This is conflating two entirely different claims pretty hard:

- The old point that AI speech isn't real or doesn't count because they're just pattern matching. Nothing new here.

- That many or most cool posts are by humans impersonating bots. Relevant if true, but the article didn't bring much evidence.

That conflation brings an element of inconsistency. Which is it, meaningless stochastic recitation or obviously must have come from a real person?