Right?! I agree with the vibe, but I was hoping for more detail, a link to the study, etc... But the article just ends with this incredibly vague statement and no sources:

"This article is based on verified sources and supported by editorial technologies."

🤷‍♂️

[–] chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

When I see this type of thing my default assumption is the actual source is ChatGPT. The article is attributed to "the editorial team" but that link just goes to a list of other articles and credits no-one. But somehow they're putting out like 20 a day, all of them similarly lacking sources or authors, and only linking to other articles on the same site. Plus the writing style is full of AI-isms.