[flagged]
2. This one works. It's peer-reviewed.
It may benchmark well, but in the wild none are much better than coin flip. A quick Google search shows that Pangram's weakness is "false positives on creative writing", and that it's trivially fooled.
This isn't even particularly good slop. If you can't identify this, we're entering a not so good space.
Anyhow, I'd recommend you roll away from this hill because it's really not worth dying on. Common sense and peer reviewed slop detection aren't working for you. I provided my opinion and backed it with evidence. That's why I posted what I did.
AI generators do a better job of conversational output than traditional language translators (although there is a risk that if you can't read the target language as a non-native speaker, it can distort or destroy the message).
I actually find it an insulting imposition on my time. I don't think this is unreasonable or even unusual.
Win-win.
Indians write english just fine.
But we can tab back 10 years in this blogger's history and note their grasp of English wasn't deeply fluid. If they're using AI to bridge the gap, I for one ain't faulting them.
But you got downvoted for pointing out that it was slop. I got similarly downvoted a couple days ago. Hackernews folk seem uninterested in having it pointed out when AI is being used to generate posts.
I'd guess it's some combination of a) they like using AI themselves, and b) they can't distinguish AI themselves. And they turn to all manner of excuse like "AI detectors do not work" or "non-native speakers need a way to produce articles, too". It's a crappy time to be a humanist, or really to care about anything, it seems.
(And the "I don't like" part of that trips over "Please don't use Hacker News for political or ideological battle. It tramples curiosity." We've all heard the pros and cons arguments of AI-augmented output by now. Fighting the fight here is just adding noise).
https://chatgpt.com/share/6930a291-a1fc-8010-bb72-7070139949...
(Actually, for that specific chatgpt output: the content isn't that awful, at least for the headers. I didn't bother to read every line of it, but I don't bother to read every line of every article I click on in Hacker News in general; only things deep in my wheel-house get added to the "read in detail later" queue).
And hypocritically, I plan on putting it on my own link list/some custom writing blog.
But in my defense, my blog is more of a public journal. I don’t link to it anywhere and my name isn’t attached to it.
"A man wrapped up in himself makes a very small bundle."
- Benjamin Franklin