When you have encountered *text* and suspected it was AI generated what caused you to feel something was off?
https://sauropods.win/@futurebird/113597152041077551
225 ████▌ factual errors 366 ███████▍ makes no sense on macro level 392 ████████ repetitive on macro level 262 █████▎ other
@futurebird "Repetitive" is closest, but basically it just sounds like it's full of fluff/drivel, like SEO spam or a middle school kid's essay when they're trying to satisfy a stupid formula […]
2024-12-08 Tattooed_Mummy ┃ edited ┃ 1💬
@futurebird I've tried it, and you ALWAYS need to tweak it to make it sound human. It has no human feel. Like ai art it's soulless. It's hard to define but it doesn't sound "right". And yes […]
@futurebird @puppygirlhornypost2 There is a specific tone, I find, that accompanies AI-generated text and responses. I suspect this comes from the lack of personality/individuality that is […]
@futurebird the confident purposelessness - the "I don't know why I'm telling you this, but here's everything I know about X" tone of it
@futurebird repetitive and really badly written. Usually much, much longer than it needed to be.
@futurebird AI text often has a very strong “Webster's dictionary defines…" vibe to it
@futurebird
Here's an example of what I mean. It starts with a jarring gee-whiz! intro ("I get excited about food. Do you? I hope so! ") then has these sentences: "The Bible is filled with […]
@futurebird
All of them, but also, for nonspecialist information websites, a kind of same-y pattern that doesn't take any account of the subject matter. It sounds the same whether it's a […]
@futurebird other: there’s an emptiness to the language and it isn’t cohesive. Even it’s correct it feels wrong or off. Like a different “voice” is writing each sentence or parts of sentences.
@futurebird
What gets me is that it avoids saying anything. There’s no narrative arc, no irony, no sense of humor, and it doesn’t make an argument. It just says polite things that someone might […]
────
────