In all of your examples, a human author would usually prefix with the word "the".
Nobody routinely says the things in your example without some supporting words.
And it's not just presence -- it's density.
And, to be clear: are you making the claim that this post was not LLM-generated or at least LLM-assisted? Or are you merely making the claim that people saying things like "nouns verb" might not be LLMs even though in this case the text is in fact most likely from an LLM?
> In all of your examples, a human author would usually prefix with the word "the".
Not really. At least one of my examples is literally based on a real headline from pre-LLM days[0]. If we are talking about a generalised idea of bias, there is no need for “the”. In fact, it would be wrong.
> Nobody routinely says the things in your example without some supporting words.
This is a post. One is expected to put more creativity into public speech. Good writing can be expected to be full of metaphors and denser than casual speech. Some writing purposefully uses headline style for impact. It doesn’t mean the author routinely talks like that.
> it's density
If it’s a wall of text with filler, it’s LLMs. If it’s dense, it’s LLMs.
You can find plenty of examples of denser, less legible posts from days before LLMs.
> are you making the claim that this post was not LLM-generated or at least LLM-assisted
I am making the claim I am making: don’t say someone used an LLM based on such a weak foundation and nothing else.
People will sound like LLMs. Blurring the line with actual writing is the entire point of LLMs and is fully by design; if you encounter a text with zero “tells”, it might as well be made with an LLM if the product works as intended.
[0] Here’s another one: https://ribbonfarm.com/2017/05/25/blockchains-never-forget/