It is LLM with a clever prompt that avoids the most egregious tells (though "load-bearing" appears).

The number of times the article goes on complete tangents, introducing new irrelevant names and the general useless level of detail, all in perfect verbose English points to an LLM. So does the upbeat and persuasive style.

If you write that level of detail, use a historian's style and footnotes. Do not use the synthetic LLM voice that is optimized for rhetoric.

It’s barely readable. The way it flips back and forth “not this but this” instead of just actually saying anything is maddening.

> Kimball was right at the level he was reading it, but wrong about which decision he was reading

What the fuck does this sentence mean?