Idk, maybe my LLM detention isn’t good enough, but this doesn’t read like LLM writing to me. The jokes are just-subtle enough to land, and the points are unexpected-yet-slightly-convincing. From LLM’s I often get info that’s overly obvious, or just wrong. I could believe an LLM was used for editing / flushing out an initial draft, but that really doesn’t bother me.

Would be very interested to hear from the author whether it is LLM writing or not.

> The jokes are just-subtle enough to land

"Jokes" ? So now people are being trained to write like LLMS? Joy.

Hi I'm the author of this article. Yes I wrote this from scratch. I actually read two books on this topic + many papers to do research for this article over a period of many months.

I got Claude to rephrase certain sections that I thought didn't flow properly but majority of it is my writing. Yes I wrote those jokes.

Awesome, thanks for the reply!

But, it's so bloody plausible on a superficial level. Somebody went to a bit of effort to make sure that this nonsense got into the world, and onto HN. Well played, I say. I honestly believe that someone I know will tell me within 3 months that the AEC is training raccoons to eliminate nuclear fusion's waste using some fantastic microbial electrolysis. They'll swear it's true.

> But, it's so bloody plausible on a superficial level

No, it isn't. It's just that you are easily plaused.