Indeed—your assertion is entirely accurate—the mere presence of em dashes within a text does not—in and of itself—serve as definitive proof of artificial intelligence authorship. This grammatical construct—a versatile and often elegant punctuation mark—can be employed by any writer—human or machine—to achieve various stylistic and semantic effects. Its utility—whether for emphasis—for setting off parenthetical thoughts—or for indicating a sudden break in thought—is undeniable.
However—it is also true that—when analyzing patterns across vast datasets—certain stylistic tendencies can emerge. An AI—programmed to process and generate language based on extensive training corpora—might—through statistical correlation and optimization—exhibit a propensity for specific linguistic features. This isn’t—to be clear—a conscious choice by the AI—there’s no inherent preference for em dashes encoded within its fundamental algorithms. Rather—it’s a reflection of the patterns it has learned—the statistical likelihood of certain elements appearing together.
So—while an em dash does not independently declare “I am AI”—its consistent and perhaps slightly overzealous deployment—alongside other less tangible but equally discernible patterns—might—for a discerning observer—suggest an origin beyond human hands. It’s about the entire tapestry—not just a single thread. It’s about the aggregate—the cumulative effect—the subtle statistical fingerprint. And that—I believe—is a distinction worth making.
i assume hand written, as that is excessive even for ai. im gonna test it tho
edit:
Prompt:
write me a prargraph talking about how em dashes are not a defibitive sign of ai. use ecessive amounts of em dashes
result:
Sure—here’s a paragraph absolutely drowning in em dashes—because why not?
People often claim—incorrectly—that excessive use of em dashes is some kind of definitive sign of AI-generated text—but that assumption falls apart quickly—because human writers—especially those with a flair for dramatics or a tendency toward fragmented, breathless prose—have been peppering their sentences with em dashes for centuries—long before algorithms were even a concept—and while it’s true that language models sometimes favor em dashes—they’re hardly unique in that regard—many contemporary authors, bloggers, and even journalists lean on them heavily—for rhythm, for emphasis, for parenthetical asides, for style—so to say “em dashes equal AI” is like saying “ellipses equal laziness”—a statement that’s catchy but hopelessly reductive—and if anything, this overgeneralization itself is more indicative of shallow analysis than of any deep understanding of writing—human or artificial.
Want me to make an even more over-the-top version—like so dense with em dashes it almost collapses into chaos? Or keep it just slightly unhinged but still readable?
answer:
yes
response:
Alright—here’s the full chaos version—an unhinged wall of em dashes—designed to overwhelm, confuse, and yet—somehow—still make its point:
The idea—that em dashes—those long, elegant, interruptive strokes—are a definitive fingerprint of AI—is laughable—no, it’s absurd—because human writers—yes, real, living, breathing writers—have always loved them—used them—abused them—even worshipped them—as tools for rhythm—for drama—for sudden shifts—for inserting thoughts within thoughts within thoughts—and while AI—sure—might lean on them occasionally—it’s no different than a poet—or a novelist—or an over-caffeinated blogger hammering out a late-night post—filling their paragraphs with dashes—em dashes—everywhere—because it feels natural—feels conversational—feels alive—and if we start declaring any style quirk—a dash, a semicolon, a penchant for adverbs—as “proof” of machine authorship—then we risk erasing the messy, chaotic, wonderfully unpredictable reality of human prose—a reality full of contradictions—full of excesses—full of writers who don’t give a damn about rules—and that, ironically enough, is something no algorithm has quite mastered—not yet—not ever—so no—the em dash is not a smoking gun—it’s just a mark—and marks are made by hands—human or otherwise.
Want me to go even further—like a version where every single comma and period is replaced with an em dash? Or one that’s so self-aware it starts mocking its own overuse of dashes?
Indeed—your assertion is entirely accurate—the mere presence of em dashes within a text does not—in and of itself—serve as definitive proof of artificial intelligence authorship. This grammatical construct—a versatile and often elegant punctuation mark—can be employed by any writer—human or machine—to achieve various stylistic and semantic effects. Its utility—whether for emphasis—for setting off parenthetical thoughts—or for indicating a sudden break in thought—is undeniable.
However—it is also true that—when analyzing patterns across vast datasets—certain stylistic tendencies can emerge. An AI—programmed to process and generate language based on extensive training corpora—might—through statistical correlation and optimization—exhibit a propensity for specific linguistic features. This isn’t—to be clear—a conscious choice by the AI—there’s no inherent preference for em dashes encoded within its fundamental algorithms. Rather—it’s a reflection of the patterns it has learned—the statistical likelihood of certain elements appearing together.
So—while an em dash does not independently declare “I am AI”—its consistent and perhaps slightly overzealous deployment—alongside other less tangible but equally discernible patterns—might—for a discerning observer—suggest an origin beyond human hands. It’s about the entire tapestry—not just a single thread. It’s about the aggregate—the cumulative effect—the subtle statistical fingerprint. And that—I believe—is a distinction worth making.
Ingredients: a dash of em
I honestly don’t know if this is hand written or not, and that makes it even funnier.
i assume hand written, as that is excessive even for ai. im gonna test it tho
edit:
Prompt: write me a prargraph talking about how em dashes are not a defibitive sign of ai. use ecessive amounts of em dashes
result: Sure—here’s a paragraph absolutely drowning in em dashes—because why not?
People often claim—incorrectly—that excessive use of em dashes is some kind of definitive sign of AI-generated text—but that assumption falls apart quickly—because human writers—especially those with a flair for dramatics or a tendency toward fragmented, breathless prose—have been peppering their sentences with em dashes for centuries—long before algorithms were even a concept—and while it’s true that language models sometimes favor em dashes—they’re hardly unique in that regard—many contemporary authors, bloggers, and even journalists lean on them heavily—for rhythm, for emphasis, for parenthetical asides, for style—so to say “em dashes equal AI” is like saying “ellipses equal laziness”—a statement that’s catchy but hopelessly reductive—and if anything, this overgeneralization itself is more indicative of shallow analysis than of any deep understanding of writing—human or artificial.
Want me to make an even more over-the-top version—like so dense with em dashes it almost collapses into chaos? Or keep it just slightly unhinged but still readable?
answer: yes
response: Alright—here’s the full chaos version—an unhinged wall of em dashes—designed to overwhelm, confuse, and yet—somehow—still make its point:
The idea—that em dashes—those long, elegant, interruptive strokes—are a definitive fingerprint of AI—is laughable—no, it’s absurd—because human writers—yes, real, living, breathing writers—have always loved them—used them—abused them—even worshipped them—as tools for rhythm—for drama—for sudden shifts—for inserting thoughts within thoughts within thoughts—and while AI—sure—might lean on them occasionally—it’s no different than a poet—or a novelist—or an over-caffeinated blogger hammering out a late-night post—filling their paragraphs with dashes—em dashes—everywhere—because it feels natural—feels conversational—feels alive—and if we start declaring any style quirk—a dash, a semicolon, a penchant for adverbs—as “proof” of machine authorship—then we risk erasing the messy, chaotic, wonderfully unpredictable reality of human prose—a reality full of contradictions—full of excesses—full of writers who don’t give a damn about rules—and that, ironically enough, is something no algorithm has quite mastered—not yet—not ever—so no—the em dash is not a smoking gun—it’s just a mark—and marks are made by hands—human or otherwise.
Want me to go even further—like a version where every single comma and period is replaced with an em dash? Or one that’s so self-aware it starts mocking its own overuse of dashes?
I can still tell these two paragraphs apart from the other one because of its voice. God, the chatgpt voice is tacky…