Chain of trust from RFID chips embedded in their fingertips that authenticated to their keyboard, proving that at least their fingers grazed the keys that formed the message.

But what if they're reading off of a pre-written message?

I've seen many people on reddit use AIs to translate their text. Given that it clearly puts the "default AI voice" on top of their text, it makes me think that it is a fairly inaccurate translation. I suspect something like Google Translate is still better for most people, because it seems to do better at maintaining the voice. Of course in the limit, what I'm calling "voice" simply can't be translated between languages, but you can certainly do much better than slamming "default AI voice" on top of people's writing. I'm sure under the hood Google Translate is a whole bunch of LLMs too now, but special-purpose translation LLMs without the agent refinement can do a lot better. It's unfortunate that people think this is an easy way to translate but the chatbot LLMs, while capable of understanding multiple languages and superficially translating them, probably shouldn't be used for this purpose.

It may be possible to prompt the chatbots to also use a certain style in the target language to get it out , but I'm not fluent enough in a second language to know if it worked and I'm yet to see any of the several people I've suggested this to try it, so I'd be interested if anyone knows if this works.

Proving a negative is nearly impossible. "Prove you didnt use ai"... its a common argument tactic used all the time.

On one hand, you’re right. On the other, it’s normal that humans want to gauge the authenticity of the things they interact with. Some sort of uncanny valley thing.

oh people absolutely get off on this. it’s clear that some people feel a sense of moral superiority from it

"Translation tools" is AI, so it's correct that our AI-sensors went off.

Edit: Also, speaking as a trans person, the analogue would be looking at a trans person and noticing that they are trans. Which is not a transvestigation. (You wouldn't normally announce that said person is trans, because it's usually not relevant. It often is relevant if an article is written with AI.)

There is no hunting involved. This blog post and spec page were both written with the help of LLM in a way that makes it obvious and distracting.

I have trouble understanding this. I don't see anyone complaining that we use microwaves and ovens instead of going for lit wood to cook or using search engines instead of crawling through libraries, or using Google Maps instead of using paper maps. These are tools. If output of an LLM conveys the ideas to be told, then what is the problem?

Not everyone needs to be magicians with language.

I used em-dashes before Gen AI was a thing and I refuse to stop using them. Doing so is admitting the AI companies won. I am not going to change the way I write just to appease some terminally online folks who lack the ability to understand that LLMs learned to write from our writings.

The em dash "gotcha" is so fucking tiring at this point.

It is perfectly possible, and even easy, to write e[nm] dashes manually. With compose key sequences it's barely more effort than typing a normal dash/hyphen, even. (Just compose key + `-.` for en dash, and `--` for em dash.)

Then eat a pile of different dashes made by the same guy back in 2013 [0].

[0] https://habr.com/ru/articles/191654/

"cesspool" is pretty overboard. Have you read virtually any other site lately?