(disclaimer: I'm not anti-ai nor do I think ai automatically makes something bad, _but_...)

To me, it's all fairly human-ai neutral except for this sentence which is oh-so AI cliche and casts doubt on the rest of it:

> This volume of The Art of 64-Bit Assembly closes the gap between a plausible explanation and genuine understanding.

"closes the gap" is a favored phrase by our artificial friends and the phrases "plausible explanation" and "genuine understanding" are just... so ... dramatic for the context.

The rest of it is pretty tame in comparison. In my armchair opinion, I'd guess it's mostly a composite of (professional) human-written/ai-revised and/or vice versa. Which is not necessarily a bad thing.

We've really gotten to the point that certain styles seem AI generated in many cases because many folks are poor writers and anything past a high school level is difficult for them. I'm not speaking in this case specifically, just in general.

It's also one of the reasons its insanely popular in ESL countries and frustrating/disliked in English-speaking countries because it makes things easier in one and harder in the other.

It was never the goal, but it is the reality. The same style people call AI, was often called being a pedant or being wordy 10 years ago.