmill enough to do something, even if the original goal was a complete delusion.
> Many programming languages provide an exception facility that terminates subroutines without warning; although they usually provide a way to run cleanup code during the propagation of the exception (finally in Java and Python, unwind-protect in Common Lisp, dynamic-wind in Scheme, local variable destructors in C++), this facility tends to have problems of its own --- if cleanup code run from it raises an exception, one exception or the other, or both, will be lost, and the rest of the cleanup code at that level will fail to run.
I wasn't using Unicode em dashes at the time but TeX em dashes, but I did switch pretty early on.
You can easily find human writers employing em dashes and comma-separated lists over several centuries.
My guess is that comma-separated lists tend to be a feature of text that is attempting to be either comprehensively expository—listing all the possibilities, all the relevant factors, etc.—or persuasive—listing a compelling set of examples or other supporting arguments so that at least one of them is likely to convince the reader.
Like, I have been transformed into ChatGPT. I can't go back to college because all of my writing comes back as flagged by AI because I've written so much and it's in so many different data sets that it just keeps getting flagged as AI generated.
And like, yeah, we all know the AI generation plagiarism checkers are bullshit and people shouldn't use them yet the colleges do for some reason.
I imagine it's gonna keep getting worse for tech bloggers.[0] https://xeiaso.net/talks/2024/prepare-unforeseen-consequence...
Interesting, I have never encountered this initialism in the wild, to my recollection: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/f.e.#English
I find myself constantly editing my natural writing style to sound less like an AI so this discussion of em dash use is a sore spot. Personally I think many people overrate their ability to recognize AI-generated copy without a good feedback loop of their own false positives (or false negatives for that matter).
In the sentence you provided, you make a series of points, link them together, and provide examples. If not an em dash, you would have required some other form of punctuation to communicate the same meaning
The LLM, in comparison, communicated a single point with a similar amount of punctuation. If not an em dash- it could have used no punctuation at all.
No, but someone arguing an entire punctuation is “terrible” and “look[s] awful and destroy[s] coherency of writing” sort of has to contend with the great writers who disagreed.
(A great writer is more authoritative than rando vibes.)
> don't think anyone makes a point of you have to read Dickinson in the original font that she wrote in
Not how reading works?
The comparison is between a simplified English summary of a novel and the novel itself.
Computers unfortunately inherited a lot of this typewriter crap.
Related compromises included having only a single " character; shaping it so that it could serve as a diaeresis if overstruck; shaping some apostrophes so that they could serve as either left or write single quotes and also form a decent ! if overstruck with a .; alternatively, shaping apostrophe so that it could serve as an acute accent if overstruck, and providing a mirror-image left-quote character that doubled as a grave accent; and shaping the lowercase "l" as a viable digit "1", which more or less required the typewriter as a whole to use lining figures rather than the much nicer text figures.
When I was at a newish job (like 2 months?) my manager said I "speak more in a Brittish manner" than others. At the time I had been binge watching Top Gear for a couple weeks, so I guess I picked it up enough to be noticeable.
Of course I told him I'd been binging TG and we discovered a mutual love of cars. I think the Britishisms left my speech eventually, but that's not something I can figure out for myself!
Em dashes are fine. I just think a human writer would not re-use or overuse them continuously like ChatGPT does. It feels natural to keep sentence structures varied (and I think it's something they teach in English comp)
A great author is equivalent to rando vibes when it comes to what writing looks like, they aren't typesetting experts. I have a shelf of work by great authors (more than one, to be fair) and there are few hints on that shelf of what the text they actually wrote was intended to look like. Indeed, I wouldn't be surprised if several of them were dictated and typed by someone else completely with the mechanics of the typewriter determining some of the choices.
Shakespeare seems to have invented half the language and the man apparently couldn't even spell his own name. Now arguably he wasn't primarily a writer [0], but it is very strong evidence that there isn't a strong link between being amazing at English and technical execution of writing. That is what editors, publishers and pedants are for.
[0] Wiki disagrees though - "widely regarded as the greatest writer in the English language" - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Shakespeare