the image linked to by the post is the Pangram LLM-detection report of paragraphs in the first screenshot below, reading “100% AI”. in lieu of alt text for the screenshots below, I suggest scrolling through @eicker@lemmy.world’s profile and https://lemmy.world/comment/26323310, which the screenshots are of. Look at the vote counts.
You must log in or # to comment.
i think this might be some human using llm translate though
He uses far too many emojis, AI loves using non standard characters you can’t easily find on a keyboard, nor would they survive a translation tool.
Other indicators:
- only talks about AI related news, doesn’t have any other hobbies.
- all comments are single paragraphs, no line breaks, no complicated thoughts that require building up with a thesis or supporting evidence.
- unusually polite and supportive, it’s not full on glazing but the threadiverse is culturally pretty cold and unwelcoming and he does not fit.
- posts multiple times within the span of minutes.
Anytime I see a gigantic paragraph of bullshit I know it’s AI.
I know “gigantic” is relative, but the user in question always had a paragraph of roughly 3-4 sentences, each of which only had up to 1 dependent/independent clause. So the paragraphs were actually short, we’re not talking walls o’ text. But that also means the user was never communicating complex ideas or nuance. If for whatever reason I didn’t want to outright label them an AI bot, I would still feel comfortable labeling them a low-effort quipper or engagement baiter.
Yeah I blocked that guy since one of his first posts. Everyone here going “oh no, you can’t trust pangram”… Irrelevant. If you can’t even spot the sloppiest slop that is his website collection and his comments (aside from some short replies to others), you’re the problem.
I couldn’t tell it’s AI because it’s such a basic take I stopped reading after the first sentence.
FYI: Pangram sucks. It’s about as accurate as throwing darts these days.
A long, long time ago (i.e. 2024) there was only one LLM that was widely used by the populace: ChatGPT. It only had a few versions and they didn’t differ much in how they worded output.
Now it’s 2026 and we have hundreds of thousands of AI models. That includes over 1000 commercial vendor models!
Another thing that’s really important that you need to understand is that even if two providers run the same model, their configurations will be different and thus, their output won’t be the same.
To summarize: There’s no fucking way Pangram can work properly anymore. It’s useless garbage.
Yeah, I don’t think that there’s going to be a viable future in distinguishing between LLM and human text either, certainly not for people who have an interest in defeating it. That being said:
-
Some people are just going to use the most-common models.
-
Some models are derived from other models and will share statistical similarities.
I still think that trying to detect LLMs is largely going to be a dead-end road, though.
There are also other wrinkles. I’d bet that an increasing amount of not-trying-to-maliciously-impersonate-a-human text out there is going to come from LLMs. Like, okay, Google Translate uses an LLM. I remember listening to an interview with a senior British EU translator (this was back before Brexit). This is going to be a quality human translator. He was saying that machine translation had gotten so good that these days, that now he always did his first pass with Google Translate and just cleaned it up by hand. Okay, so you figure that this is probably widespread, probably even more so now, right? So if most of the EU’s documents are coming from an LLM, even if you could hypothetically detect all LLMs, you probably wouldn’t want to trigger on some of them.
Not to mention that people adopt mannerisms from text that they read or hear spoken. If someone is using, say, automated browser translations, they’re seeing a lot of the world through an LLM, and you’d expect them to pick up characteristics of that.
-
Now it’s 2026 and we have hundreds of thousands of AI models.
And yet they still all write the same. And the vast majority are only using of a handful of models anyway.
The third screenshot is me asking if it was written by AI and not receiving a reply. The user pretty much does not reply to people, just obviously-LLM summaries to his own posts. Almost all such comments are the same amount of lines. I used the first result for an LLM detector just to give a number; Eicker’s language always ticks the “this is LLM” neurons to me.
Piefed has some LLM detection tools for moderators as well as bot detection for admins.
It’s also worth pointing out that some users on here use translation tools which may trigger some of these “AI Detectors”.
Why should I take that piece of AI detection software at its word? I looked at that user’s comment history and, while admitting I am not an expert on it, do not see any obvious signs of AI. If that’s AI, mission fucking accomplished.
they always end the comment with some sort of wry contrast.
I do not consider this kind of preaching to the choir constructive at all: it oversimplifies any nuance in articles posted into building the echo chamber. what’s constructive for discussion should be what challenges!
Reviewing @eicker@lemmy.world’s comment history, they do appear to use ‘it’s not X, it’s Y’—something ChatGPT is known for—unusually often.
Don’t need an AI to notice that.
I didn’t use an AI to notice that? Just checked their past comments.
You’re on one of the only actively pro-AI instances…
And you came here to complain an account seems to be using a chat bot?
lemmy.world is pro AI? Huh?
OP is on dbzer0, but they posted to a Lemmy.world community.
Oh, I misunderstood. I wasn’t aware dbzer0 was pro AI either, but I don’t really know what happens on there.
