roywiggins

Good news, airlines already barely profit:

https://www.iata.org/en/pressroom/2025-releases/2025-12-09-0...

Even more worrying if it's not deliberate and we are all just naturally writing like that now.

Sometimes that's me. I wish more submissions didn't read like AI. I worry that people can't detect tiresomely LLMy output and upvote it to the front page. I'm not mad or anything, I just find the internet less and less useful, because so much that circulates pings my personal AI detector (running in my skull). Sometimes I just close the tab in frustration but sometimes I comment, because it sucks.

(I don't actually care that much if it is LLM text, I care when something reads like it is, because it means everyone writing blogs using this style sounds like everyone else. it's alienating!)

My problem is that my personal AI detector running on wetware just goes ping and it's hard to articulate why. I agree with the person you're replying to on all points but also, when I think something is AI, it's very much just a little brain ping that I would have to laboriously try to work backwards from.

LLM text often just is missing the cadence of human-written text. It never slows down or speeds up; it keeps a relentless pace. Sure, a human can write like that, and I'm sure people do, but I find it enervating to read, whether it was a human or an AI that wrote it.

A shame that Pangram flags this as AI.

https://www.pangram.com/history/c0a9cde2-7a5c-4588-83a3-0269...

ai; dr, unfortunately

Long sequences of short sentences. Not X, but Y.

And Pangram flags it, too.

https://www.pangram.com/history/126831e1-562f-4e65-9874-5250...

Weirdly not dissimilar from MUMPS systems.

ai; dr

Very likely. I'm just saying, people in the CIA seeing where the tech might be going and hedging their bets is not that unlikely.

Common side-effect of letting Claude write your landing page.

Apparently it's mostly this:

    // ENCODE — pack(html) → one .hmml (a Uint8Array you store or send)
    //   · lifts every data: image out of the HTML into raw bytes (no base64)
    //   · gzips the HTML/CSS/JS and frames it all as one binary blob

Well, define "drone warfare"- the CIA and the Pentagon has been operating Predators and friends for a long while.

The idea is to expose it as a tool to your LLM agent so it can run calculations on its own initiative.

Your rewritten post is far easier for me to read now, fwiw.

LLM output has conditioned in me a near reflex response to just close a tab as soon as I smell LLM-authored text. Like, I'm not mad or anything, I just frequently find most default LLM-voiced text very unpleasant to read so I just don't continue reading.

"quietly" seems to be the new one recently

If something's a bad tool that misleads people into doing bad work, it would be good to know that.

A simple distributional analysis of every rsync release with bug data. No model. No assumptions. Just placement.

If you want me to read your analysis, you are going to have to make it not read like Claude wrote it. What does "placement" even mean here?

Pangram seems to be tuned to avoid false positives most of the time.

it can operate at the level of a mere mathematics professor, who everyone knows are barely conscious, basically automatons. wake me up when it's Einstein

Pangram flags this as 100% LLM output fwiw

It's that companies like copilot/cursor are in real trouble if they are in the business of reselling expensive Anthropic tokens

“rename this function and update callers”

I'm old enough to remember when IDEs could do this without needing a couple gigabytes of matrices to do it

(LLMs are great for anything even slightly more complicated ofc)

Pangram agrees it's 100% LLM written.

pangram flags this whole post as 100% AI generated fwiw (and it reads that way to me)

They could have defended the small claims cases against them in that case?

It happens, eg:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EBay_stalking_scandal

Their first study allegedly resulted in "44% were below the cut-off for mild ASD"- ie, practically cured, from a diagnostic point of view.

imho part of the communication problem is that a 6 year reduction actually is large, but it doesn't sound large. Smoking takes about 10 years off your life, and it's deadly in a very mechanical and understood way.

No, that appears to be the implication of this study, which frankly seems like such a large effect that I'm pretty skeptical! I'd say "where's the control group" except the claimed effect is so large that you kind of don't need one, if it's real:

Prior to the study, 83% of participants had "severe" autism. Two years later, only 17% were rated as severe, 39% as mild or moderate, and incredibly, 44% were below the cut-off for mild ASD.

Emphasis mine. If you are below the cutoff for mild ASD you wouldn't be diagnosed at all.

“The past is a foreign country; they do things differently there.”