If you’ve never seen Jim Carrey’s 2007 psychological thriller The Number 23, then congratulations. It is a film about a man who sees the number 23 so many times that he ends up going bonkers. I used to think this film was stupid. However, now I appear to be living it.
My own personal number 23 is a rhetorical device: “It’s not X, it’s Y.” Everywhere I look, there it is. Whenever I hate myself enough to scroll through Facebook’s wilderness of algorithmically suggested posts, I find myself being smacked in the face with sentences such as: “Self-improvement isn’t a trend, it’s a lifestyle shift,” and “The small wins aren’t just moments, they’re the majority of your life.” Once you notice it, it becomes impossible to ignore. This weekend during a Peloton class (I know, shut up), I heard an instructor bark a variation of “this isn’t X, it’s Y”. Yesterday, a character did the same during a TV show I was reviewing, and I dropped a star from its score in retaliation.
You know where this is coming from, don’t you? “It’s not X, it’s Y” is an AI mainstay. It’s one of ChatGPT’s most insidious tells. No matter how innocuous a prompt you enter, AI will always find a way to sneak it into its response. Ask it if you should put more ham in your pasta, and it will tell you: “Ham doesn’t just taste good – it makes everything else taste better.” Ask it if you should chase a bee around your garden and it will say: “Bees aren’t stupid – they’re hyper-specialised”.
It’s beyond irritating to me that because LLMs were trained on writing that uses such constructions, being competent at writing now makes me get accusations of using one to create a post or comment.
This isn’t really the case on Beehaw, but head over to Reddit, post a cogent, well-reasoned comment, and the knives are out.
I think the most infuriating part is that instead of engaging with the content (I’m there mostly for debate, anyway), they attack the structure and lob accusations. That’s not a conversation.
This sentence structure has been incredibly common for decades, if not longer. It is not a sign of AI.
llms seem to use the word “the” a lot, so any sentence with the word “the” is AI-generated!
I agree, people look for these patterns and sometimes they are overused by AI, but sometimes they’re such a stretch.
I got so annoyed by this, that I looked into what the most common GPT quirks are. Now I have a long list of things to hate when reading stuff online. Also, many YT video scripts were clearly written by GPT and edited by nobody. Once you start seeing these signs, you can’t unsee them ever again.
It’s not X, it’s Y” is an AI mainstay.
You should have seen my h.school essays…
Funny about the Number 23. After watching it years ago, I still find it everywhere and often. I know it’s probably one of those: “Get a new car then notice that same car everywhere” effects, but still…
I’m actually using more those resources (em dashes, three points lists, “it’s worth noting that”, “it’s not X, it’s Y”, etc.) after AI popped up. They’re a damn good way to detect assumptive people, eager to conclude based on little to no info or reasoning; the same ones OP is complaining about. They don’t want a conversation at all, they want to whine, so if you give them a low-hanging fruit you can detect them early and block them as noise and dead weight.
That’s in my “casual” writing style, though. Professionally (as a translator) I mostly play by the tune, trying to preserve the style of the original. (Plus I barely translate things into English, it’s usually into Portuguese, very rarely Italian.)
That might not necessarily be the case – there is a possibility every example is completely organic – but it’s a sign of the times that we can’t just relax and assume the things we see and hear were made by people.
Guys, I found em dashes! The author is a bot! Bring me my pitchfork! /jk (those are en dashes, by the way.)
Understanding the length of dashes aside, I think a big part of this backlash is a lot of people are terrible writers, and as such, the idea that another user can actually write is offensive to them. They have no way to fight back with words, so LLMs provide a tidy way to dismiss the whole piece as a hallucination.
I, too, have a couple of different writing styles, which stems from having been an opinion editor in college. What Beeple generally see on here is my columnist voice, but I am capable of the editorial Voice of God when it’s called for (it is rarely called for).
a lot of people are terrible writers, and as such, the idea that another user can actually write is offensive to them.
I worry you’re right, here; but only in brief episodes. I mostly want to assume otherwise.
I LOVE great writing: proper punctuation, good delineation, awareness of mass nouns, etc. I love when I see great writing and wish I could be as good.
I feel for people who don’t.
“Power isn’t given, it’s taken.” - Malcolm xAI
This is something I see my partner’s high school students having to deal with now: the suspicion that competence or intelligence must indicate AI use. It feels like when dumb film writers or directors make non-MC character unbelievably dumb to make the MC look smart (cough BBC Sherlock cough), but applied to real life.
I submitted some things I wrote years ago to AI and asked if it was written by AI and it said yes.
If you write intelligently and using proper sentence structure, the default now is to believe AI. It’s sad.
I’ll never give up em dashes.
Agreed—me neither.
This is not just chatgpt and also not caused by a recent changed.
all llms seems to love this pattern and i agree once you know about it you start seeing it everywhere.
“This isn’t chatgpt, it’s an endemic change!”
:D
I don’t know if that was a purposefully funny comment, but it was both clever and funny if so.
I haven’t seen this particular quirk outside GPT users, but Claude’s seems to be, “X is quietly doing work…” or some variation of that.
“You really hit the nail on the head, but the thing you said about X is doing quiet work as well.”
Your reasoning is doing quiet work. The context is doing quiet work. Everything is doing quiet work. We’re all a bunch of librarians out here, apparently.
