Nonspecific and flat and plain. Riveting as wet clay. It’s not A, it’s B. Odd items in trios. Unrhythmic. Doesn’t seem to actually state a thesis or a problem. No drama, no ear. Just invocations of important terms shorn from meaning.
Tell me to my face it’s not AI. RoL you gotta stop letting this stuff through your editing process or I can’t continue supporting you.
The AI assures you it’s not AI. What about the evidence of your eyes and brain? Please read this. Distinguishing AI writing from human writing should be a basic literacy skill these days
Bro, relax. The piece has a strong point of view and seems reflective of lived experience. The reality of 2026 is that I can't definitively check whether or not a writer has used AI in their composition - other than what turns up with an AI detector - but my strong intuition is that this is Ben's piece. It's interesting and impassioned and I learned things from that I didn't know before.
I do think people can distinguish AI better than random chance, but there's always uncertainty. Calling it out so confidently is a mistake. I also don't really like this writer's style, it seems somewhat theatrical and false, maybe overly crafted for Western ears, not really communicating very much.
Nonspecific and flat and plain. Riveting as wet clay. It’s not A, it’s B. Odd items in trios. Unrhythmic. Doesn’t seem to actually state a thesis or a problem. No drama, no ear. Just invocations of important terms shorn from meaning.
Tell me to my face it’s not AI. RoL you gotta stop letting this stuff through your editing process or I can’t continue supporting you.
To your face, Liam Noble, the piece is not AI. Multiple AI detectors show an overwhelming probability that the piece is human-written.
The AI assures you it’s not AI. What about the evidence of your eyes and brain? Please read this. Distinguishing AI writing from human writing should be a basic literacy skill these days
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Signs_of_AI_writing
Bro, relax. The piece has a strong point of view and seems reflective of lived experience. The reality of 2026 is that I can't definitively check whether or not a writer has used AI in their composition - other than what turns up with an AI detector - but my strong intuition is that this is Ben's piece. It's interesting and impassioned and I learned things from that I didn't know before.
GPTZero says 70% human, 22% AI, 8% mixed.
I do think people can distinguish AI better than random chance, but there's always uncertainty. Calling it out so confidently is a mistake. I also don't really like this writer's style, it seems somewhat theatrical and false, maybe overly crafted for Western ears, not really communicating very much.
I agree with the editor: this is a truly authentic tale, heartfelt and 100% read-worthy. Kudos, Ben!