I’m not going to suggest this article isn’t helpful but this:

• It’s not some “Old Wives Tale” – it’s based on millennia of established knowledge;

is 100% AI slop (ed: training material). That’s where I stopped paying attention (ed: and shouldn’t have).

👉 “it’s not X it’s Y” is a a good indicator. Humans use this but AI fucking loves it, and generally in this order. “It’s X not Y” is a weaker indicator. This isn’t enough for me to be certain but it instantly triggers skepticism
👉 Clarifying something that was never in question to begin with. That’s not a subtle hint — it’s a dead giveaway. It’s contextual; humans use this rhetorical pattern, but not to deny something there is no existing implied suggestion of
👉 emdash is a weak indicator, but combined with the rest increases suspicion. “But this isn’t an emdash!” That’s because as search and replace was used to replace them with regular dash, but the usage is the same
👉 finishing a bullet with a semi-colon? (is that a thing? I’ve never seen anyone do it, AI or human — I’m going to go with atypical usage not indicative either way but I’m going to start looking for that as a pattern.)
👉 I used emojis instead of bullets because irony amuses me and it’s a very AI thing to do. If it didn’t trigger a question in your head of whether this comment is written by AI, it should have. Pay attention.

Don’t you talk like that about Ian.

Dude’s site was used to train AI.

Also, thank you for your hyper-vigilance. It amuses me, and for your sense of irony in using AI to criticize something that predates AI as being written by AI.

Chef’s kiss.