In this case, not only is it a theory that fits the facts, it’s likely.

A content farm having a disparate range of websites, for the sole purpose of SEO needs to be able to create engaging content quickly. AI generation allows for that; and by purposefully keeping a name that we can try to trace back to a real human as the author, the post itself lends credence to the theory that it’s AI generated.

Ironically we're not far from having custom AI filters that remove any sentiment we want, namely, "this seems AI generated".

I'm with you, those comments add no value and are only guesses. Even normal samples of writing will include AI traits like em dashes or "it's not just that, it's this". Conversely, it's not difficult to tell an AI to stop sounding like itself. It's overall burned thought cycles that can never be recovered.

My pet peeve lately is low effort comments that don't reflect anything substantive in the content. We don't have that problem on HN, but on YouTube it's prevalent. Comments like "absolutely/me too/exactly what I thought" etc. The only thing they can help are bot farms, and even if they were from a human they offer no value.

Discernment?

Whatever they and their affliction are called, they've successfully ruined the last few comment sections on the web that were still worth visiting for me. I hope they'll eventually receive the help they so desperately need. Maybe they'll be able to handle reality one day.