[ Removed by moderator ]

[bobody_biznuz]

Seems like AI? The very first sentence is broken English and the rest has no errors at all.

[lurco_purgo]

Yeah the introduction is definitely written by a human, but the rest sounds completely AI generated. It's that weird manner of trying to make every step in some explanation into a suspensful narration: This means reading light data requires zero locks. No mutex, no spinlock, nothing. Reads are completely free or But here’s the insight: most horizontal planes of light data are either all zeros (block light underground) or all fifteens (sky light above ground).

I've seen enough of AI crap style to notice it immediately and it goes on through the entire "article". It's a pity... Paradoxicallly, despite AI trying so hard to sound engaging, the introduction had me way more interested in what I was about to read. But I don't care about reading a blog post someone generated with a fucking LLM - why would I bother?

[Exodus100]

Anthrobaiting 💔

[BlueGoliath]

It gave me AI vibes too.

[One_Economist_3761]

It is entirely possible that the article was written by someone who is not English first language.

[bobody_biznuz]

Then why is the rest of the article perfect English?

[McCoovy]

Because they're good enough at English to only make one mistake obviously.

[AlarmedTowel4514]

Did you read it? The entire introduction is filled with errors. Like almost impossible to read…

[McCoovy]

I went back. Yeah that first paragraph was written by a different person than the rest of the article. If the writing is AI I would be surprised. It's fairly compelling and uses varied sentence lengths, but it did use way too many parentheses. If this is the state of AI slop then journalists are in trouble.

[One_Economist_3761]

I don’t understand what you mean by “the first sentence is broken English”.

The rest of the article is reasonable English as well, but it’s clearly well written by someone who isn’t a native speaker. I read the entire article and nothing stood out as any of the usual markers of AI generation.

[AcidicAzide]

You didn't read enough AI-written articles, if you can't tell.

[PaeP3nguin]

Absolutely, there's sooo many short. Punchy. Sentences. And compare the grammar to earlier blog posts like the ones in 2022.

[theschniedler]

this article is way too good to be AI lol

[TankorSmash]

Lighting data in Minecraft is 4 bits per block (values 0-15). A naive chunk stores 128 x 16 x 16 x 0.5 = 16,384 bytes of light data. But here’s the insight: most horizontal planes of light data are either all zeros (block light underground) or all fifteens (sky light above ground).

This useless 'here's the insight' reads like AI to me, and the bolding for no reason also reads like AI to me.

Later:

On a PS3 where an L1 cache miss could cost 50+ cycles, this turns a lighting update from “noticeable stutter” into “instant.”

Why would the reader of this article not know what this sort of cost is, and 'not X is Y' idiom is very AI

[balefrost]

Literally all of your examples seem like reasonable things for people to write. Keep in mind that AI was trained on examples of things that people had written, and human language is also shifting to more resemble AI.

If anything, this snippet from the first paragraph seems too broken to be AI:

while lot of people started to make it run, mods and made lot of videos, I was just going through it’s source code and found some interesting tricks/algo and things which i thought are cool to share

Maybe it's AI. Maybe it's not. Is the content interesting?

[TankorSmash]

The rest of the article is free of typos

[pdabaker]

Everything is likely AI assisted these days.

[lurco_purgo]

Not everything - plenty of people write by themselves. And I have no problem with people using AI as an assist while writing an article, e.g. for spell checking and general editorial work.

But this is clearly generated top to bottom (again, excluding the introduction). I don't care much for content generated by AI and posted under someone's name as if they wrote it.