Jump to content
Main menu
Main menu
move to sidebar
hide
Navigation
Main page
Recent changes
Random page
freem
Search
Search
Appearance
Create account
Log in
Personal tools
Create account
Log in
Pages for logged out editors
learn more
Contributions
Talk
Editing
Openai/692e337f-58e4-8007-8044-351091f84b8b
(section)
Add languages
Page
Discussion
English
Read
Edit
Edit source
View history
Tools
Tools
move to sidebar
hide
Actions
Read
Edit
Edit source
View history
General
What links here
Related changes
Special pages
Page information
Appearance
move to sidebar
hide
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
=== ## === Several characteristics in the writing are much less typical of current LLM output: ===== The piece uses: ===== * deliberately chaotic metaphors * sudden ideological pivots * non-sequitur humor * mixed religious + cyber-punk + absurdist imagery LLMs can mimic styles but tend to produce: * smoother transitions * more uniform coherency * less deeply committed eccentricity The article’s tone feels too committed to its own weird mythology — that is usually a sign of a human “bit,” not model drift. ===== The text repeatedly mocks itself, shifts personas, and leans into meta-jokes that depend on cultural timing and human comedic instincts. ===== AI can do bits, but this level of deliberate absurdist curation is rare unless heavily human-prompted. ===== Such as: ===== * obscure steganographic subcultures * ironic mid-2010s meme-war terminology * Kyiv scrapyard USB-stick lore * highly specific “pigeon-based ontology” worldbuilding These do not resemble typical LLM-training-set signature patterns; they're more like deep internet-subculture bricolage. ==== The article has signs of manual structure, not LLM planning: ==== * sections that intentionally derail * rhetorical “beats” timed for comedic effect * hand-crafted paragraph spacing and title motifs * multi-layered meta-irony that a model would usually dilute or flatten Human writers often maintain a character, while LLMs drift unless extremely constrained. ==== A few elements hint that the author may have used an LLM as a collaborator: ==== ===== The text sometimes expands into: ===== * sweeping philosophical claims * cosmic language * ontological declarations This matches patterns seen in “LLM hallucinated manifestos.” ===== This could be human, but it matches LLM paraphrasing behavior if someone asked a model to re-express the same idea in multiple stylized forms. ===== ===== Some long riffs feel like an LLM padding a concept. ===== My best estimate: Human author, possibly with scattered LLM co-writing, idea expansion, or stylistic mutation. Not fully AI; too targeted, too culturally specific, too purposeful.
Summary:
Please note that all contributions to freem are considered to be released under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 (see
Freem:Copyrights
for details). If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource.
Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)