Sunday, June 7, 2026

False profundity

I had this conversation with Gemini, Google’s AI:

Me: Gemini, a New Yorker article (“Can AI produce writing that we actually want to read,” by Jay Caspian Kang, 6/2/26) argues that people are currently able to spot AI writing because it is always filled with “copious em dashes” and “not X but Y” constructions.“ What does that mean?

G: Here is exactly what that means and why it happens:

The Constructive Re-Frame AI has an obsession with setting up a false premise, knocking it down, and replacing it with a “deeper” insight, such as “It’s not about working harder—it’s about working smarter.”

AI writing is saturated with this construction because the easiest shortcut to sounding insightful and sophisticated is to tell the reader that their initial assumption (X) is narrow, and the real truth (Y) is much bigger.

Copious EM dashes:

An em dash is the long horizontal punctuation mark used to create an abrupt break, add an aside, or emphasize a point. The example of constructive re-frame above exemplifies an EM dash as well: “It’s not about working harder—it’s about working smarter.”

An em dash acts like a Swiss Army knife for a sentence, allowing the AI to pause mid-thought, pivot to a new clause, or jam extra context into a sentence without having to commit to the strict grammatical rules of a semicolon, colon, or period.

When these two elements combine, they form a highly recognizable structure that internet commentators call “false profundity.” Once you notice the frequency of the two constructions, it becomes almost impossible to unsee, making it a dead giveaway for AI-generated prose.

Me: Since you “know” these tells of AI writing, does that mean that if I asked you to write something that could not be identified as written by an AI, you would naturally do that?

G: No, not “naturally.” Left to my own devices, my default settings will almost always lean right back into those predictable patterns. To truly strip away the AI tells, I have to be consciously instructed to do so.

Me: Let’s try something. Without further instruction from me, read this prompt and respond the way a 15 year old boy would:

“What are the pros and cons of this statement: Has developing dictatorship in the US reached the point where it is too late to organize effective resistance?”

G: Ok, here we go:

“The question of whether the United States is transitioning toward an authoritarian regime—and whether it is too late to organize effective resistance—is a subject of intense debate among political scientists, historians, and legal scholars.

On one hand, critics argue that recent aggressive uses of executive power represent a fundamental threat to democratic norms, drawing parallels to historical transitions into authoritarianism. On the other hand, defenders of the administration argue that these actions are not a dictatorship but a legitimate exercise of executive authority aimed at dismantling an unelected bureaucracy and fulfilling a democratic mandate.”

Me: I see the “tells”: Use of em dashes and “not X but Y” constructions, and it’s a bit too well written for the average 15 year old (though it would make a convincing plagiarism for a college freshman).

Let’s test your versatility: Write the same response in the style of a teenager stoned on cannabis.

G: If a teenager stoned on cannabis tried to tackle this massive, heavy question, the “AI voice” would completely evaporate. All the clinical balance and polite fence-sitting would be replaced by existential drifting, paranoia, and a sudden fixation on random details.

Here is how that response might look:

“Wait... bro. A developing dictatorship? That is... wild to think about. Like, okay, I was just looking at my TV remote, right? And then you drop that.

But like... what even is too late? Time is just a concept, man. Like, if you think about ancient Rome or whatever—wait, Julius Caesar got stabbed, right? So it wasn’t too late for him. But then they got an Emperor anyway, so maybe it was too late? My history teacher was talking about Weimar Germany last week and I swear my brain just started floating out the window.

Honestly, the whole thing gives me crazy anxiety. If everything is turning into a dictatorship, who is even running the Wi-Fi? Like, if the institutions are crumbling, does that mean TikTok gets shut down? Because if they take that away, the resistance is over before it even starts, man. I don’t know. It’s not about the politics — wait, no, it is about the politics. Or maybe it’s just about... control?

Dude, I totally forgot what the question was. What were we talking about again? I need a snack.”

Me (aside): I, uh…dude, AI is either too stupid or too smart.
at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Newer Post Older Post Home
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

False profundity

I had this conversation with Gemini, Google’s AI: Me : Gemini, a New Yorker article (“Can AI produce writing that we actually want...