Maybe it isn't deliberate! I was asking out of curiosity. This reads as extremely LLM-y to me, so if it was purely human-written I am curious about the process.
> "they will be as easy with it as you are with the light switch you never once thought about."
This metaphor doesn't really feel coherent.
> "What is dying is acquaintance."
This is a very odd topic sentence.
> "The kids coming up will not feel this as a loss, and they are not wrong not to."
Claude loves stacking big piles of negatives and arguing both sides of everything.
> "I went looking the other night for a recording of a modem connecting. People keep them around like pressed flowers."
No they don't?? People don't keep recordings of modems connecting around like pressed flowers. I, of course, understand that this is a simile. The simile just does not make sense.
> "I played one back for no reason except to hear it."
Again, note the unnecessarily florid negative phrasing. It would be much more parsimonious to write "I played one back just to hear it"
> "I know that sound by heart. People will never know the machine that just played the sound back to me. Not the way I knew the one that used to make it."
> "The difficulty was the knowledge. You came to know that machine the way you come to know anything that pushes back. The resistance was the whole medium."
The X -was- the Y, twice in short succession, to say the same thing.
It is interesting that your recent posts have much more LLM style tics than your post on the same site from 2023. Are you deliberately imitating LLM writing quirks?
Please write your blog posts yourself. I don't want to have to parse through this stupid claude output to get to your point. Literally just posting the prompt would be better than this.
I stopped reading at "The policy correlate of the vocabulary theft is equally clean." Please write your own blog posts; if I wanted to listen to Claude ponder about the crypto market I would have prompted it myself.
LLM translations of non-LLM text don't generally look as bad as this does. Many of the LLM-y traits -- inappropriate overuse of bolding and em-dashes, aggressively punchy sentences, and an essay that seems artifically stretched out to hit a word count -- are not affected by translation.
"On the surface it looks like an engineering question, or a career planning question, but underneath it is an existential question:"
"This gives us the first corollary of end-state thinking cold but honest:"
"What does the end-state look like? My take is simple — a single line: PRD is Code."
"This shift brings a quiet, lethal corollary: "
"But think clearly about what letting go means."
"It sounds like a lament; it is actually a refining process. "
"When the tide of the times is pushing you along, slow can be a discipline."
These outtakes are all fairly obvious unedited claudeslop that add nothing to the argument. The excessive use of bolding and em-dashes throughout the article are also signals.
Writing tip: you do not need to have LLMs expand your ideas into a longer form for you. Spreading out your ideas across a longer post does not make them better.
I said one of those things (sort of) but not the other. I am not sure why you are speaking as if "some people say x, and others say not x" is a gotcha. I am aware that many people say many different things.
I am not sure if you are serious? It really has nothing to do with being grammatically correct. The article is chock-full of all of the most common LLM tells. The aggressive use of negative parallelism, filler adjectives like "deeply", and unvaryingly breathless tone all feel like decisions an actual thinking person would not make.
That's interesting! I have tried to get false positives from pangram and failed, so I trusted it a bit more than any of the others, although I generally just rely on my own intuition. I am curious what your false positive samples looked like, if you're willing to share.
(I'm less interested in false negatives; I have successfully produced those myself.)
The sentence construction, choice of vocabulary, and continually breathless tone are all clear indicators this was written by an llm and barely edited.
I threw part of it into pangram to get a second opinion: