the image linked to by the post is the Pangram LLM-detection report of paragraphs in the first screenshot below, reading "100% AI". in lieu of alt text for the screenshots below, I suggest scrolling through @eicker@lemmy.world's profile and https://lemmy.world/comment/26323310, which the screenshots are of. Look at the vote counts.

You're on one of the only actively pro-AI instances...

And you came here to complain an account seems to be using a chat bot?

Why should I take that piece of AI detection software at its word? I looked at that user's comment history and, while admitting I am not an expert on it, do not see any obvious signs of AI. If that's AI, mission fucking accomplished.

FYI: Pangram sucks. It's about as accurate as throwing darts these days.

A long, long time ago (i.e. 2024) there was only one LLM that was widely used by the populace: ChatGPT. It only had a few versions and they didn't differ much in how they worded output.

Now it's 2026 and we have hundreds of thousands of AI models. That includes over 1000 commercial vendor models!

Another thing that's really important that you need to understand is that even if two providers run the same model, their configurations will be different and thus, their output won't be the same.

To summarize: There's no fucking way Pangram can work properly anymore. It's useless garbage.

Piefed has some LLM detection tools for moderators as well as bot detection for admins.

It's also worth pointing out that some users on here use translation tools which may trigger some of these "AI Detectors".

Reviewing @eicker@lemmy.world's comment history, they do appear to use 'it's not X, it's Y'—something ChatGPT is known for—unusually often.

The third screenshot is me asking if it was written by AI and not receiving a reply. The user pretty much does not reply to people, just obviously-LLM summaries to his own posts. Almost all such comments are the same amount of lines. I used the first result for an LLM detector just to give a number; Eicker's language always ticks the "this is LLM" neurons to me.

they always end the comment with some sort of wry contrast.

I do not consider this kind of preaching to the choir constructive at all: it oversimplifies any nuance in articles posted into building the echo chamber. what's constructive for discussion should be what challenges!

lemmy.world is pro AI? Huh?

Now it's 2026 and we have hundreds of thousands of AI models.

And yet they still all write the same. And the vast majority are only using of a handful of models anyway.

Yeah I blocked that guy since one of his first posts. Everyone here going "oh no, you can't trust pangram"... Irrelevant. If you can't even spot the sloppiest slop that is his website collection and his comments (aside from some short replies to others), you're the problem.

Yeah, I don't think that there's going to be a viable future in distinguishing between LLM and human text either, certainly not for people who have an interest in defeating it. That being said:

• Some people are just going to use the most-common models.

• Some models are derived from other models and will share statistical similarities.

I still think that trying to detect LLMs is largely going to be a dead-end road, though.

There are also other wrinkles. I'd bet that an increasing amount of not-trying-to-maliciously-impersonate-a-human text out there is going to come from LLMs. Like, okay, Google Translate uses an LLM. I remember listening to an interview with a senior British EU translator (this was back before Brexit). This is going to be a quality human translator. He was saying that machine translation had gotten so good that these days, that now he always did his first pass with Google Translate and just cleaned it up by hand. Okay, so you figure that this is probably widespread, probably even more so now, right? So if most of the EU's documents are coming from an LLM, even if you could hypothetically detect all LLMs, you probably wouldn't want to trigger on some of them.

Not to mention that people adopt mannerisms from text that they read or hear spoken. If someone is using, say, automated browser translations, they're seeing a lot of the world through an LLM, and you'd expect them to pick up characteristics of that.

OP is on dbzer0, but they posted to a Lemmy.world community.

Oh, I misunderstood. I wasn't aware dbzer0 was pro AI either, but I don't really know what happens on there.

i think this might be some human using llm translate though

I couldn't tell it's AI because it's such a basic take I stopped reading after the first sentence.

Don't need an AI to notice that.

I didn't use an AI to notice that? Just checked their past comments.

He uses far too many emojis, AI loves using non standard characters you can't easily find on a keyboard, nor would they survive a translation tool.

Other indicators:

• only talks about AI related news, doesn't have any other hobbies.
• all comments are single paragraphs, no line breaks, no complicated thoughts that require building up with a thesis or supporting evidence.
• unusually polite and supportive, it's not full on glazing but the threadiverse is culturally pretty cold and unwelcoming and he does not fit.
• posts multiple times within the span of minutes.

Anytime I see a gigantic paragraph of bullshit I know it's AI.

I know "gigantic" is relative, but the user in question always had a paragraph of roughly 3-4 sentences, each of which only had up to 1 dependent/independent clause. So the paragraphs were actually short, we're not talking walls o' text. But that also means the user was never communicating complex ideas or nuance. If for whatever reason I didn't want to outright label them an AI bot, I would still feel comfortable labeling them a low-effort quipper or engagement baiter.

i just block botspammers as soon as I see em, usually reporting but also usually without posting my suspicion of botspam. if my behavior is common, then many people who notice it just block and move on, too. others will refuse to see it when pointed out, insistently pointing out an individual phrase or line that seems unlikely for an ai to produce, which... well.

at least for my part, the vigilance is not lacking, its just that my vigilance doesn't federate. i suppose i'll be more careful about making sure to leave suspicion comments instead of just reports.

alexa, quote that post where it says frankenstein was 90% ai written and the a user saying they hope the writer addresses this grave accusation

—

pot, kettle.

Check my comment history and you'll see that I'm a big fan of em dashes (typically to prevent run-on sentences, clarify a point, or where someone else might use parentheses, like this) but very anti-AI.

I've never generated anything in any of my comments with AI and I have no intention of doing so.

The point was on the complaining about AI because of trends in how humans write (which is where AI got it from in the first place) when quite visibly using those same trends, but sure, why not.

1. They do not all write the same. There's benchmarks for this and if you just do a basic search or actually test them yourself you'll see that their output differs wildly. Not only between vendors, but been versions of the same model. For example, Claude stopped using em dashes for most output for a while but now they've come back.
2. There's vastly more than "a handful of models"! Are you living under a rock‽ Go to HuggingFace today and then again tomorrow. There's going to be a dozen new ones! Probably more!
3. Changing the back end configuration even a tiny bit can vastly change the output of a model.

only talks about AI related news, doesn’t have any other hobbies.

False. They talk about Xbox pricing in your own screenshots.

They do not all write the same

They all have the same hallmarks.

There's vastly more than "a handful of models"! Are you living under a rock‽

You're intentionally misrepresenting my statement. It wasn't about the models that exist, it was about the models people are using.

the em dash is just one tick. eicker has at least five of those to the point where it's embedded into the logical flow of the argument and the sentence structure

and for that matter, looking into it, Pangram seems to have an extremely low false-positive rate these days: https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/2026/05/pangram-ai-detection-accuracy/687381/ . the only complaints seem to be about its false negative rate. the FP rate of 1 in 10,000 is maybe higher than you want but whatever of Eicker's text you throw at it it always comes up positive.

also, can we talk about how Eicker's website literally advertizes LLM social media marketing services? see third screenshot in body

eicker links several websites in his bio, such as this one:

it scares me that 90% of Fediverse users do not recognize his obviously LLM writing.

I'm not misrepresenting anything. If you take any model and just change the temperature a little bit (it's a setting that controls the influence of the RNG) you can have wildly different output.

Different AI providers using the exact same model will have outputs so different using the same exact prompts you'd think they were in different universes.

They absolutely do not "have the same hallmarks."

This stuff is benchmarked to absurd degrees every time a new model comes out. Just look it up already! You're so obviously arguing from an ignorant position it's silly.

I often think about that exact, particular, specific comic lately... for some reason! 🤔 😞

That said, OP said elsewhere:

The third screenshot is me asking if it was written by AI and not receiving a reply. The user pretty much does not reply to people, just obviously-LLM summaries to his own posts. Almost all such comments are the same amount of lines.

So if the account in question mimics a human exclusively in order to spread spam about particular websites that they are paid to promote as "authentically"-looking as possible, then I would argue that the mission is not "fucking accomplished". Or rather, at least not our mission of being able to converse with fellow humans, possibly with the assistance of the occasional bot so long as they are properly labeled as such and not trying to manipulate and scam us.

A properly labeled bot - e.g. that posts daily comics - is a great tool (even if some people choose to opt-out of such, which is their right). It's the deception that people do not like (mainly).

So very many of us around the Threadiverse have been preemptively banned from communities located on dbzer0 that barely exist - e.g. no posts or even subscribers other than the creator at the time - and called slurs (like "troll") in the modlog by pro-AI account holders who iirc are also admins of that instance (or were at the time).

So yes, dbzer0 is unquestionably the single most rabidly pro-AI instance we have, and I would even go so far as to say vehemently anti-anti-AI. If half the Threadiverse defederates from dbzer0, that will be the main reason why - especially since there is currently no other defense against modlog spam.

Although at this point dbzer0 seems more likely to itself initiate defederation from the rest of the Threadiverse, or at least Lemmy.World where sth like 90% of the most active communities are located, for following the laws of the nations the server machines are located in, and not allowing literal death threats levied against the LW admin team.

Oh, and also dbzer0 is pro-tankie now. Look up the Flotilla if you want more info. I know, shocking right? It used to be one of the more respected instances across the Threadiverse, but now... it's one step removed from the tankie triad in terms of antagonistic behaviors against everyone else. Now you are caught up on all the drama.

Probably not 90%? This post seems to be receiving an unusually high amount of push-back, less than a day after its posting, which honestly we all probably should have predicted would happen to any such post - at the very least all of eicker's alts are going to be on the warpath against it?

Maybe people are downvoting bc it's so much detail but only about a single account, I dunno.

The next release of PyLova will offer subscribable blocklists - PieFed already offers user-customizable and shareable Topic Area Feeds, so this is a logical next step!

Lemmy seems unlikely to add new features except on the timescale of decades though, so anyone wanting this would have to switch to a new instance, or get your admins to switch over.

I'm not misrepresenting anything

You absolutely did. So much so that you didn't even bother to explain yourself.

I don't need to look up anything. It's been shoved in my face for the last 5 years. You are so obviously arguing about nuances that don't matter in reality and it's ignorant and silly! Things like em-dashes, bullet points, and gargling the user's balls are all signs that everyone who's paying attention can quickly and easily recognize at this point.

the commenters seem legit

Yep, that account was banned from piefed.social 3 months ago.

The writing is pretty clearly AI to me. I can point out some reasons but they'll be easy to nitpick; it's a holistic thing.

unusually polite and supportive, it’s not full on glazing but the threadiverse is culturally pretty cold and unwelcoming and he does not fit.

lmfao true

Holy GPT batman, yeah that's clearly generated.

The therapist is a database, and the waiting room is a data center.

That's the unsettling part.

Democracy becomes a lot less inconvenient when you can X, Y, and Z.

Researchers needed one query.

X, Y, and Z on the same day. Somewhere, a sysadmin is discovering that Y is actually Z. Meanwhile, [flowery adjective soup storytime].

Next up:

You can tell there's no real thought in those word choices, too. You wouldn't prepare your origin story, you would experience it. The data center would less aptly be described as a therapist's waiting room and more as their office. It also reads like it's trying to write long-form prose entirely out of headlines-- every single word is designed to suck as much attention out of me as possible. It makes me feel disgusted, like seeing an ad.

the "LLM detectors" are just modern era coffee-grains-prediction

the field's state-of-the-art-s have gotten a lot better at eliminating false positives over the past year: https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/2026/05/pangram-ai-detection-accuracy/687381/

your

there's a pretty big blue indicator to tell you which comments' authors are OP and which ones are not

New Villain Unlocked: Impersonators