Just meaning this as feedback -- I hate these kinds of comments. Unless there is something concretely failing that you can point out, it's not very useful to say "it seems like chatgpt". I hate inaccurate articles as much as the next person, but "seems like chatgpt" is a criticism that can be lobbied at _every article_, and therefore loses value. For instance, I could very well claim that your comment looks like it's written by ChatGPT, and thus should be disregarded. And you could claim the same about this comment.

Fair, yeah. There's a few concrete points: the ai generated header image is a start, but "I had recently bought an iLife A11 smart vacuum—a sleek, affordable, and technologically advanced robot promising effortless cleaning and intelligent navigation." sounds like an advertisement or marketing fluff. Extremely frequent use of em-dashes. Frequent use of "It was X, but also Y" sentences. "In seconds, I had full root access. No hacks, no exploits. Just plug and play." is such hokey writing. That's just the first 3rd.

I agree with the grandparent comment and wanted to say something similar. I’m allergic to AI written drivel and at the first “it wasn’t just” I had to close the article.

Whether or not the author used AI to write it, it’s a valid criticism that it sounds like it, it makes people not want to read it and the author should consider a less offputting style if they want more engagement.

Edit to add, it’s worth flagging AI articles if you don’t want to see them, just commenting on it ends up making for a poor discussion - this thread is littered with talk about how it’s AI written. Better just to vote for it to flagged/dead.

Author here, and yes I used a few different LLMs to improve my initial write up. Am not a frequent writer and writing was never a skill that I focused on. I shall consider writing myself from my next article, even though it might be worse. However, I did ensure non of the information in the article was exaggerated.