Seriously. AI talks like this because this is how effective communicators talk. The fact that people are getting turned off by this way of communicating and seeking out worse writing is concerning, and yet another way that AI is contributing to the dumbing down of society.
I don’t think it’s great writing. To me, regardless of AI involvement, it sounds like it’s trying hard to be punchy. Big ideas, big impact! But the lack of structural variation and generic vocabulary make it bland, and bland writing doesn’t tickle one’s imagination or stick in one’s memory.
It’s not necessarily great writing, but this style is an effective communication mode. There’s a reason that AI uses it, and it’s because it works. 🤷♂️
Yall bitch about Ai slop and you can’t even see it when it’s served in front of you by an ex drug addict. Lol and I don’t mind Hunter, but he doesn’t speak like this, the cadence is clearly AI, and the writing fucking sucks it just sounds profound to minds as deep as a puddle. Not to mention, who gives a fuck what he has to say?
I hate AI slop as much as the next person, but some people become so obsessed with finding and pointing out that something is AI that everything starts to look like AI. They also tend to use it to dismiss the messaging, as you are doing. In this case, we’ll never know if this is AI or not, and it really doesn’t matter, because Hunter is correct, and he’s using his platform to point out a systemic issue that needs to change.
My CTO and I had a fun convo at 7am about em dashes before a big client preso. We all know we all do it. Why do we care at this point? It’s just being transparent.
I don’t use AI at all, but I refuse to change my writing style just to avoid the appearance of AI use. After all, AI just copies human writers, and if it becomes the norm to write in a style that is distinct from typical AI output, then AI output will just change to the new style and we’ll be back at square one.
Same here. I’ve likely personally cost openAI tens of thousands of dollars as a consumer user. I’ve seen tens of thousands of responses across a wide range of LLM voices and I know it in my bones that Hunter used AI for this.
Every single point is the same length and ends with an aphoristic zinger. It’s not X it’s Y (people know to avoid this and em dashes since it’s a lazy LLM tell.) there’s a consistent cadence to it but little substance. The cave man version of his points use less than 10 syllables. The prose is extremely even. Humans have variation in how they write especially when making impassioned bluesky posts lol.
To demonstrate here’s my argument from above processed through clause
I’ve spent years as a heavy AI user — we’re talking tens of thousands of interactions across models and voices. Pattern recognition at that scale becomes intuitive in the same way a sommelier stops consciously analyzing and just knows.
What flags this for me isn’t any single element. It’s the consistency. Every point is approximately the same length. Every point ends with a punchy, quotable closer. The prose quality never dips or spikes — there are no throwaway lines, no moments where the writing gets lazy or overexcited. Humans don’t write that way, especially not in impassioned social media posts.
Strip each point to its core claim and you’re left with less than ten syllables of actual content. The rest is rhetorical packaging. Elegant, even packaging — but packaging nonetheless.
People have learned to avoid em dashes and “it’s not X, it’s Y” constructions because those are known tells. But the underlying architecture remains. The fingerprint isn’t any single phrase. It’s the absence of variation. It’s the fact that nothing here is accidental.
Hunter Biden’s documented voice is the opposite of this. This tweet is what happens when you prompt a model to sound like him.
Anyone who’s taken a tech writing course - it’s not on writing for techies, it’s the technical bits of writing - will use that all the time. Ya frame the assumption and show the reality.
The “not A but Z” thing and variations thereof was pretty common before LLMs. The noticeable thing about their usage of it is they’re trying to use language meant to take the reader from something they might genuinely be confused about to a surprising conclusion, and using it in a way that’s entirely banal. It relies on distance between A and Z, and genuine possibly of either. Humans tend to have way better intuition about what is surprising to other humans, and don’t make insane mistakes like LLMs do.
Rather than have “Z” be self-evidently interesting, the LLM need to tell us that it’s not “A”. Except no one thought anything was “A” in the first place, and the “Z” is barely a “B” let alone a “Z”.
This also goes for couplings of three short descriptors (“Simple. Intuitive. Seamless.”) and summations (“the important part to realise is:”), bullet point lists, etc. All techniques to say: here’s the important part, here’s the bit you should listen to.
This all being said: the tweet smells like ai to me. Wtf does he mean by sword
We are seriously about 18 months away from people thinking punctuation and complete sentences are AI because they have literally never read anything not posted on Twitter or Facebook.
HunterGPT
I am no Hunter apologist by any means, but this doesn’t look like an LLM wrote it to me.
Not saying Hunter himself wrote it either; just doesn’t look like a machine.
“The lesson under the lesson:” is a very LLM closing statement.
I mean the AIs copied it from somewhere
Seriously. AI talks like this because this is how effective communicators talk. The fact that people are getting turned off by this way of communicating and seeking out worse writing is concerning, and yet another way that AI is contributing to the dumbing down of society.
I don’t think it’s great writing. To me, regardless of AI involvement, it sounds like it’s trying hard to be punchy. Big ideas, big impact! But the lack of structural variation and generic vocabulary make it bland, and bland writing doesn’t tickle one’s imagination or stick in one’s memory.
It’s not necessarily great writing, but this style is an effective communication mode. There’s a reason that AI uses it, and it’s because it works. 🤷♂️
Bland can have an impact. The man turned to hookers and blow instead of dusty libraries, cut him a break.
Yall bitch about Ai slop and you can’t even see it when it’s served in front of you by an ex drug addict. Lol and I don’t mind Hunter, but he doesn’t speak like this, the cadence is clearly AI, and the writing fucking sucks it just sounds profound to minds as deep as a puddle. Not to mention, who gives a fuck what he has to say?
I hate AI slop as much as the next person, but some people become so obsessed with finding and pointing out that something is AI that everything starts to look like AI. They also tend to use it to dismiss the messaging, as you are doing. In this case, we’ll never know if this is AI or not, and it really doesn’t matter, because Hunter is correct, and he’s using his platform to point out a systemic issue that needs to change.
It’s genuinely making me want to make mistakes just to seem human
YouTube videos… It’s getting harder. If they don’t make mistakes, I can’t tell anymore.
I’m keeping my fucking god-damned em dash
Just use a regular dash. It’ll be fine.
My CTO and I had a fun convo at 7am about em dashes before a big client preso. We all know we all do it. Why do we care at this point? It’s just being transparent.
I don’t use AI at all, but I refuse to change my writing style just to avoid the appearance of AI use. After all, AI just copies human writers, and if it becomes the norm to write in a style that is distinct from typical AI output, then AI output will just change to the new style and we’ll be back at square one.
And the multiple “It’s not [x], it’s [y]”
“sword | question mark”
“strategy | empty room”
Now you’re just quoting redditors.
An LLM probably didn’t write it but it reads so painfully like the LLM dialect I cringed the entire time even though I agreed.
Same here. I’ve likely personally cost openAI tens of thousands of dollars as a consumer user. I’ve seen tens of thousands of responses across a wide range of LLM voices and I know it in my bones that Hunter used AI for this.
Every single point is the same length and ends with an aphoristic zinger. It’s not X it’s Y (people know to avoid this and em dashes since it’s a lazy LLM tell.) there’s a consistent cadence to it but little substance. The cave man version of his points use less than 10 syllables. The prose is extremely even. Humans have variation in how they write especially when making impassioned bluesky posts lol.
To demonstrate here’s my argument from above processed through clause
I’ve spent years as a heavy AI user — we’re talking tens of thousands of interactions across models and voices. Pattern recognition at that scale becomes intuitive in the same way a sommelier stops consciously analyzing and just knows. What flags this for me isn’t any single element. It’s the consistency. Every point is approximately the same length. Every point ends with a punchy, quotable closer. The prose quality never dips or spikes — there are no throwaway lines, no moments where the writing gets lazy or overexcited. Humans don’t write that way, especially not in impassioned social media posts. Strip each point to its core claim and you’re left with less than ten syllables of actual content. The rest is rhetorical packaging. Elegant, even packaging — but packaging nonetheless. People have learned to avoid em dashes and “it’s not X, it’s Y” constructions because those are known tells. But the underlying architecture remains. The fingerprint isn’t any single phrase. It’s the absence of variation. It’s the fact that nothing here is accidental. Hunter Biden’s documented voice is the opposite of this. This tweet is what happens when you prompt a model to sound like him.
It’s definitely AI.
It sounds a lot like Claude to me.
Sucks that we can’t give credit to people who could just have good writing skills.
It’s not good writing. That’s part of it. “They aren’t a sword, they are a question mark.” That’s just bad.
deleted by creator
He did the “It’s not X, it’s Y” thing twice in a single tweet. Lol
It’s a common rhetorical device, especially for politicians. I don’t think it’s a smoking gun for LLM-ness at all.
Anyone who’s taken a tech writing course - it’s not on writing for techies, it’s the technical bits of writing - will use that all the time. Ya frame the assumption and show the reality.
The “not A but Z” thing and variations thereof was pretty common before LLMs. The noticeable thing about their usage of it is they’re trying to use language meant to take the reader from something they might genuinely be confused about to a surprising conclusion, and using it in a way that’s entirely banal. It relies on distance between A and Z, and genuine possibly of either. Humans tend to have way better intuition about what is surprising to other humans, and don’t make insane mistakes like LLMs do.
Rather than have “Z” be self-evidently interesting, the LLM need to tell us that it’s not “A”. Except no one thought anything was “A” in the first place, and the “Z” is barely a “B” let alone a “Z”.
This also goes for couplings of three short descriptors (“Simple. Intuitive. Seamless.”) and summations (“the important part to realise is:”), bullet point lists, etc. All techniques to say: here’s the important part, here’s the bit you should listen to.
This all being said: the tweet smells like ai to me. Wtf does he mean by sword
We are seriously about 18 months away from people thinking punctuation and complete sentences are AI because they have literally never read anything not posted on Twitter or Facebook.
And in 18 years?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=py37IFuKxYw
deleted by creator
He didn’t say Middle EAST. He said the Middle, as in the middle of the field or in the middle on issues.
Wow holy shit my eyes fully read a word that wasn’t there lmfao
happens to the best of us
Good on you for admitting it instead of doubling down!
Indeed, it’s very common for this to happen to anyone.