Excessive headings for short sections is the easiest thing to spot first as you can raise a red flag just by scrolling. I recommend scrolling any AI-adjacent article and see how many headings it has, and how often they start with the word "The".

You'll then find lots of "Blah blah blah: blah blah blah." Ten of the sentences in this article are of that form.

Then there's of course "it's not x but y". It avoids that exact construction, but is still plentiful in the article.

> What happened next was not a reasoned evaluation of competing paradigms. It was a gold rush.

> Not because the methods it displaced had stopped working, but because the money, the talent, and the prestige had moved elsewhere.

The paragraph "The ImageNet Moment" stuck out to me. It's so stuffed of the current AI-isms that I have a hard time seeing this as chance.

> Not because the methods it displaced had stopped working, but because the money, the talent, and the prestige had moved elsewhere. The researchers who understood decision theory, Bayesian inference, and operations research didn’t lose their arguments. They lost their audience.

yeah it’s slop; multiple sites also confirm this, seems like they are using clawdbot or whatever