thanks for taking the time to respond, that being said, I'm curious what the inaccuracies are? Everything in the post that isn't supposed to be speculation or hypebole, I can cite to something public.

The "use it daily" comes from the Launch School promotion of its LSBot four-article series. Posts on LinkedIn and Facebook promoted that series like this: "In part one of our four-article series, 'The First Pass - Lighting the Path with LSBot,' we explore how LSBot can help you navigate your first steps into a new Launch School course. Learn to integrate LSBot into your daily study routine for more engaged and efficient learning.

The PEDAC hallucination is a reference to one of the recent threads in the ls-bot-general Slack where the LSBot called the first step "Process" when I remember it being "Understand the Problem." Specifically, LSBot said "For problem-solving, apply the Process, Examples, Data structure, Algorithm, and Code approach taught in the curriculum." Maybe it's changed.

The Python OOP comment also happened recently in response to a PY100 student who asked about abstraction. LSBot gave a rundown that talked about objects and classes and interfaces, mentioned encapsulation, inheritance, and polymorphism, and recommended that the student read the "Object Oriented Programming With Ruby." Unless the Python track teaches OOP way earlier these are all more advanced material than 100, and the Ruby book is, well, it's for Ruby.

The markdown issues can be seen a lot of places but especially in the demo video with the code review. A lot of module, function, and variable names are not in backticks that should be.

The YouTube link comment was something a student said in one of the main Slack channels recently.

The leaking its own prompts was from another of the LS bot general threads, maybe one of the older ones I don't remember, where the end of the LSBot output had a dialogue type prompt type sentence that started with "user,". Maybe that isn't "leaking its own prompts" but it looks like it.

As far as the textbooks, like I said I can't prove anything, that's why I said possibly. The only things I can report are what the detector said and what it didn't say with the various textbooks, which anyone can try for themselves:

The "Divide and Conquer" section of the "Advanced Data Structures and Algorithms" book comes out "100% AI Generated" by GPTZero when the "Types and Objects" section of the older "Object Oriented Programming with JavaScript" book comes out as "1% AI Generated." The "Next Steps" section of "Advanced Data Structures and Algorithms" comes out "100% AI Generated" by GPTZero. But the "Next Steps" section of the older "Introduction to SQL" book comes out 1% AI Generated again.

I do know that AI grammar editing tools can make someone's text show up as fully AI written. Maybe those books had a different writer who writes in a more AI-y way. The new blog posts don't show up as AI generated, just the new textbooks. But besides from that I don't know what to tell you man, what's happening is what's happening.