No, because the writing is objectively bad in ways that LLMs excel in producing.

Either they used an LLM or they have no taste and have used LLMs far too much elsewhere.

> No, because the writing is objectively bad in ways that LLMs excel in producing.

Author does not dispute that. Yet they claim to not use AI. So your preferred belief is that they are lying, rather than a thing that looks AI written might have been actually written by a human and you are wrong thinking that it can't be true in this case.

Yes that’s right, I and many other readers think the author is probably lying when they say they didn’t use AI.