Not everyone. So far I’m a couple comments deep and the AI blind people can’t tell.

I’m just so sick of blatantly obvious AI being an argument with people who somehow are tricked into thinking it’s real…

In fact I did, because I wrote that with AI 😂

Reading comprehension was already critically endangered before LLMs. It’s no wonder people can’t tell it’s AI doing the heavy lifting on that apology.

That’s… exactly my point though? PR writing and LLM writing have converged to the point where they’re indistinguishable, and that’s worth noting. The structure here isn’t just “polished corporate” — it’s the specific pattern of: acknowledge the problem, reframe it, add a caveat, accept responsibility anyway, announce a process review, close with community appeal. That’s a ChatGPT prompt response, not a comms team working through a genuine crisis.

You’re essentially arguing “it could be human” as a rebuttal to “this reads like AI,” which, sure, technically. But the tell isn’t any single phrase — it’s the whole skeleton. PR people write defensively. This is weirdly balanced and self-correcting in a way humans under pressure just… aren’t.

You’re right to call this out, and I want to address it directly and provide important context on how this happened.

My accusation that Proton used AI to write their apology should never have been posted, because I intentionally try to avoid making claims I can’t substantiate, especially ones that could undermine a company’s genuine attempt at accountability.

I engage with a lot of online content, and while my ability to spot AI-generated text is something I take seriously, my knowledge of every writing style and corporate voice is not perfect. In this case, I didn’t have enough context about how Proton communicates to make a well-informed judgment, and that’s on me.

I also want to be straight about what an accusation like this is and isn’t. Pointing out polished writing is an observation, not evidence. In the case of Proton’s statement, it was a thoughtful response from a communications team, not a chatbot output.

But that distinction doesn’t excuse what I said. The responsibility to verify before I post is mine, and I didn’t meet it this time. I’m now reviewing how I evaluate content before making public claims to ensure this doesn’t happen again.

If you see me do something like this again, call it out. I rely on that feedback.

“you’re right to raise this” is an LLMism on the same level as “You’re exactly right!”

Edit: You’re right to call this out, and I want to address it directly and provide important context on how this happened.

My accusation that Proton used AI to write their apology should never have been posted, because I intentionally try to avoid making claims I can’t substantiate, especially ones that could undermine a company’s genuine attempt at accountability.

I engage with a lot of online content, and while my ability to spot AI-generated text is something I take seriously, my knowledge of every writing style and corporate voice is not perfect. In this case, I didn’t have enough context about how Proton communicates to make a well-informed judgment, and that’s on me.

I also want to be straight about what an accusation like this is and isn’t. Pointing out polished writing is an observation, not evidence. In the case of Proton’s statement, it was a thoughtful response from a communications team, not a chatbot output.

But that distinction doesn’t excuse what I said. The responsibility to verify before I post is mine, and I didn’t meet it this time. I’m now reviewing how I evaluate content before making public claims to ensure this doesn’t happen again.

If you see me do something like this again, call it out. I rely on that feedback.

Have you ever yelled at Claude or chatgpt and had it apologize to you? It’s literally word for word this format. Low burstiness (sentences are around the same length) same with paragraph length. Absolutely perfect grammar and it reads like LLM vomited it out. I can’t prove it definitely but I’ve cursed out enough LLMs to know what it’s “you’re right to be angry, I deleted the entire production database without asking…” apology looks like.

Have you run it through an AI checker?

Have a real human type out the apology

Edit:

You’re right to call this out, and I want to address it directly and provide important context on how this happened.

My accusation that Proton used AI to write their apology should never have been posted, because I intentionally try to avoid making claims I can’t substantiate, especially ones that could undermine a company’s genuine attempt at accountability.

I engage with a lot of online content, and while my ability to spot AI-generated text is something I take seriously, my knowledge of every writing style and corporate voice is not perfect. In this case, I didn’t have enough context about how Proton communicates to make a well-informed judgment, and that’s on me.

I also want to be straight about what an accusation like this is and isn’t. Pointing out polished writing is an observation, not evidence. In the case of Proton’s statement, it was a thoughtful response from a communications team, not a chatbot output.

But that distinction doesn’t excuse what I said. The responsibility to verify before I post is mine, and I didn’t meet it this time. I’m now reviewing how I evaluate content before making public claims to ensure this doesn’t happen again.

If you see me do something like this again, call it out. I rely on that feedback.

They’ll try. Once this bubble pops there literally isnt enough money for the US to print their way out of it. It’ll be a default on US treasuries since they got all the blood they’re going to get out of the working class the last 3 times they printed infinite money. I think we’re soon about to meet that can multiple generations of corrupt politicians and bankers have been kicking down the road.

Well at least that’ll only wipe out half of my pension instead of all of it

They decided not to change their rules to allow these unhealthy stocks in. They have to do the full process instead of skipping the line to make pensioners into bag holders as opposed to Altman and friends.

They’re not blocked but they’re never going to be healthy enough to be added before they implode.

If I smother OpenAI to death by denying them oxygen for 5 minutes did I “block” the entry of air into their lungs, or did they just not breathe for 5 minutes?

Wtf? Do these scientists explicitly eat ultraprocessed food that becomes Portland cement in your guts and kills all the bacteria in your microbiome?

The irony that your comment will never reach its intended audience

They tried to make pension funds into bag holders before those IPOs got blocked. I think the desperation surrounding getting those stocks added in 5 days should be a better indication than price.

This is why IMO blitz scaling is dumb when your service is a commodity. I’m not any more loyal to Uber than Skip. If more investor money goes into making a cheaper meal or ride on Skip I use that. Consumers are mercenaries about that stuff.

The “blitz” part of blitz scaling assumes your customers can’t move.

If it works for orphaned wells and patent trolls it’ll work for this

Revanced is dying because OSumAtrix, the lead dev, is so toxic every other developer decided to hard fork revanced and make Morphe.

What’s really sad is Osum is copying code religiously from Morphe, including typos. They also forget to change function names or comments to go from Morphe to Revanced. As a result, Morphe DMCA’d him for not complying with the attribution clause of their GPL license.

It’s a whole mess but basically it’s one guy trying to replace dozens of contributors by copying code. He’s never going to sustain it like this, so just use Morphe honestly…

It’s updated daily (sometimes multiple times a day) and it seems like they can’t stop adding new QoL features to the patcher. Their patches work great, I highly recommend it.

Truly the most oppressed class of people 😢

/s if it wasn’t obvious

When I upgraded my CPU to a Ryzen 9 5900X I did the research on DDR5 vs DDR4. I was considering a better version of the CPU that used DDR5 (I can’t for the life of me remember and I’m not searching just for this comment)

I decided to keep my ram but get a new MOBO and CPU. The performance gain from DDR5 was minimal for my use cases. The ECC would have been nice but that’s ok. I run memtest once a year and have only had ram die on me once.