No, nothing about this post is AI-generated.It’s a 100% human post from @koshercockney
(“Just opinions of a Jewish dude…”), whose entire account is raw, punchy, sarcastic political commentary with zero LLM stiffness.The text“Wow.
Joe Kent and Tucker Carlson clips were shared by Iranian Regime State Media four times in the space of an hour.
Tells you everything you need to know really doesn’t it?”Classic @koshercockney
style: short explosive opener (“Wow.” / “Holy shit.”), quick fact, rhetorical closer. Matches his feed perfectly.
The imageA simple collage of four real @PressTV
(Iranian state media) screenshots showing them reposting the exact Joe Kent and Tucker Carlson clips. Crisp X interface, normal engagement numbers, embedded video thumbnails—no weird AI artifacts, no generated text glitches, no surreal details. Just standard screenshots anyone can take.
Nicely done. The illustration is the explanation, and vice versa.
A tell-tale giveaway for me is the two sentence phrasing "This is not X. This is Y." It is typically is found following the summary section as it transitions into the em-dash infused punchy conclusion.
How so many AIs developed this language tick during their training I don't understand. Humans do not write like that. From where does it originate? I can't see how it would be sufficiently present in natural texts. Perhaps it is an effect of indirect self-reinforcement. AI slop infuses out into the web then cycles back into the next training iteration.
Or as you hint, it may be a consequence of user engagement reinforcement learning. The clicks & scrolls feedback may give AI its distinctively off-putting voice.
This is not definitive. This is informed speculation.
Groc analysis says:
No, nothing about this post is AI-generated.It’s a 100% human post from @koshercockney (“Just opinions of a Jewish dude…”), whose entire account is raw, punchy, sarcastic political commentary with zero LLM stiffness.The text“Wow. Joe Kent and Tucker Carlson clips were shared by Iranian Regime State Media four times in the space of an hour. Tells you everything you need to know really doesn’t it?”Classic @koshercockney style: short explosive opener (“Wow.” / “Holy shit.”), quick fact, rhetorical closer. Matches his feed perfectly.
The imageA simple collage of four real @PressTV (Iranian state media) screenshots showing them reposting the exact Joe Kent and Tucker Carlson clips. Crisp X interface, normal engagement numbers, embedded video thumbnails—no weird AI artifacts, no generated text glitches, no surreal details. Just standard screenshots anyone can take.
Format. Once you see it you'll notice almost all of these right wing or stock market X accounts post in the same exact format:
A quick, but detailed summary, using raw, real, and catchy phrase to get your attention and make their post feel authentic but passion.
Then, one line.
And then, another.
To the point.
But harvesting your attention more and more.
Give another paraphra maybe where they try to expound in what they've been alluding to, but still keeping your attention.
And bam, another line.
Then, end it all in a one line--"punchy"--summary. Notice the hyphens.
Groc disagrees
AI disagrees got it
Grok is wrong about a lot a shit
Ask it about the 2020 election.
Ask it about Obama''s birth certificate.
Fair comment. You are right on Obama's birth certificate... Still not proof on the above
Nicely done. The illustration is the explanation, and vice versa.
A tell-tale giveaway for me is the two sentence phrasing "This is not X. This is Y." It is typically is found following the summary section as it transitions into the em-dash infused punchy conclusion.
How so many AIs developed this language tick during their training I don't understand. Humans do not write like that. From where does it originate? I can't see how it would be sufficiently present in natural texts. Perhaps it is an effect of indirect self-reinforcement. AI slop infuses out into the web then cycles back into the next training iteration.
Or as you hint, it may be a consequence of user engagement reinforcement learning. The clicks & scrolls feedback may give AI its distinctively off-putting voice.
This is not definitive. This is informed speculation.
Ah! You see what I did there.
yep i recognized that immediately as well.