AI Detectors Flag Human Writing as Machine-Generated
89 posts across 35 communities in the last 30 days; 12% from r/ChatGPT.
“The new models like Qwen3.8 27B and DeepSeek V4 Flash etc., all have this terrible, Claude-sounding writing style that I can't stand. Here's an example of what I'm talking about: "A probe that asks what a language model memorised reports a null when the model answers at chance…”
“The post was cleaned by AI, but my data and ideas. I think we collectively need to get away from the idea that AI is "tidying up" writing. It supplies content, structure, tone, and formatting - in other words readers cannot know if it did not write the whole thing. There is…”
“No. There's a problem with fully-AI writing that is independent of quality: you can produce a practically infinite supply of it at nearly zero cost. This means that if we don't push back, it's simply bound to crowd out human expression. You already see this on your social media…”
Content creators are experiencing a crisis of recognition and value, as their work is increasingly perceived as AI-generated, despite significant effort and expertise. This leads to feelings of frustration, insecurity, and a questioning of the perceived value of their contributions. The feedback undermines the creator's investment and expertise.
SOURCES (60)
“Honestly, people are overthinking every little thing now. Imagine being afraid to use bullet points because someone might think you used AI lol. [re: AI is making everyone’s writing worse - but not for reasons you’d think]”
“so u didn’t write this then, ai did. it wasn’t “refined”, it was written by AI. refined would be if you had the structure to begin with and made minor adjustments with ai [re: A year into Big Tech PM role - Bored, underutilized, and politically stuck. How to navigate?]”
“Yes, that might be true. But it is like announcing that you had a spelling error in your website's copy, and that you used a spell-checker to fix it. I may be the only human that interacts with this message, and I can assure you it was not worth posting. There are thousands of worthwhile topics you could post about, but they would all require a major effort on your part - not least you'd need to write it yourself. If you're vibe-coding, working out how to wrap test automation around”
“AI was trained off of organized, intelligent, human writing: logically outlining ideas, categorizing concepts, etc. As a teacher, and as a working human, people are much more afraid of being falsely accused of AI usage than of actually using it. Thus, they - intentionally or not - make their writing WORSE. “Don’t use bullets in that email, they’ll think it’s AI” “Don’t use dashes to break up that sentence, they’ll think it’s AI.” So now we avoid sounding like the intelligent writing that AI is m”
“I'm sure many of us are slogging through impenetrable AI writing as we finish ICLR reviewing. I'll try to create an anonymized version from a paper I'm reviewing, though it's hard to match Claude on this: outperforms the best baseline costing no more at none of six operating points and a permuted placebo at none of three, with gains up to about 1.5 not excluded My question for the community is this: how do we call out this type of bad writing? The reason I think it's tricky i”
“dammit I thought I was good at spotting them but this one is so obvious [re: If AI fatigue has hit you, I have a question]”
“feels like AI wrote this ? I used to have these convos at University - chatting after hard math lectures, or shooting the shizzle in the quad eating sandwiches before physics class, or running into a school mate at the library or campus bookshop. Ideally you can set up an environment to talk with your customers in this freewheeling way. [re: A big piece of the Industrial Revolution came out of a monthly dinner party. What’s the version of that for founders today?]”
“The new models like Qwen3.8 27B and DeepSeek V4 Flash etc., all have this terrible, Claude-sounding writing style that I can't stand. Here's an example of what I'm talking about: "A probe that asks what a language model memorised reports a null when the model answers at chance, and that null is evidence of absence only if the probe could have shown the fact. Two separate conditions have to hold, and checking the first does not establish the second." 🤮 I remember there were”
“What makes you think this is AI? 🤔 Great question — let's break it down. There are three key tells here: 📋 1. Lists Overly verbose lists of items — each one beginning with a bullet character and followed by many, many items: Item one Item two Item three …and so on ❌ 2. The "no X, no Y, no Z" construction No fluff. No filler. No nonsense. Only the essentials are needed. ✨ 3. Polished AI UX That unmistakably clean , structured , human AI-generated presentation. TL;DR: It's not”
“Every AI writing tool will happily generate a paper with 30 citations. Almost none will tell you that 12 of them don't say what you claim they say. I built veripaper (MIT licensed, open-source) around one idea: the paper is just the final presentation. Researchers should do three things — creative ideas, logical reasoning, empirical proof. Everything else is tooling. The core is a honesty system, not a writing system. Every claim gets a label: [VERIFIED] — source exists AND actually supports”
“No, they explained it pretty decently. They are, at their core, very fancy autocomplete. Every LLM is, no matter how many wrappers they put around them to abstract that fact. That's why, despite the billions and billions of funding, they still produce hallucinations... just like how your phone will autocorrect a word which is complete nonsense in a sentence. [re: ChatGPT encouraging a student to drop out of high school]”
“The post was cleaned by AI, but my data and ideas. I think we collectively need to get away from the idea that AI is "tidying up" writing. It supplies content, structure, tone, and formatting - in other words readers cannot know if it did not write the whole thing. There is nothing wrong with using AI for this I think this statement is wrong, but it is not provable either way. It will thus develop in the court of public opinion, and for now I don't think anything can be said to be”
“The 95% curve really drives it home, drops off a cliff after like 8 fields. I think most people see "95% accurate" and picture one typo out of twenty, not a third of all documents being unusable The straight through rate question is the one that separates the actual tools from the demo reel. If they don't track it, they probably know why The ERP validation point hits close. I sat through a demo once where the system confidently extracted a PO number that was one digit off, with lik”
“as always with llms, citing unfiltered garbage like ai-generated "developer" blogs and junk Reddit comments. maximized only. full screen is full screen, but we don't count it here. [re: Viewport size statistics]”
“Vendors quote per field accuracy. 99 percent sounds solved. It is not, and the reason is just compound probability. A document is only usable if every field is right. So, the probability of a clean document is accuracy to the power of the field count. At 99 percent per field on a 20-field invoice: 0.99^20 = about 0.82. So roughly 18 percent of documents contain at least one error. At 95 percent per field, same document: 0.95^20 = about 0.36. Only around a third come out clean. At 98 percent on a”
“Did you ever end up getting this to work? I've recently been exploring using AI to analyze an inbox/brain dump note and categorize snippets from it into individual notes. I ended up just using Claude to write a program that interfaces with Ollama but it's still a little shabby. [re: Exploring Practical Uses for Small Language Models (e.g., Microsoft Phi)]”
“the assistant isn't discovering you, it's repeating something it already read. so ask it about your own category and look at the pages it cites, that list is the corpus you have to get into. listicles, comparison threads, docs. that's a different job from ranking your own site, and it moves a lot faster. [re: Day 14 of 30: 6 sign-ups today, my best day yet. The top two sources surprised me]”
“No. There's a problem with fully-AI writing that is independent of quality: you can produce a practically infinite supply of it at nearly zero cost. This means that if we don't push back, it's simply bound to crowd out human expression. You already see this on your social media feed, if you're paying attention.I see inherent value in hearing from and talking to other humans. There is, unfortunately, a lot of AI content hustlers who want to rob me of this so that they can get more links to their”
“The funny part is that the same concerns about AI-generated text existed back in 2019, and now we use it almost daily. The real challenge was never just generating convincing text, but figuring out how to detect misinformation and use AI responsibly at scale. [re: "New AI fake text generator may be too dangerous to release, say creators" (2019 Guardian headline)]”
“AI is only used to give my words some structure. no automation used. [re: What self-hosted inference server actually shares one GPU across models?]”
“I know these things are inaccurate but what if the admission offices use them? yes it's written by me and I read over it and it doesn't sound like AI text to anyone who has read it submitted by /u/ProgrammingGuy_ [link] [comments]”
“i’ve noticed another way to spot if someone ai generated their script, aside from the obvious points like the unbelievably generic points they make. ZERO specific examples if the video essay is on a niche topic. theres ZERO passion in the person reading the script because of course there isnt, they didnt write a word of it so they dont have the capacity to emphasise anything they’re reading because they’re reading it for the first time alongside us. the constant analogies for things that dont ne”
“"Proper paragraph structure"? The "every sentence is its own paragraph" formatting is neither proper nor natural, it's a dead giveaway of AI crap. See also: 99% of posts on /r/linkedinlunatics [re: The 2026 Hater's Guide to Credit Cards]”
“I just put my essay into GPTZero just to be safe with detection, and it came out saying human-written but polished with AI. I am confused on what to do and I am scared since I wrote this essay all by myself with no help from AI. What do I do? submitted by /u/ConsiderationBoth246 [link] [comments]”
“I have a complete 1900 word essay, and I fed it to 5 different AI checkers. As for Copyleaks, I received a full-on analysis report, while others I just simply used the free AI checkers. Here are the results: WalterWrites AI Detector: 0% AI detected Proofacademic: 0% Copyleaks Analysis Report: 0% GPTZero: 100% AI Originality.ai: 89% AI Putting aside this being proof that AI detectors don't exist, Do y'all believe I'm going to get flagged for submitting this essay in? This is a genuine”
“Thank you for the validation 😭 idk if they expect most people to AI copy and paste the short form answers but I researched that the platform can detect that (plus AI often sounds like AI) so I actually typed it all out… I’ll reach out to the recruiter and keep it brief, cross your fingers for me 🥲 this was my first one-sided interview so was definitely a learning experience [re: Didn’t Finish Online Pre-Assessment in Time…Worth Emailing Recruiter?]”
“Why would you think that Laya would be able to determine if something was LLM generated or not? That's not exactly... Yeah idk. LLM versus written by a person detectors are generally / mostly imperative code that counts beans and compares probability distributions. Laya is a classifier that works in embedding vector space. They are totally different systems. They have nothing to do with each other. Try asking Laya for sentiment analysis on reddit post (angry vs happy) or ask it whether or no”
“Clean portfolio, the "good taste, bad sleep" line stuck with me. Out of curiosity I checked whether AI assistants can read it on my app MentionMachine. 57/100. The basics (robots, sitemap, Person schema) are there, but: no FAQ or Q&A content for the questions people ask an AI creator / freelance dev service detail beyond the Person block is thin, so engines struggle to describe what you actually take on no llms.txt guide for crawlers Worth tightening if you want ChatGPT etc. to sen”
“Maybe OP used AI to write the post "Here is what is actually going on" followed by a bolded bullet point list raised a flag for me. Not that human beings never write that way, but considering the context, I'm inclined to think OP at least used it as an assist. [re: Retainer language explicitly banning clients from using AI to check a firm’s work. How will firms adapt?]”
“The experience and requirements in the post are mine. I’m not a native English speaker, so I used AI to help translate, draft, and polish the text. No links or promotion, just a genuine question. [re: Before I vibecode yet another personal finance app like 3 million other people: does something already do this?]”
“Oh wow, 4 attempts and only 2 unique stories with slightly different word order. You really overfitted it on like 5 stories. A NGRAM is more diverse than this [re: A 24KB stand-alone HTML-LLM that can generate consistent stories]”
“The one time I click on these bs “news” articles. This has to be ai. No sane human would actually writes this is what my heart is telling me. submitted by /u/MistyGnome21 [link] [comments]”
“Did you run this comment through AI or do you really sound like AI when you type naturally...? edit: LOL ABSOLUTELY AI. check their ONE other comment. Sad. [re: Flower I Didn’t Plant.]”
“so you purposely added thos mistakes to make it look like it wasnt Ai then . perfect [re: Ai slop creators and thumbnails]”
“Where should we draw the line in using ai for essays. This is how i use ai(claude) for my essays. I use it for brainstorming, i give it ideas and it picks the best one. Then I write the draft myself and paste it in. It points out any errors, places where i can improve(vagueness, spelling and whatnot) and that's it. Am i at risk? submitted by /u/mati79355 [link] [comments]”
“Hypothetical question those in the college search process: If you came across admissions materials from a college that were clearly AI-generated, would that affect your perception of the school? (Referring to things like event schedules, brochures, graphics, or other materials where the design looks NOTICEABLY AI-generated.) I am very curious how much this matters to prospects/applicants and its impact on a college decision. Is this something that you notice? Does it influence how you view a col”
“I don't let AI write for me, which hopefully comes across quickly. I do let it check errors, because I have more typos than anyone you've ever met. There isn't a lot of time spent on engineering details, but there is some. The engineering details about Shopify are intentionally vague because that's not something I can write about. The open source work I did while I was there is fair game. Overall, my goal was just to be entertaining. It's part engineering blog, partially my e”
“Zero words in that comment were written with (or researched with) an AI. [re: Can someone expansively explain to me what this means please?]”
“I finished up my Master's in Spring of 2024 and even then, when AI-written text was super obvious to anyone that had used AI but seemed brilliant to the many professors that still hadn't heard of it, probably 75% of the discussion posts were AI-generated. Thankfully discussion was only about 15% of the total grade because those students pretty much bombed the rest of the content (particularly the live demonstrations they had to do via Zoom). [re: I don’t think an online masters will have”
“ha same list, em dashes are the tell. i mostly fix the rhythm, ai writes in neat little packages and humans dont. structure usually survives, phrasing gets rewritten [re: I’m tired of every small business website turning into AI slop, so we built our content tools around real search data instead]”
“So, I wrote my supplemental essay fully by hand. However it was around 100 words over the count, to solve this I asked ChatGPT to recommend areas where I should try and cut out words in a way that wouldn't greatly impact the overall message and emotion invoked by my writing. I decided it'd be smart to just double check it with GPTzero and zeroGPT because of my use of AI. Im a little worried about the breakdown and what I should do about this. zeroGPT says it is 5.8% AI and has one senten”
“I ran pangram into the first 40% of the article. It's mostly AI written (72% for the first 2000 words, it's really bad). That ofc doesn't mean the content must be discarded but my confidence goes down when AI usage goes beyond spelling fixes.”
“Guy is misrepresenting AGMAI, talking about the Simons Institute (AI boosters), Quanta (AI boosting magazine from the Simons Foundation), Scoot Alexander (!) and Steven Pinker (!).The he puts up preemptive straw man arguments against doomers. His blog has become a joke.”
“Hello! I am currently testing Verify AI and how reliable it is in detecting AI artworks and from real ones since I am mainly on this field. I am a bit new to using this tool but I have read the technical study on its creation so I can at least make some basic assumptions on how it can work (but please do correct me if I get things wrong). I already posted in another sub but forgot about this place. I understand that only the encoder and decoder is mostly provided to the public but the informatio”
“I'm pretty surprised at the typing speed. In the past, when I've measured, I've usually clocked in around 120 wpm. And I'm getting older! I'm a bit suspicious.”
“https://preview.redd.it/t7wxguxqvzth1.png?width=1314&format=png&auto=webp&s=0ba382fb88894c6e687d5bb9a4b14a85334eae67 Guess we have a dataset for sycophancy and AI content detection submitted by /u/Striking-Warning9533 [link] [comments]”
“Thanks for building DeepSentinel — combining the forensic methods (FFT, ELA, face geometry, SRM noise, MesoNet) with an explanation layer, plus the "build a fake, then detect it" lab, is a strong teaching concept. I came across it while evaluating open source tools for a German media literacy catalogue for teachers. One blocker, and it is only about paperwork: the README carries an MIT badge that links to LICENSE , but the repository has no license file. Verified today (2026 10 06): GitHub's API”
“As a blogger, writer, or reader, are there things you look for to be able to tell (for sure) that a post / article is AI generated? I think we're all familiar with the overuse of "—" (em dash) by agents such as ChatGPT and Claude, as well as other dead giveaways, like certain phrases that popup in almost every article that's written by AI. What are some indicators you personally look for when reading a piece to know that it wasn't created by flesh-and-blood intelligence? &#”
“I am preparing essays for MBA applications. as English is my second language, I use AI to check and fix any mistakes with English grammar (only after writing the whole thing by myself). What worries me is that after all hard work to make a polished essay, I use AI detection software (e.g. pangram) and it flags my essays as AI-generated (60->100%). I noticed that these tools are not reliable as I can see very different outcomes from two nearly identical texts with only one small change. Does a”
“I keep hearing all of these different flags for AI writing (lists of 3, not x but y, sentence structure, etc.) and now when I'm writing my essays I have to constantly keep them in mind to the point where it's harming my own writing. Do you guys think I should always avoid these flags no matter what or just write what comes naturally? submitted by /u/AccountantHot4026 [link] [comments]”
“Hey everyone, Over the past few months, I’ve been frustrated with how existing AI content detectors operate. Most of them have two major flaws: The Black-Box Fallacy: They spit out a single arbitrary confidence percentage (like "92% AI") without showing any underlying evidence, explanation of false positives, or camera details. The Privacy Trap: You have to upload your private photos, videos, or documents to an unknown server. To tackle this, I built WhatMadeIt — a transparent, evidenc”
“I've noticed a trend with most new models with regards to their writing style. They are creating a new style, and this seems common among them. It's very information-dense. Here is an example from GLM 5.3 Flash. I'm gonna be honest here and say that my prompt was kinda silly; my prompt was 'Why wouldn't you just name your Chinese restaurant 'Chinese Food' instead of 'Ming Dynasty' or 'Szechuan Garden' or whatever?' the idea being that someone searc”