Funnily enough, to me these aphorisms (?) sound almost like the replicant test in Blaze Runner. Like these are the unit bit of "nudging"

LLM, recite your baseline:

"It's not just X – it's Y." Slop. "You're absolutely right!" Slop. "And this is key –" Slop. "This is a nuanced topic." Slop.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vrP-_T-h9YM

The problem is not authorship. It's the lack of substance

This is just prompting an LLM and just dumping it on the site (which is clearly what is happening here, all the articles show the same signs of AI output, no human writing, no style, as far as I can tell).

If this is the level of care that goes into news articles, then we're doomed. What will ultimately happen is that AI summarizes AI articles, which got summarized from another AI article, which got summarized from another AI article, .. and after enough rewriting all facts will be gone from articles. I don't care to read this slop, and I'm shocked people are so readily accepting this new state of affairs.

This article is all fluff because real benne marketing. If they mentioned that a 4B model on an iPhone 16 drains 15% of the battery for a single long prompt and triggers hard thermal throttling after 20 seconds, nobody would be clicking on headlines about "commercial viability" fwiw

I ran several Gemma 4 quants on my 24gb mac mini, and with proper context size tuning they're quick enough I guess, but I would really love to see them working well on an iphone with 2/3gb of ram...