8 ms·
Slop Cop
- doctorpangloss 5mo agogptzero.me is an excellent LLM-authored text detector.
- deleted 5mo ago[deleted]
- Cpoll 5mo agoThe LLM Prose Tells and wiki page linked in the readme was a fun read. https://github.com/awnist/slop-cop?tab=readme-ov-file#source-rules https://github.com/awnist/slop-cop?tab=readme-ov-file#source...
- add-sub-mul-div 5mo agoI'm sure there are some useful applications of this but we can't trust the reliability of an AI detector for the same reasons we can't trust the reliability of AI.
- rkagerer 5mo agoI'm curious how well this thing works, but you need a yardstick to measure it against. The last year or two a burgeoning community of meatspace AI detectors has emerged right here on HN, it might be fun for someone to rank "sloppiness" of submitted HN articles as gauged by comment sentiment vs. this tool to see how well they align.
- awnist 5mo agoGood idea, I did test on HN op/ed submissions and likely upgraded my own wetware slop radar in the process
- keybored 5mo ago> "In an Era of…" Opening phrase that stalls before reaching the actual argument. Always gotta have In This AI Era of Ours. Because even if you fail to convince the reader of the point you ostensibly were trying to make you still get to tediously skull-bang about The AI Era. And it only costs tokens. > Staccato Burst Three or more consecutive very short sentences at matching cadence. This is real. It’s not your imagination. AI is here and eating your lunch/AI is psychologically draining/The unemployment lines are unusually long.
- korse 5mo agoThe feedback needs to go away or this thing is just exacerbating the problem. Give a slop score if you must but then shut up and let the user interpret the result as they see fit. Slop is stopped by allowing unique quirks to flourish. Do you speak in 'staccato bursts'? THEN FUCKING WRITE IN STACCATO BURSTS! Do you need a 'throat clearing opener? THEN FUCKING USE ONE! Human language does not need to take progressive steps toward some universal standard. Having one is fine, in theory, but the beauty lies in how we solve for our inability to consistently utilize it. Adding mechanism to every step removes the beauty. Stop being the problem.
- Chaosvex 5mo agoAgreed. I ran some human-authored technical articles through this and most (all?) of the suggestions were just stripping the personality out of the writing. Kind of ironic.
- ameliaquining 5mo agoIt seems relevant that a lot of these things were fairly notorious clichés even before LLMs, which just intensified the phenomenon. They were what people tended to do who wanted to sound smart and sophisticated but didn't have a developed voice or anything in particular to say. Indeed, I'm fairly sure this is why LLMs sound like this.
- cryzinger 5mo agoThis is true, although I can still get behind "use fewer cliches" regardless :)
- keybored 5mo agoAI is so original that it can’t make cliches out of decently-worn phrases and constructions by itself.
- gus_massa 5mo agoIt's just following what the prompt says, something like: fake prompt> To sound smart, use as much literary tricks from LinkedIn Grow Hackers as possible. If they prompt asked to sound like Strawberry Shortcake, the AI pudding would be full of berry interesting cooking analogies.
- ameliaquining 5mo agoThe interesting thing is that LLMs sound kind of like LinkedIn Growth Hackers even if you don't explicitly tell them to do that, unless you instead tell them to sound like something else. (And even then, there are still similarities.)
- UqWBcuFx6NV4r 5mo agoYou don’t know what’s going on in the training process.
- justzisguyuknow 5mo ago
- sublinear 5mo agoI don't understand the point of this. Terse writing isn't always necessarily better or something that LLMs are incapable of. This doesn't detect AI slop. It's just a grammarly/copilot clone.
- RogerL 5mo agoYou want me to enter my api key into a website? Yes, I see the message about it staying local. No, I don't trust the message or that you will never be hacked.
- awnist 5mo agoRun it locally, Github is linked on the bottom left: https://github.com/awnist/slop-cop https://github.com/awnist/slop-cop
- kstrauser 5mo agoLOL. I copied and pasted an 87-word blog post I wrote yesterday, on my phone, via my own thumbs. It detected 4 likely AI patterns, or once every 22 words. I'm so over this idiocy. It's gotten to the point that the "haha, gotcha!" AI claims are more annoying than AI slop itself. God forbid you use a semicolon or an em dash or an interesting sentence structure to break things up, because someone will be quick to point out the "proof" that it's machine generated.
- awnist 5mo agoIt isn’t an AI detector. It flags valid language patterns that have become LLM-output clichés through overuse. False positives are a given. and I'll never give up on em dashes
- nz 5mo agoI've taken to telling people, that if they see me write a long piece, that lacks em-dashes, then they should assume that I am under duress, and send help.
- deleted 5mo ago[deleted]
- tavavex 5mo agoThis is a confused and misguided project. It makes the mistake of failing to identify why the AI 'style' feels wrong. The author decided to replicate similar tools by breaking down AI writing into bite-sized issues, but it just doesn't work the same way as correcting grammatical errors. Because of this, the author had to really try to find what's so wrong about these patterns in isolation, so all of it comes off as annoying nitpicks. Let's take a look at a few. > Overused Intensifier - Delete it. If the sentence still makes sense, the word was never needed. If it doesn't, rewrite the sentence to show why it matters. You heard it here first. Adjectives? More like AIdjectives, a covert plan by AI companies to make our writing more sloppy. According to this recommendation, writing should never have any emphasis, it should only contain the most basic "X is Y" relations, like in some programming language. Sentences should contain the bare minimum amount of information required to parse them, everything else must be cut. In practice, this recommendation only filters a few of the most pervasive 'corporate PowerPoint'-style language, but even then, the suggestion that these words are never useful is wrong. > Triple Construction - Break the pattern. Use two items or four. Or convert one item into its own sentence to give it more weight. Humans may really like when things are structured into threes, but you must resist this AI temptation! Use two or four points, because you're not like them. The only reason cited for why this is wrong is that LLMs use this pattern often, so naturally the rest of us must cede good writing practices to them. > "Almost" Hedge - Commit. "Almost always" → "usually." Or just say "always" and defend the claim. Readers notice when you won't take a stance. As we all know, the world is discrete and easy to describe. That's why there simply isn't anything between things that happen "usually" (70%) and "always" (100%). Saying "almost always" (95%) is bad, because you should round your estimates and defend what is now an obviously wrong statement, for it makes you seem more brutal and confident. > "Broader Implications" - State the implication explicitly, or cut the phrase. "This has broader implications" says nothing. What are the implications? Say them. God forbid you organize an essay that's in any way non-linear, temporarily withholding some information for the sake of organization. Asking to can the phrase entirely says that even complex writing should be strung together in a rigid and sequential order. That's the problem with the project, the way I see it. It was too heavily inspired by Grammarly and the likes, and in chasing it, the criticisms were adapted to fit the Grammarly model. The issue with that LLM 'style' is the punchy, continuous overuse of these patterns to the point where these phrases start seeming like meaningless sound combinations. There's nothing wrong with most of these patterns individually, what I hate is when text is filled with them to the brim, not when they show at all. If your writing is like the example paragraph, with most of the text highlighted, then it's a sign that your essay is more rhetoric than substance. But if you write an argument with three items in it and it's highlighted because "that's like AI" to make you delete it, then that's performative self-censorship, not improving your writing.
- starkparker 5mo agoThis is a genuinely useful tool with a shitty self-sabotaging name.
- jonahx 5mo agoName seems fine. Catchy, and I knew what I did before opening link.
- alexjurkiewicz 5mo agoAnd it's unnecessarily rude. Grammarly and Hemingway can identify the same sort of issues without "you are a stupid robot" vibes.
- 0gs 5mo ago... the problem is it is rude to LLMs? i think they can handle it.
- UqWBcuFx6NV4r 5mo agoTry the countless people that are falsely accused of using AI to write something, every day. The “AI cop” movement is pretty ironically being pushed forward in large party by unintelligent people that don’t know how to think.
- setnone 5mo ago'Add Slop API Key' button is a missed opportunity here
- IshKebab 5mo agoWhat do you mean? It's a great name. Catchy, rhymes, and immediately tells you what it does.
- chromacity 5mo agoLike the original Grammarly, I think this can be useful for business writing because these tools help you get to the point. Many students are rewarded for using flowery language in school essays, but if you're composing an email or writing a design doc, just optimize for reading time and clarity. But for general use, I think this is misguided. The problem with LLM output is not that it's using em dashes or words such as "crucial". It's that most LLM articles on LinkedIn or on personal blogs just take a one-sentence prompt and dress it up into a lot of pointless words, wasting everyone's time: "I had a shower thought and I asked a chatbot to write five pages of text about it." I don't need prettier words, I need there to be far fewer of them? On the flip side, if you're a human and actually have something of consequence to say, "delve" all you want.
- Swizec 5mo ago> "I had a shower thought and I asked a chatbot to write five pages of text about it." I don't need prettier words, I need there to be fewer of them? Always judge an author by the length of their text. Decades of insights barely condensed into 200 pages? Great! Hours of thought expanded into 200 pages? Very bad. Same length of text but lands very differently. Same is true for emails, tweets, videos, and even just talking. Say less! But not too little either.
- grahamplace 5mo agoAs the saying goes: “If I had more time, I would’ve written a shorter letter”
- littlexsparkee 5mo agoSo many books that could've been an article. I try to save myself time by checking Goodreads but it's not always clear as I'm more critical than the average person. Reading a preview in Google Books helps but you only get so many pages before you're cut off. Appreciate that lately new books are sometimes featured in pubs with an excerpt.
- alfiedotwtf 5mo ago
- rdmuser 5mo agoI've been wanting something like this for a while now but as an extension that runs locally. Just something I can click to get a quick response telling me if the article seems like ai so I can focus on the writing without needing to spend energy on remembering ai styles and detecting obvious ai. I'd be pretty happy to see something like that built straight into firefox. Ultimately slop is so pervasive that I'm wasting a fair amount of time vetting text and it's affecting my ability to simply enjoy reading. I keep getting part way into an article before realizing it's low quality ai writing. Being able to get a quick heads up that it looks like ai before starting would save me a lot of energy even on articles I decide to try reading because it cuts down on mental overhead.
- doginasuit 5mo agoIt sounds like you might be overthinking it. Slop is pretty noticeable at a glance, and it doesn't really matter if it is AI slop or human slop. On the other end, I have probably enjoyed an article or two that was made partially or entirely by AI and I'm not sure what the downside is.
- furyofantares 5mo agoRemoving the aesthetic tells from LLM-generated text won't fix the fact that there's nobody home with opinions and experiences to express. It will just make it take more work for your unsuspecting audience to figure that out.
- IshKebab 5mo agoYeah but there's a reasonable amount of content that has real information from a real human but they've used AI to help write it. Maybe they got a first draft from AI and then fixed it. Those can still be things that I want to read but the AI rhetorical style is so tedious and overused at this point it's really annoying to read them. So this tool would help with those cases. (Assuming people actually use it.)
- furyofantares 5mo agoI believe you, but I have yet to see any I want to read. I've had 5 or 6 times where I've thought, OK, finally someone has produced something useful this way. And in the end I've always been bitten, by hallucinations or by an inability to work out what the author cared about or was trying to express. Again, I believe you've had ones where you did want to read it, I'm not trying to contradict that. I'm still waiting though, and until then I'd really prefer the aesthetic tells to still be obvious.
- iamjs 5mo agoI'm enjoying pasting early 2000's era blog posts in here and learning that they too were LLM slop!
- lotyrin 5mo agoIt's not purporting to be an LLM detector. Your 2000s era posts probably do have some sloppy cliches in them.
- rorylawless 5mo agoAnd it is not impossible the posts ended up in the training corpus.
- Mistletoe 5mo ago>Staccato Burst. Now I have a name for the thing I despise the most about AI writing.
- krackers 5mo agoIsn't this called the tricolon? Ironically the names of the patterns all seem AI generated.
- lemagedurage 5mo agoIt looks like tricolon is about specifically three parallel elements, while staccato is about short consecutive sentences, so staccato would be the appropriate name here.
- cjlm 5mo agoI find it funny that all of these little tools lean into the slop = poop dynamic. I'm building writetrack.dev - a writing signal sdk that helps folks understand proof of process. It takes a different approach to writing analysis and I'm pretty sure the logo will never feature a brown turd.
- 3eb7988a1663 5mo agoWow! Did you know that Abraham Lincoln let AI write the Gettysburg Address? 17 patterns identified out of only 305 words. I don't know why I ever let him get the ad revenue.
- deleted 5mo ago[deleted]
- deleted 5mo ago[deleted]
- NitpickLawyer 5mo agoHaha! Did the same with Asimov. These "detectors" are a joke.
- IshKebab 5mo agoI tried that but most of those seem to be false positives. It seems to report Triple Construction based just on commas, which were apparently way more common in writing of the time. It also reports em-dashes which are obviously irrelevant in this case. And nobody is really saying that you need to completely eliminate these constructs. 17 matches out of 305 words is an order of magnitude less than the example it opens with.
- SkiFreeWin3 5mo ago[dead]
- jedbrooke 5mo agoHonestly, I get pretty good improvement from just adding a “Emoji are forbidden” and a small list of banned words and phrases (the usual suspects like “it’s not just x, it’s y” etc)
- flexagoon 5mo agoBanning bold font and saying to avoid lists and tables as much as possible is an immediate massive improvement to LLM output quality
- ar_turnbull 5mo agoInteresting. I made a skill for my Claude agent based on Wikipedia’s list of AI writing tells. /remove-ai-writing It works reasonably well (better if you run it a few times), but still benefits from a final pass by a human editor IMO. https://github.com/arturnbull/remove-ai-writing https://github.com/arturnbull/remove-ai-writing
- resters 5mo agoIf prompted appropriately, LLMs can write prose that mirrors nearly any style you ask for. Not sure what the big hubbub about "slop" is. Honestly it's annoying.
- m0llusk 5mo agoThat isn't really true, though, at least not when actual common usage is considered. As the studies of "Trendslop" have revealed, LLMs aggressively normalize output. What they do is generate content based on averages over large samples. This gives everything from them a strong tendency to revert to the mean from concepts to presentation and style.
- burnished 5mo agoI love how you can tell something was generated because it comes out clear and using many of the important writing fundamentals we were all taught.
- Anamon 5mo ago[dead]
- m0llusk 5mo agoBeing cautious and an autistic mathematician also I am prone to heavy qualification. This causes very large blocks of my writing to be highlighted as "Hedge Stack" which isn't really helpful. Lots of Overused Intensifier and Triple Construction instances also, but those are usually words or phrases, not several paragraphs together as with Hedge Stack. Seems like a sad situation, but I'm not going to start changing my communication style to avoid sounding like an LLM. At least not yet.
- foxfired 5mo agoOne thing I learned is that AI written text is not hard to spot. Usually, when I meet slop, I close it one or two paragraphs in. Although tools like this will become more common, they usually serve to win an argument, or confirm what you already believe. Also, it was painful to learn that my very first blog post I wrote in 2013 is AI generated. But I'm fine with it because I read this: > A short punchy opener (≤10 words) followed by two or more substantially longer elaboration sentences — the LLM "hook then evidence pile" rhythm. ... and realized that the entire app is AI generated.
- jillesvangurp 5mo agoIf you can spot it, an AI can spot it too. We have a website with some AI generated content (about AI). I added a skill to correct AI slop. Content got a lot better when I put that in place. I actually made codex research slop patterns and it came up with a list of known AI slop linguistic anti patterns. It now fixes its own content using that list. I also put a guard rail in place to do a critical review of all produced content as a final quality gate. That actually catches a lot of baseless claims, and other slop. And there's another skill that ensures we use the right SEO relevant language (a list that is produced by a separate agent). It's actually starting to generate interesting content based on me giving it a few bullets and ideas. I won't claim it's perfect but it does a decent enough job. I have my reasons for doing this (we help people set up agentic work flows) and I appreciate that not everybody likes the idea of AI generated content. But I think it will start getting harder and harder to spot AI slop. Basically slop is what you get without guard rails and quality gates. Of course, most people still lack the skills to configure their AI tools properly. Particularly non technical people. But it's not that hard and I bet there are a few handy journalists out there getting better at this. Also, for technical writers this is not going to be optional.
- koito17 5mo agoHow does this site tokenize text? Split on ASCII whitespace? Inputting Japanese sentences of any length flags the whole sentence as "Dramatic Fragment: A standalone paragraph with ≤4 words".
- awnist 5mo agoThat's right, its tokenization and fragment rules use fairly simple heuristics that assume whitespace delimited words plus English language/punctuation. Proper CJK support would require language specific tokenization and morphological parsing. Correcting rules like "≤4 words = dramatic fragment" would be difficult. The more complex rules already require LLM roundtrips, so supporting all languages in one pass would need to rely on LLM alone, I imagine. Which brings up an interesting point - what do these LLM clichés look like in Japanese? https://github.com/awnist/slop-cop#client-side-instant https://github.com/awnist/slop-cop#client-side-instant
- koito17 5mo ago> what do these LLM clichés look like in Japanese? Besides text reading like a machine translation, the tell-tale signs often involve things like: - itemized lists (I know, it's ironic that I'm using them here) - frequent use of conjunctions - use of demonstratives that feels redundant - full-width colons, especially in titles - subheadings that always end in abstract nouns - bold text, especially at the beginning of a line The demonstrative bit may be hard to express, but to give you an idea: when communicating in Japanese, words that can be understood from context may be omitted. Explicitly writing out words understood from context can sometimes make a sentence sound redundant. Before LLMs were widespread, SEO spam in the Japanese net tended to be affiliate sites with predictable, template paragraphs. I get reminded of those sites whenever GPT starts a response with 「結論から言うと、〇〇」, since that's exactly how those affiliate sites wrote back in the day.
- trane_project 5mo agoI pasted a blog that I wrote myself and flagged hundreds of patterns. Granted, the article is 15,000 words so some are expected but there are simply too many false positives to make this and any similar tool have any usefulness beyond flagging the most obvious offenders. And looking at its suggestions, they are not very good. People are better developing their own writing style than trusting generic advice meant for common-denominator writing.
- JuniperMesos 5mo agoI did the same thing, and also found the results pretty mediocre. At best it did point out some places I could've dropped a less important word to be more concise, but pretty much any editing will do that (and I do think I tend towards verbosity as a writer; it's a flaw, but it's my organic flaw). Beyond that it was just pattern-matching on sentence structures it thinks are over-used in LLM-generated prose. Even if that's true, it's not a good argument for why I should rewrite a particular sentence in context.
- trueno 5mo agoyup same just tried it myself which an email I wrote. like llms are using our language here so there's gonna be patterns we use that they also use. i dont think we're ever going to get to a place where we have a "yes/no this was written by AI" kind of tool. i do be worrying what this might do to the fabric of society but there's no puttin this damn cat back in the bag so i guess we'll find out
- NitpickLawyer 5mo agoI c/p a section of Asimov's "The Last Question", since it was readily on the front page. It detected 14 patterns (2 reds, one yellow, bunch of green and blue) in 583 words. Welp, I guess it's back to school for mr. Asimov... Update: 13 patterns in 800 words for Samuel Clemens. Apparently he's an em-dash abuser, but also likes "filler adverbs", "triple constructions" and "anaphora abuse". Damn! And for Mr. Hemingway we have 43 patterns in 1600 words. 16 filler adverbs, 5 triple constructions, 5 staccato bursts, and 14 question then answer. My my...
- thih9 5mo agoWhat’s the use case? Paste AI generated text and get a more human sounding version? That’s just AI generated text with extra steps.
- cientifico 5mo agoUnpopular opinion. Until now, ideas were only relevant when the owner was able to communicate then regardless of the impact of the idea. LLM "democratize"(VC term) sharing ideas, as people with low communication skills can be heard.
- thih9 5mo agoCould you give an example?
- cientifico 5mo agoMy self. LLM helps me communicate my ideas better. Thinking in different angles, focus on the main idea, structure in a post series... It constantly challenge my mess. Opus and I, iterate over 20 times a single blog post.
- gbalduzzi 5mo agoI created a gem on Gemini (the equivalent of a gtp) basically with a set of instructions for rewriting my text in a professional, clear and concise way and it works great. I just write my text without too much thought about it and I get a rewritten version that is usually clearer, but not pedantic or overly verbose. It particular helps for English text as it is not my first language
- efilife 5mo agoThis website itself looks like it was generated by an LLM and its github readme as well. Loses all credibility
- zombot 5mo agoA handy tool. Bookmarked. And good to know that Teddy Roosevelt was not an LLM: https://www.trcp.org/2011/01/18/it-is-not-the-critic-who-counts/ https://www.trcp.org/2011/01/18/it-is-not-the-critic-who-cou...
- cientifico 5mo agoI find some parallelism between writing articles and Pull requests. We are moving to a point in time, where we don't care if the PR was written by AI. We care that the author understand what is about, that it tested it and in general, we want the ownership. With articles is the same. I don't care if it was written by AI, if the content is interesting, and ai make it easier to digest... That's a win win. The problem is not the presentation. Is the content.
- pocksuppet 5mo agoIf the prompt is interesting, why not just post the prompt?
- cientifico 5mo agoIn my case. The prompt is normally a collection of ideas connected over time. Ai groups, structure, challenges and help me organize that ideas. Then, once I see something that I consider worth sharing, I ask to draft a blog post. 20 iterations over, and I have a blog post. The prompt is normally larger than the content generated.
- shevy-java 5mo ago> Companies that utilize these tools will thrive I read this before but I have some doubts. I recall some companies that were surprised when suddenly the prices were increased. Usual examples include Amazon, Google and some more, but this can happen to any company, including AI slop master companies. I am not at all claiming that the AI slop has zero use cases, of course - there are use cases, so I don't deny that. But the assumption generated here by AI slop, claiming how all the problems will soon have been solved, and risk-free profits are to be made by all companies, is just rubbish nonsense. AI slop is a big liar. In fact: I am beginning to believe that the current US administration is an AI slop brigade. Every time the stock market yields some suspicious profits, it seems to be that the AI slop protects some thieves here.
- zjp 5mo agoThis is the Hemingway Editor by another name, and I have the same complaint about it that I have about the Hemingway Editor. See: https://zjpea.substack.com/p/an-llm-will-never-say-thou https://zjpea.substack.com/p/an-llm-will-never-say-thou
- mrob 5mo agoGreat article. I see it was already submitted once and received zero comments, but it deserves more attention than that.
- red_admiral 5mo agoThe rule of three was actually good and common writing advice in the pre-LLM era. There's psychological studies that show 3 is a good number to grab human attention, which is why you have "an Englishman, an Irishman, and a Scotsman walk into a bar" jokes. Even my Algebra professor said that a well-written definition should have three conditions, for example a group is a set with an operation that is (1) associative, (2) has a neutral, and (3) has inverses. I don't think he was completely joking. (For stories with multiple protagonists, the common choices that seem to work best for readers are 3 or 5. Humans are weird.) I suspect that LLMs use that rule so much, because it's so common in their training data, for good reasons.
- JuniperMesos 5mo agoA group is an algebraic structure, and many algebraic structures are defined as sets with an operation that obeys some number of axioms. It happens that a group is a structure whose operation has exactly three axioms; but a monoid for instance is a set with an operation with just two axioms - it's a group without the "has inverses" axiom - and I don't think this makes the monoid worse than a group in any meaningful way.
- nxpnsv 5mo agoIn "fixing" the last sentence in the example I got "One can say that we are at a moment in history." Indeed.
- cadamsdotcom 5mo agoNice work. But it only goes half way. It should loop the LLM’s results back on itself repeatedly, behind the scenes, until its writing is free of signs of slop. After your quality gates pass and the result is presented, it’d be cool to then see a visualization of each of the agent’s drafts that the user can page through to watch how the writing was gradually incrementally improved by the model! No need to keep a human in the writing-improvement loop. Just show it when it’s slop free.
- awnist 5mo agoThere is a one shot rewrite function now, but you're right, even when asking the LLM avoid some of the patterns, it will stubbornly repeat them. It's a bit more reliable with smaller fragments of text.
- cadamsdotcom 5mo agoI am saying, keep reflecting its attempts back on itself. Over and over again, dozens of times if needed. We’ve seen it - any aligned model wants only to achieve its goal. But it does need to see all of its past attempts and where and why each attempt got a failing grade. That’s just a standard conversation history. It might spit back the same thing the first round. But after the first time it received the exact same feedback for saying the same thing, the model will realize it’s in a deterministic sandbox and try something different. You need to give it all of the conversation including its past attempts as context. If it tries the exact same wording that’s okay, it’s just one more invisible round of back-and-forth. The model is going to rediscover how to work with the harness every time, but that’s not your users’ problem because you’ve hidden that wrinkly bit behind the automation - they just see “model did 10 drafts and here’s the result - would you like to view the result or page through the drafts?” What I am describing is exactly what a human would do, it is just automated and thus, getting to a good result becomes insanely faster.
- Epholys 5mo agoWhen I copy/paste some text I wrote online, even short, it's full of alerts. Maybe I write exactly like a LLM in English? It's not my native tongue, maybe that's why. Otherwise, almost nothing. I don't know if it's because it's specialized on English or if learning it as a second language makes it really unnatural?
- onchainintel 5mo agoCould you still utilize this tool running a local model (any Ollama model for example) instead of making calls out to Anthropic to avoid costs while running this tool or does it have something specific to Anthropic that requires it?
- awnist 5mo agoGood idea! Nothing special about the Anthropic calls, would be simple to point at local models
- rachel_rig 5mo ago[dead]
- owenthejumper 5mo agoMy biggest slop peeve is not necessarily using words like 'delve', it's the algorithmic structuring of headings. Every single article out there is now structured as: - THE problem - THE solution - THE proof - Why it matters
- seqizz 5mo agoA whole new generation is coming who learns how to communicate by llm-generated text, so I assume by time these used "catching" methods will be invalidated.
- zaptheimpaler 5mo agoThis is so dumb. LLMs have some patterns they copied from people, so now people need to stop using those patterns? Not to mention 10000000 famous books, stories, speeches, essays, comments and more are flagged by these stupid tools. These kinds of tools only narrow the scope of our expression and over time can suffocate the entire written language into a single flavour of corporate approved not-slop speak. Yes AI writing is bad, but sometimes the cure is worse than the disease.
- squibonpig 5mo agoCorporate speak sounds like AI and vise versa though I don't think this concern makes sense.
- xnx 5mo ago> Slop Cop Thought this was a NY Post-style headline about FBI "top cop" Kash Patel's drinking problem: https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/2026/04/kash-patel-fbi-director-drinking-absences/686839/ https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/2026/04/kash-patel-fbi-...
- Noaidi 5mo agoOh. My. God. I had a suspicion that a friend was using AI to respond to my texts///and this said he was!!! It caught a "Short-Hook Paragraph" and "Negation Pivot" and "Staccato Burst" in one text. Wonderful tool!
- kmfrk 5mo agoLooking forward to putting every apology statement into this - although many of them tend to require OCR for being posted as images or screenshots.