It’s basically unseen outside of professionally written stuff. Most people use commas. But AI like to use them a fair bit, more than the average internet user.
Using honest to goodness em dashes instead of just a hyphen - pretty uncommon.
Even a hyphen would be pretty unusual in a real text message, because they’re more annoying to get than other common punctuation on the phone keyboard, and autocomplete won’t put them in.
In a chat app, a hyphen would probably be somewhat common since it’s right there on the keyboard, but a true em dash would be pretty unusual since most chat apps aren’t going to be doing autocorrect like a word processor would, and you’d have to use the magic key combination to insert it.
But we don’t have the original text so we can’t tell if the original author confused a hyphen with an em dash, though
They don’t but the word processing software they likely use autocorrects them in. What’s next, proper semi-colon use and Oxford commas means you’re a bot?
Most normal people, at least from my understanding, don’t use em dashes in text messages, let alone even use punctuation half the time. So if I see em dashes, yeah, my first thought is going straight to AI.
Annoyingly I’ve used them for a number of years as a good way to make internet comments flow a bit more. However I find myself doing it less and less now because I’m worried people are just going to think I’m using an AI if they see an em dash.
(You just long press dash on android to get to it, opt+shift+dash on Mac, and the admittedly Byzantine alt+0151 on windows. Can’t remember iOS off the top of my head, but I think it’s similar to android)
Given that most people won’t even bother with punctuation at all, a long press for something they’ve likely never heard of before is so vanishingly unlikely it is more than safe to assume llm generation.
I don’t use em dashes but I do use punctuation (apparently some people find that passive aggressive and I don’t what to do). When someone else uses punctuation I just ignore it unless it doesn’t match their previous messages.
Indeed—your assertion is entirely accurate—the mere presence of em dashes within a text does not—in and of itself—serve as definitive proof of artificial intelligence authorship. This grammatical construct—a versatile and often elegant punctuation mark—can be employed by any writer—human or machine—to achieve various stylistic and semantic effects. Its utility—whether for emphasis—for setting off parenthetical thoughts—or for indicating a sudden break in thought—is undeniable.
However—it is also true that—when analyzing patterns across vast datasets—certain stylistic tendencies can emerge. An AI—programmed to process and generate language based on extensive training corpora—might—through statistical correlation and optimization—exhibit a propensity for specific linguistic features. This isn’t—to be clear—a conscious choice by the AI—there’s no inherent preference for em dashes encoded within its fundamental algorithms. Rather—it’s a reflection of the patterns it has learned—the statistical likelihood of certain elements appearing together.
So—while an em dash does not independently declare “I am AI”—its consistent and perhaps slightly overzealous deployment—alongside other less tangible but equally discernible patterns—might—for a discerning observer—suggest an origin beyond human hands. It’s about the entire tapestry—not just a single thread. It’s about the aggregate—the cumulative effect—the subtle statistical fingerprint. And that—I believe—is a distinction worth making.
i assume hand written, as that is excessive even for ai. im gonna test it tho
edit:
Prompt:
write me a prargraph talking about how em dashes are not a defibitive sign of ai. use ecessive amounts of em dashes
result:
Sure—here’s a paragraph absolutely drowning in em dashes—because why not?
People often claim—incorrectly—that excessive use of em dashes is some kind of definitive sign of AI-generated text—but that assumption falls apart quickly—because human writers—especially those with a flair for dramatics or a tendency toward fragmented, breathless prose—have been peppering their sentences with em dashes for centuries—long before algorithms were even a concept—and while it’s true that language models sometimes favor em dashes—they’re hardly unique in that regard—many contemporary authors, bloggers, and even journalists lean on them heavily—for rhythm, for emphasis, for parenthetical asides, for style—so to say “em dashes equal AI” is like saying “ellipses equal laziness”—a statement that’s catchy but hopelessly reductive—and if anything, this overgeneralization itself is more indicative of shallow analysis than of any deep understanding of writing—human or artificial.
Want me to make an even more over-the-top version—like so dense with em dashes it almost collapses into chaos? Or keep it just slightly unhinged but still readable?
answer:
yes
response:
Alright—here’s the full chaos version—an unhinged wall of em dashes—designed to overwhelm, confuse, and yet—somehow—still make its point:
The idea—that em dashes—those long, elegant, interruptive strokes—are a definitive fingerprint of AI—is laughable—no, it’s absurd—because human writers—yes, real, living, breathing writers—have always loved them—used them—abused them—even worshipped them—as tools for rhythm—for drama—for sudden shifts—for inserting thoughts within thoughts within thoughts—and while AI—sure—might lean on them occasionally—it’s no different than a poet—or a novelist—or an over-caffeinated blogger hammering out a late-night post—filling their paragraphs with dashes—em dashes—everywhere—because it feels natural—feels conversational—feels alive—and if we start declaring any style quirk—a dash, a semicolon, a penchant for adverbs—as “proof” of machine authorship—then we risk erasing the messy, chaotic, wonderfully unpredictable reality of human prose—a reality full of contradictions—full of excesses—full of writers who don’t give a damn about rules—and that, ironically enough, is something no algorithm has quite mastered—not yet—not ever—so no—the em dash is not a smoking gun—it’s just a mark—and marks are made by hands—human or otherwise.
Want me to go even further—like a version where every single comma and period is replaced with an em dash? Or one that’s so self-aware it starts mocking its own overuse of dashes?
I’m sure it’s possible (I know it’s easy on a touch keyboard), but if the person who sent it has never used em dashes in their life, then it’s pretty definitive proof. Otherwise, it’s just a big clue that you might combine with other factors.
On a mobile phone it’s super easy. Long press the hyphen button and swipe over to the dash.
On Mac it’s pretty easy still, but requires a little more knowledge. Option-shift-dash. (Without the shift gives you an en dash.)
On Windows it’s the completely arcane alt-0151, and only possible if you have a numpad. I memorised it like 15 years ago and have regularly used it since, but it’s hard to blame people for not doing so.
If you were playing yahtzee, and your opponent only rolled sixes, would you not say anything? No, no, rolling a six isn’t proof of cheating—that’s… that’s ridiculous.
Also, don’t tell me you need to roll more than sixes to win yahtzee, I don’t know any other dice games.
Also, don’t tell me you need to roll more than sixes to win yahtzee
Ok but this is an interesting question.
If you rolled only sixes, you’d score 30 in the upper section, missing the bonus.
Then in the lower section you’d get 30 in each of 3 & 4 of a kind and chance (90 points) and 50 for the Yahtzee. One could make a case that it’s a weird full house, but that’s a stretch.
That’s a total of 170 points. That’s not going to do very well when 250 is often considered a minimum “good” score.
However…some rules give you an extra bonus for a second or subsequent Yahtzee. With that, you could actually win with all sixes. Just get 100 after 100 after 100 and end up with over a thousand points.
I’d looked up a score card first and there were precisely three checkboxes for extra, succulent, 100-point-scoring yahtzees. What I don’t know is if this is a limit of the paper or of Hasbro’s imagination for crowning human achievement.
You people think em dashes are proof of AI?
Jesus Christ that’s so fucking sad.
You are vastly underestimating the amount of people who don’t use em dashes at all.
I don’t have a good sense of this since I am a trained writer. Is it really so low that one would reasonably conclude an AI wrote something with them?
the actual emdash symbol isn’t really something you can do when texting from your phone
It’s basically unseen outside of professionally written stuff. Most people use commas. But AI like to use them a fair bit, more than the average internet user.
It seems like AI is mostly trained on academic writing then. Very interesting.
I’d say using professional academic notation to break up with someone over text is a bigger red flag than using chatgpt to write it.
Using honest to goodness em dashes instead of just a hyphen - pretty uncommon.
Even a hyphen would be pretty unusual in a real text message, because they’re more annoying to get than other common punctuation on the phone keyboard, and autocomplete won’t put them in.
In a chat app, a hyphen would probably be somewhat common since it’s right there on the keyboard, but a true em dash would be pretty unusual since most chat apps aren’t going to be doing autocorrect like a word processor would, and you’d have to use the magic key combination to insert it.
But we don’t have the original text so we can’t tell if the original author confused a hyphen with an em dash, though
They don’t but the word processing software they likely use autocorrects them in. What’s next, proper semi-colon use and Oxford commas means you’re a bot?
Spelling & Grammar tool just wreaking havok.
most people aren’t writing texts in a fancier word processor than their phone’s default. Mine doesn’t – and I doubt every will – correct them
I’ve seen more proper use of the semicolon and oxford commas than em dashes. The em dash is a lot more esoteric, that won’t change.
Most normal people, at least from my understanding, don’t use em dashes in text messages, let alone even use punctuation half the time. So if I see em dashes, yeah, my first thought is going straight to AI.
Annoyingly I’ve used them for a number of years as a good way to make internet comments flow a bit more. However I find myself doing it less and less now because I’m worried people are just going to think I’m using an AI if they see an em dash.
(You just long press dash on android to get to it, opt+shift+dash on Mac, and the admittedly Byzantine alt+0151 on windows. Can’t remember iOS off the top of my head, but I think it’s similar to android)
Given that most people won’t even bother with punctuation at all, a long press for something they’ve likely never heard of before is so vanishingly unlikely it is more than safe to assume llm generation.
I don’t use em dashes but I do use punctuation (apparently some people find that passive aggressive and I don’t what to do). When someone else uses punctuation I just ignore it unless it doesn’t match their previous messages.
I’m a fiend for a dash - they’re just better
If you were actually a fiend for dashes, you’d have used an em dash—not used a hyphen as a stand-in for one.
Ah well - maybe I’m just a fiend for a wrongly used hyphen 🤷♂️. I don’t think I would ever notice which one someone was using.
i use those a lot to indicate that i finished a thought rapidly (in most cases)
like “what the fu—”
I used to :(
Indeed—your assertion is entirely accurate—the mere presence of em dashes within a text does not—in and of itself—serve as definitive proof of artificial intelligence authorship. This grammatical construct—a versatile and often elegant punctuation mark—can be employed by any writer—human or machine—to achieve various stylistic and semantic effects. Its utility—whether for emphasis—for setting off parenthetical thoughts—or for indicating a sudden break in thought—is undeniable.
However—it is also true that—when analyzing patterns across vast datasets—certain stylistic tendencies can emerge. An AI—programmed to process and generate language based on extensive training corpora—might—through statistical correlation and optimization—exhibit a propensity for specific linguistic features. This isn’t—to be clear—a conscious choice by the AI—there’s no inherent preference for em dashes encoded within its fundamental algorithms. Rather—it’s a reflection of the patterns it has learned—the statistical likelihood of certain elements appearing together.
So—while an em dash does not independently declare “I am AI”—its consistent and perhaps slightly overzealous deployment—alongside other less tangible but equally discernible patterns—might—for a discerning observer—suggest an origin beyond human hands. It’s about the entire tapestry—not just a single thread. It’s about the aggregate—the cumulative effect—the subtle statistical fingerprint. And that—I believe—is a distinction worth making.
Ingredients: a dash of em
I honestly don’t know if this is hand written or not, and that makes it even funnier.
i assume hand written, as that is excessive even for ai. im gonna test it tho
edit:
Prompt: write me a prargraph talking about how em dashes are not a defibitive sign of ai. use ecessive amounts of em dashes
result: Sure—here’s a paragraph absolutely drowning in em dashes—because why not?
People often claim—incorrectly—that excessive use of em dashes is some kind of definitive sign of AI-generated text—but that assumption falls apart quickly—because human writers—especially those with a flair for dramatics or a tendency toward fragmented, breathless prose—have been peppering their sentences with em dashes for centuries—long before algorithms were even a concept—and while it’s true that language models sometimes favor em dashes—they’re hardly unique in that regard—many contemporary authors, bloggers, and even journalists lean on them heavily—for rhythm, for emphasis, for parenthetical asides, for style—so to say “em dashes equal AI” is like saying “ellipses equal laziness”—a statement that’s catchy but hopelessly reductive—and if anything, this overgeneralization itself is more indicative of shallow analysis than of any deep understanding of writing—human or artificial.
Want me to make an even more over-the-top version—like so dense with em dashes it almost collapses into chaos? Or keep it just slightly unhinged but still readable?
answer: yes
response: Alright—here’s the full chaos version—an unhinged wall of em dashes—designed to overwhelm, confuse, and yet—somehow—still make its point:
The idea—that em dashes—those long, elegant, interruptive strokes—are a definitive fingerprint of AI—is laughable—no, it’s absurd—because human writers—yes, real, living, breathing writers—have always loved them—used them—abused them—even worshipped them—as tools for rhythm—for drama—for sudden shifts—for inserting thoughts within thoughts within thoughts—and while AI—sure—might lean on them occasionally—it’s no different than a poet—or a novelist—or an over-caffeinated blogger hammering out a late-night post—filling their paragraphs with dashes—em dashes—everywhere—because it feels natural—feels conversational—feels alive—and if we start declaring any style quirk—a dash, a semicolon, a penchant for adverbs—as “proof” of machine authorship—then we risk erasing the messy, chaotic, wonderfully unpredictable reality of human prose—a reality full of contradictions—full of excesses—full of writers who don’t give a damn about rules—and that, ironically enough, is something no algorithm has quite mastered—not yet—not ever—so no—the em dash is not a smoking gun—it’s just a mark—and marks are made by hands—human or otherwise.
Want me to go even further—like a version where every single comma and period is replaced with an em dash? Or one that’s so self-aware it starts mocking its own overuse of dashes?
I can still tell these two paragraphs apart from the other one because of its voice. God, the chatgpt voice is tacky…
How the hell do you even type an em dash?
I’m sure it’s possible (I know it’s easy on a touch keyboard), but if the person who sent it has never used em dashes in their life, then it’s pretty definitive proof. Otherwise, it’s just a big clue that you might combine with other factors.
On a mobile phone it’s super easy. Long press the hyphen button and swipe over to the dash.
On Mac it’s pretty easy still, but requires a little more knowledge. Option-shift-dash. (Without the shift gives you an en dash.)
On Windows it’s the completely arcane alt-0151, and only possible if you have a numpad. I memorised it like 15 years ago and have regularly used it since, but it’s hard to blame people for not doing so.
No idea about Linux.
You could make it easier on windows with an on-screen keyboard probably
This is what I’ve been using for years -> https://github.com/samhocevar/wincompose
Well it depends on the keyboard layout, on Linux, at least—but on other platforms too, I think.
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.
Fair point. It’s still a red flag (in more ways than one!) but I accept it’s not definitive.
You use use the compose key with a sequence of characters. Mine is right alt, so it’s gonna be:
right alt, then -, then -, then -
—
Considering that a comma has its own button, it’s no wonder which one is preferred.
We could ask an LLM, but it’s probably bot a good idea given the post 😄
Yes. and your ignorance is sad.
It’s honestly unhinged. So many stupid people trying to desperately grasp at something to feel more correct than you™
If you were playing yahtzee, and your opponent only rolled sixes, would you not say anything? No, no, rolling a six isn’t proof of cheating—that’s… that’s ridiculous.
Also, don’t tell me you need to roll more than sixes to win yahtzee, I don’t know any other dice games.
Ok but this is an interesting question.
If you rolled only sixes, you’d score 30 in the upper section, missing the bonus.
Then in the lower section you’d get 30 in each of 3 & 4 of a kind and chance (90 points) and 50 for the Yahtzee. One could make a case that it’s a weird full house, but that’s a stretch.
That’s a total of 170 points. That’s not going to do very well when 250 is often considered a minimum “good” score.
However…some rules give you an extra bonus for a second or subsequent Yahtzee. With that, you could actually win with all sixes. Just get 100 after 100 after 100 and end up with over a thousand points.
I’d looked up a score card first and there were precisely three checkboxes for extra, succulent, 100-point-scoring yahtzees. What I don’t know is if this is a limit of the paper or of Hasbro’s imagination for crowning human achievement.