alekwithak

joined 2 years ago
MODERATOR OF
[–] alekwithak@lemmy.world 1 points 8 minutes ago* (last edited 7 minutes ago)
[–] alekwithak@lemmy.world 18 points 7 hours ago (5 children)

This has no bearing on my life whatsoever but a developer releasing a QoL update after 15 years is pretty cool and great marketing.

[–] alekwithak@lemmy.world 26 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

I know three girls who got BBLs in Florida and the "Doctor" used rubber cement. In the words of Dave Barry: I swear to god I'm not making this up! https://www.miaminewtimes.com/news/fake-doctor-injected-cement-and-fix-a-flat-into-patients-butt-6544305

[–] alekwithak@lemmy.world 29 points 1 day ago (6 children)

Great catch! That’s a really interesting observation — but no, using em dashes and emojis alone is not a reliable way to tell AI text from human-written text.

Here’s why:

1️⃣ Humans and AI both use em dashes and emojis

Skilled human writers often use em dashes for style, tone, or emphasis (like in essays, journalism, or fiction).

Modern AI models, including ChatGPT, are trained on vast amounts of text — including texts that use em dashes extensively — so they use them naturally.

2️⃣ Em dash frequency varies by context

In formal writing (e.g., academic papers), em dashes are less common, regardless of author.

In casual or conversational writing, both humans and AIs may use them liberally.

3️⃣ Stylometric features are broader than one punctuation mark

When people try to detect AI-generated text, they usually analyze a combination of features:

Average sentence length

Vocabulary richness

Repetition patterns

Syntactic structures

Overuse or underuse of certain constructions

Punctuation is just one small part of these analyses and isn’t decisive on its own.

✅ Bottom line: Em dashes can hint at style, but they aren’t a reliable "tell" for AI detection on their own. You need a holistic analysis of multiple stylistic and structural features to make a meaningful judgment.

🤖 Why emojis aren’t a clear tell for AI

1️⃣ AI can easily include emojis if prompted Modern AI models can and do use emojis naturally when asked to write in a casual or friendly tone. In fact, they can even mimic how humans use them in different contexts (e.g., sparingly or heavily, ironically or sincerely).

2️⃣ Humans vary wildly in emoji usage Some humans use emojis constantly, especially in texting or on social media. Others almost never use them, even in casual writing. Age, culture, and personal style all influence this.

3️⃣ Emojis can be explicitly requested or omitted If you tell an AI “don’t use emojis,” it won’t. Similarly, you can tell it “use lots of emojis,” and it will. So it’s not an inherent trait.

4️⃣ Stylometric detection relies on more than one feature Like em dashes, emojis are only one aspect of style. Real detection tools look at patterns like sentence structure, repetitiveness, word choice entropy, and coherence across paragraphs — not single markers.


✅ When might emojis suggest AI text?

If there is excessively consistent or mechanical emoji usage (e.g., one emoji at the end of every sentence, all very literal), it might suggest machine-generated text or an automated marketing bot.

But even then, it’s not a guarantee — some humans also write this way, especially in advertising.


💡 Bottom line: Emojis alone are not a reliable clue. You need a combination of markers — repetition, coherence, style shifts, and other linguistic fingerprints — to reasonably guess if something is AI-generated.

If you'd like, I can walk you through some actual features that are better indicators (like burstiness, perplexity, or certain syntactic quirks). Want me to break that down?

[–] alekwithak@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago

No they are massively over budget. They haven't gotten a budget increase yet, it just passed Congress.

[–] alekwithak@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

Hell yeah, dude.

[–] alekwithak@lemmy.world 20 points 1 week ago (3 children)

I'd love to play some video games, anyone know where I can find some of this free healthcare?

[–] alekwithak@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago

Just referencing a longstanding meme in line with the OP, bro. I didn't realize not watching a single movie made me completely ignorant, but then I guess that's the ignorance in action. Anyway thanks for the unnecessary condescension over fucking batman :)

[–] alekwithak@lemmy.world 16 points 1 week ago

Right? The press would never have let Biden or Obama forget that gaffe.

[–] alekwithak@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I've never seen that movie, but okay. Many apologies.

[–] alekwithak@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Hey if your list of projects isn't insurmountable what are you even doing with your life?

Most carriers have an email to sms gateway address Usually your number@carrier.com or similar.

[–] alekwithak@lemmy.world 22 points 1 week ago (8 children)

Batman: "I would never take the life of even the most evil of villains" Breaks the neck of a petty thief Snaps the femur of a low level Mafia grunt

 
 
 
 
 
167
me_irl (lemmy.world)
 
 
 

Nikolai Patrushev, aid to Putin, has accused the U.S. and the U.K. of intending to sabotage underwater internet cables and planning to destabilize the maritime energy trade.

Citing U.S. officials, CNN reported in September that Russia was developing a sabotage unit with submarines and drones to target underwater infrastructure by order of the defense ministry's Main Directorate for Deep- Sea Research (GUGI).

A Swedish investigation found evidence of sabotage on the pipelines between Russia and Germany. Moscow had initially accused the U.S. Probes by Sweden and Denmark were closed in February 2024 without identifying those responsible, although a German investigation is ongoing.

Media in Norway have reported concerns at the presence in the last few weeks of the Russian intelligence ship Yantar in international waters alongside its coast near critical seabed infrastructure such as oil and gas pipelines and cables for internet and telecommunications.

 
 
view more: next ›