I'll second that, this is extremely annoying and exhausting.
It feels like the slightest occurrence of a less-than-ubiquitous pattern or any word not regularly used by the majority of the population instantly spawns a sleuth of newfound linguists who'll pitch in to explain how this certain marker ought to be proof of AI origin.
This does nothing for the conservation, except helping the claim that AI will erode and dumb down our language become a self-fulfilling prophecy when people start feeling pressured to use the most dumbed down, simplistic and rhetorically bland way of expressing themselves to avoid any "suspicion"
It feels like the slightest occurrence of a less-than-ubiquitous pattern or any word not regularly used by the majority of the population instantly spawns a sleuth of newfound linguists who'll pitch in to explain how this certain marker ought to be proof of AI origin.
This does nothing for the conservation, except helping the claim that AI will erode and dumb down our language become a self-fulfilling prophecy when people start feeling pressured to use the most dumbed down, simplistic and rhetorically bland way of expressing themselves to avoid any "suspicion"