upvote
> I've been using it for decades now but these days, I almost always pause for a second.

Wrote about this before [0] but my 2c: you shouldn't pause and you should keep using them because fuck these companies and their AI tools. We should not give them the power to dictate how we write.

[0]: https://manuelmoreale.com/thoughts/on-em-dashes

reply
That's not really how it works.

Gemini tells me that for thousands of years, the swastika was used as "a symbol of positivity, luck and cosmic order". Try drawing it on something now and showing it to people. Is this an effective way to fight Nazism?

I think it's brave to keep using em dashes, but I don't think it's smart, because we human writers who like using them (myself very much included) will never have the mindshare to displace the culturally dominant meaning. At least, not until the dominant forces in AI decide of their own accord that they don't want their LLMs emitting so many of them.

reply
When you say "show it to people" I guess you don't mean the people in India, Japan, etc who still use the symbol for its original purpose?
reply
I'm not confident that the average person is aware of an em dash nor that it is widely associated with AI; I think the current culturally dominant meaning is just a fat hyphen (which most people just call a dash anyway).
reply
For what it's worth, whatever LLMs do extensively, they do because it's a convention in well-established writing styles.

LLMs have a bias towards expertise and confidence due to the proportion of books in their training set. They also lean towards an academic writing style for the same reason.

All this to say, if LLMs write like you were already writing, it means you have very good foundations. It's fine to avoid them out of fear, but you have this Internet stranger's permission to use your em dash pause to think "Oh yeah, I'm the reference for writing style."

reply
I think that bias is not due to the proportion of books and more due to how they are fine-tuned after the pretraining.
reply
> For what it's worth, whatever LLMs do extensively, they do because it's a convention in well-established writing styles.

I think that's only part of the story. I think that while it's true what LLMs do is somehow represented in their corpus of training data, they also lack any understanding of how to adapt to the context, how to find a suitable "voice", and how not to overdo it, unless you explicitly prompt them otherwise, which is too much of a burden. Their default voice sucks, basically.

So let's say they learned to speak in Redditese. They don't know when not to speak in that voice. They always seem to be trying to make persuasive arguments, follow patterns of "It's not X. It's Y. And you know it (mic drop)." But real humans don't speak like this all the damn time. If you speak like this to your mom or to your closest friends, you're basically an idiot.

It's not that you cannot speak like this. It's that you cannot do it all the time. And that's the real problem with LLMs.

(Sorry, couldn't resist!)

reply
Aren’t books massively outweighed by the crawled internet corpus?
reply
I would doubt that because books are probably weighed as higher quality and more trustworthy than random Reddit posts

Especially if it's unsupervised training

reply
We're in the brief window of time when AI's writing style is the weirdness. It's an artifact of the production process, like JPG blur, MP3 distortion, autotune's rigidity. And it didn't take long for those things to become normalized, in fact for them to become artifacts that people proudly adopted and embraced. DJs release tracks built from MP3s samples instead of waves. Autotune is famously a 'sound' that was once something to be subtly added and never confessed to, but which now genres and artists lean into rather than away from.

Long story short: I think emoji in headings and lists, em dashes, and the vile TED Talk paragraph structure of "long sentence with lots of words asking a question or introducing a possibility. followed by. short sentences. rebutting. or affirming." are here to stay. My money is that it gets normalized and embraced as "well of course that's how you best communicate because I see it everywhere."

reply
Short sentences were popularized in writing only in the last hundred and fifty years. Styles change.
reply
Yes, but it's kinda sad, isn't it, that this robotic way of writing in turn teaches a new generation of people how to write?

Also, you forgot the extremely enervating: "It's not X. It's Y. <Clincher>."

reply
Exactly this! I love(d) using em dashes. Now they’ve become ehm dashes, experiencing exactly that pause — that moment of hesitation — that you describe
reply
AI never uses em dashes in a pair like this, whereas most people who like em dashes do. Anyone who calls paired em dash writing AI is only revealing themselves to be a duffer.
reply
In my limited text generation experience, LLMs use em-dashes precisely like that, only without spaces on the sides and always in pairs in a single sentence. Here some examples from my Gemini history:

"The colors we see—like blue, green, and hazel—are the result of Tyndall scattering."

"Several interlocking cognitive biases create a "safety net" around the familiar, making the unknown—even if objectively better—feel like a threat."

"A retrograde satellite will pass over its launch region twice every 24 hours—once on a "northbound" track and once on a "southbound" track—but because of the way Earth rotates, it won't pass over the exact same spot on every orbit."

"Central, leverages streaming telemetry to provide granular, real-time performance data—including metrics (e.g., CPU utilization, throughput, latency), logs, and traces—from its virtualized core and network edge devices."

"When these conditions are met—indicating a potential degradation in service quality (e.g., increased modem registration failures, high latency on a specific Remote PHY)—Grafana automatically triggers notifications through configured contact points (e.g., Slack, PagerDuty)."

After collecting these samples I've noticed that they are especially probably in questions like explain something or write descriptive text. In the short queries there is not much text in total to trigger this effect.

reply
> ”AI never uses em dashes in a pair”

I wish that were true, but I feel a little bit vindicated nevertheless

reply
I've gone back to using two dashes--LLMs typically don't write them that way.
reply
I'm going to propose that we name this the --gnu-long-form :)
reply
I used to enjoy the literate usage of the word "literally".

You'll get over it.

reply
Using literally to mean figuratively goes back hundreds of years
reply
Not to mention "seriously", "really", "truly", "very", "verily", etc. There's a long history of using words related to truth as intensifiers in English.
reply
Also, unfortunately I have in my global instructions to never use em dashes...
reply
Maybe I'll get over it eventually.
reply
What I do – and I know this isn't conventional style – is use ex dashes. (Or, you could use spaces between em dashes, as incorrect as it is.)
reply
I've noticed that LLMs generated text often has spaces around em dashes, which I found odd. They don't always do that, but they do it often enough that it stood out to me since that isn't what you'd normally see.
reply
> Or, you could use spaces between em dashes, as incorrect as it is.

It's a matter of style preference. I support spaces around em-dashes — particularly for online writing, since em-dashes without spaces make selecting and copying text with precision an unnecessary frustration.

By the way,what other punctuation mark receives no space on at least one side?Wouldn't it look odd,make sentences harder to read,and make ideas more difficult to grok?I certainly think so.Don't you? /s

reply
To quote Office Space, “Why should I change? He’s the one who sucks.”
reply
Mostly because when I see an em dash now, I assume that it was written by AI, not that the author is one of the people who puts enough effort into their product that they intentionally use specific sized dashes.

AI might suck, but if the author doesn't change, they get categorized as a lazy AI user, unless the rest of their writing is so spectacular that it's obvious an AI didn't write it.

My personal situation is fine though. AI writing usually has better sentence structure, so it's pretty easy (to me at least) to distinguish my own writing from AI because I have run-on sentences and too many commas. Nobody will ever confuse me with a lazy AI user, I'm just plain bad at writing.

reply
> assume

There's your trouble. The real problem is that most internet users are setting their baseline for "standard issue human writing" at exactly the level they themselves write. The problem is that more and more people do not draw a line between casual/professional writing, and as such balk at very normal professional writing as potentially AI-driven.

Blame OS developers for making it easy—SO easy!—to add all manner of special characters while typing if you wish, but the use of those characters, once they were within easy reach, grew well before AI writing became a widespread thing. If it hadn't, would AI be using it so much now?

reply
deleted
reply
As someone who frequently posts online- with em dashes- I wonder if I am part of the problem with training llms to use them so much- and am going to get punished in the future for doing so.

I also tend to way overuse parenthesis (because I tend to wander in the middle of sentences) but they haven't shown up much in llms so /shrug.

reply
If you’re judging my writing so shallowly, I don’t think I’m writing for you.
reply
I don’t think I’m judging shallowly- there is no em-dash on a standard keyboard. The one way it ends up in real writing is if you use a typesetting program like LaTeX, or Word changes an en-dash with auto formatting, or the user consciously interrupts their writing flow to insert the character with a special keystroke combination or by pasting it in. The proportion of people who do any of those things in writing for the web is quite small. The number of clearly AI written posts with em-dashes is quite large. So large, that I immediately suspect AI writing when I see an em-dash and I rarely see countering evidence that suggests the author is human but meticulous about how they write.
reply
> If you’re judging my writing so shallowly, I don’t think I’m writing for you.

No, you are writing for people who see LLM-signals and read on anyway.

Not sure that that's a win for you.

reply
"Seeing LLM-signals" == "reading shallowly", so I think I covered that case.
reply
Or you're writing for the people who haven't deluded themselves into thinking that they're magical LLM detectors, which definitely does seem like a win.
reply
To continue the story, the guy saying this got fired and probably wouldn't have without taking this stand.
reply
The correct thing to do is to use an en-dash with spaces. ;)
reply
I use it to trigger false positives in haters – why not?
reply
This is the modern day "I can tell that's photoshopped because I've seen some 'shops in my day." The sooner we stop glorifying the people who think they're magical LLM detectors, the better, frankly.
reply
You can still use them — it’s just that they have a new purpose; getting things ignored by AI detection or AI;DR.

Now you can ask for outlandish things at work knowing your boss won’t read it and his summariser will ignore it as slop — win.

reply
You’re absolutely right. I hate AI writing — it’s not that I hate AI, it’s that it makes everything it says sound a specific combination of smug and authoritative — No matter the content. Once you realize it’s not saying anything, that’s the real aha moment.

\s

reply