I wanted to like this, but the article is rife with Claudisms. I don't really care if you use LLMs to generate interesting articles, but maybe re-write it, or p

I wanted to like this, but the article is rife with Claudisms. I don't really care if you use LLMs to generate interesting articles, but maybe re-write it, or prompt it to not produce output like this? 1. The Guarantee: A Smooth Sweep Across Flatland 2. The Surprising Part: Existence Does Not Help You Find It 3. Why the Obvious Answer Fails: The Center-of-Mass Trap 4. It Gets Stranger: The Ham Sandwich Theorem 5. How I Turned the Math into a Game 6. Why This Is Harder Than It Looks At least there's nothing loadbearing about it. I still don't know which huge part of the training corpus led to this style. It had to be something massive that I never interact with in real life. Maybe marketing presentations? Pitch meetings? LinkedIn posts? Where did the LLMs start to learn to talk like this? Are there actual examples from the pre-LLM era that anyone can point to that resulted in this style of output?