Damn she had AI write it
-
Wrong scene. This is almost literally in the blade runner sequel.
Genuine question, is the sequel any good?
-
Genuine question, is the sequel any good?
wrote last edited by [email protected]So good. Bleak as fuck, but good, and good in a lot of the same ways.
As an example, watch the whole movie, then rewatch and pay attention to that sex scene-it's so literarily good.
Edit: about the sex scene? Really? Where the protagonist
::: spoiler Tap for so much spoiler
After being retired from the police (and having his termination delayed by a day as a personal favor from his 'obviously more of a machine than the replicant protagonist' boss) he hires a sex worker to fuck while his hologram girlfriend projects herself over.Except the sex worker is working for the replicant underground/resistance. She wants to use him (is there to plant a bug) and does not give a single shit about him as a person. The plastic mass produced girlfriend-product/alexa that he literally bought is projected glitchily over her, and the dialogue is portentous as fuck "quiet now. Ive been inside you. Not so much there as you think."
It's him symbolically heartbreakingly-bleakly fucking his way from the synthetic world-which doesnt care about him but will lie to him for a price and allow him to play house-to the real world, which doesnt give a single fucking shit about him, and may try to kill him, but would be real, if he stopped projecting his delusions onto it. And it hapoens just as he's defying his corporate masters and taking his investigation in directions he's not supposed to, becoming his own, and doing so based on a delusionally hopeful interpretation of some evidence-the fake projected onto the real, pulling him into reality. It's up there with 'tears in rain'.
Edit: Also really good illustrated example of why you shouldn't call LLM's 'AI', even if that wasn't a problem when this was made-the protagonist, the sex worker, and the hologram were all made by the same company, but the first two are obviously people, and the hologram is just an emotional support chatbot that only even kind of means anything when the entire rest of your life is just as fake-ass bullshit as it.
::: -
Genuine question, is the sequel any good?
Yes, amazing.
-
Another take:
She feels bad about it, wrote a incoherant babbling mess of run-on sentences and incoherant rants about your relationship, she then re-read it and found it to be disproportionately mean and possibly hurtful, She then shoved it all into an LLM and prompted:
I'm breaking up with my boyfriend. This is all my natural heartfelt take on the situation <inserts text>, but I find the tone to be callous, angry, and hurtful. Can you please reword this to make the reader feel less attacked, possibly up to and including removing grievances, but at the same time making it clear that this decision is final and that I'd like to part ways amicably, and also that he's not getting his dog back.
She wants it reworded to be less hurtful but she's keeping 'his' dog?
She'd better start mentioning he kicked it or she just painted herself as... Well, not the worst but, like, really low... Ain't no 'amicable' if you're kidnapping the dog.
-
Yet we're perfectly cool with a card from a department store claiming Happy anniversary to my beautiful wife and I'm so glad that you're such a good mother to our kids.
Anyone that has a take that is not shoving a red hot poker up AI's ass gets down voted.
I'm not here for the upvotes. Carry on. And please don't take it personally, I do hope you have a solid day.
We aren’t really cool with that though, people tend to write a longer personal note inside those cards.
-
You can pry my em dashes — which I use regularly in writing because I love them — from my cold dead hands (To be fair, I really like parenthetical statements too, could be an ADHD thing).
I mean id use them more if i knew how to make them. they hide that fucking button on every keyboard -- it's like some big secret
-
Word and Google docs will translate them from --
They'll also give you the stupid smart quotes.
I've never break up with anybody over text but if for some reason I had to I would certainly write it on a computer first.
edit: LOL apparently lemmy markdown also translates them from
--that's odd, Voyager showed me -- double hyphen
-
I've been using em dashes for years. I learnt the alt code for them, because using hyphens for dashes looks awful (before that I'd do the double hyphen for an em dash). Also, like me, I notice you put spaces around the em dashes, which is apparently incorrect, but also according to me is the right way to do it.
-
Me too -- oh no! 🫢
This is a em dash (—).
-
You actually can – just long-press the dash.
En-dash: –
Em-dash: —
Dot: •You can also do proper ellipses by long-pressing the full stop…
And long-press most letters for more options: ă é ï ø û æ œ ç ñ $ £ €
Pretty much everything is in there.
—–·
huh, TIL, neat! I'll still probably use normal hyphens for em and endashes, but good to know! will be helpful for bootlegging my own kaomoji lol
-
She wants it reworded to be less hurtful but she's keeping 'his' dog?
She'd better start mentioning he kicked it or she just painted herself as... Well, not the worst but, like, really low... Ain't no 'amicable' if you're kidnapping the dog.
Didn't want my conjecture to be boring
-
Em dashes and emojis
The illiterate flocking to Lemmy to profess that they don't know how to make em dashes, therefore it's AI
-
Em dashes and emojis
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 AI1️⃣ 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?
-
All QWERTY-based layouts.
– sincerely, Dvorak user.
Fellow Dvorak. It's great for typos on touchscreens. Too many times I've mistyped whole and all.
-
It takes ages to get good at
It took me about one week to reach a basic competency, two weeks before I was equal in both (though this was partly because my QWERTY speed had also fallen), one month before I reached my pre-Dvorak average speed, and I capped out at about 30% faster in Dvorak than I was in QWERTY.
(Note: my methodology in testing this was very imperfect. It relied on typing the same passage on each keyboard layout, once per day, changing the passage each week to avoid too much muscle memory. Certainly not scientific, but relatively useful as a demonstrative.)
In a broader sense, my average comfortable typing speed in QWERTY was about 60–70. When speed-typing, I could push that up to 80. And the top speed I would hit in typing games was about 100–105. In Dvorak, those numbers shifted to 80, 100, and 120.
Granted, the comment above (or it might have been one of the very few good points in the article linked from that comment, I forget) made mention of the fact that some of the benefit is not in the keyboard layout itself but in the act of re-learning as an adult. I strongly agree with this. A secondary part that is loosely related to this in practice (though not at all in theory) is that by learning Dvorak you are not just "re-learning as an adult", but you are forced to learn proper typing technique. Hunt and peck obviously doesn't work when looking at your fingers shows you the wrong letters because the keyboard hardware is labelled according to QWERTY. Even a sort of situation where you are mostly touch typing, but imperfectly with the need to glance down occasionally, even if just for reassurance (which is where I was at with QWERTY) does not work with Dvorak. You become—you must become—a fluent typist. This may not be theoretically an advantage inherent to Dvorak, but for so long as the rest of the world is using QWERTY, it certainly is, as a matter of fact, an advantage. And for that reason, even if no other, I do strongly recommend anyone even vaguely considering it to switch.
causes a lot of little annoyances when random programs decide to ignore your layout settings
Not a problem I've encountered very often.
or you sit down at someone else’s computer and start touch typing in the wrong layout from muscle memory
This does happen. But personally I have found that my QWERTY speed is still faster than most people's, even if it's now a lot slower than either my Dvorak speed or what my QWERTY speed used to be. It takes maybe 10 seconds to adjust mentally. And if it's a computer you're going to be using regularly, just add Dvorak to it—it's a simple keyboard shortcut to switch back and forth.
or games tell you to press “E” when they mean “.”
Games are one of the most frustrating, in part because of the inconsistency. The three different ways that different games handle it. My favourite are the ones that just translate back into QWERTY for you. That listen for the physical key press, then display on screen an instruction that assumes QWERTY. My second favourite tends to be in older games only, and it's where it listens for the character you typed; on these it's as easy as just quickly switching back to QWERTY while playing that game. The worst, but still very manageable are where they listen for the physical key press and display the correct letter for that key according to Dvorak. But you quickly learn to associate a key with muscle memory, so it's not really an issue in practice.
Anyway, all of this is wildly off topic. Because my original comment was memeing. Nobody was meant to take it seriously. It was, as the kids say, for the lulz.
That's impressive! It took me way longer to learn. Maybe a month or two? Even longer to feel really comfortable with it.
-
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 AI1️⃣ 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?
Fucking thank you.
-
Humans just use dashes - they get the point across and don't require esoteric button presses.
wrote last edited by [email protected]It's trivially easy on everything—except maybe Windows. I use them because I like the way they look.
Android: long press the dash
Linux: Compose Key + three dashes (you can set the Compose Key to whatever you want, I use the Right Alt key).
macOS: Opt + Shift + dash
-
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 AI1️⃣ 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?
I've never seen em dahses outside of an academic paper, so saying people use them liberaly is an olypmic level stretch.
Also that comment was clearly written by ai itself.
-
Yet we're perfectly cool with a card from a department store claiming Happy anniversary to my beautiful wife and I'm so glad that you're such a good mother to our kids.
Anyone that has a take that is not shoving a red hot poker up AI's ass gets down voted.
I'm not here for the upvotes. Carry on. And please don't take it personally, I do hope you have a solid day.
You're giving her a card and flowers in person though, no? You're not just texting it to her and that's all she gets.
-
I've never seen em dahses outside of an academic paper, so saying people use them liberaly is an olypmic level stretch.
Also that comment was clearly written by ai itself.
I use them often even when I’m not writing anything important, just a habit from writing I guess.
Fuck. I just realised I used them in my résumé that I sent out yesterday. Shit shit shit
