Is there any way to stop LLMs generating text like this?

Is it really better than just writing it yourself? I guess generating blog posts is lower-effort and thus wins in this attention economy people think they are competing in.

The actual engine is here: https://github.com/badlogic/pi-mono

An interesting idea to have a bit more control over what your 'agent' is doing and keep it simple. Some of the prompts do give me pause though, why do we talk to text generators as if they are people, have we found this works best, or is it a sort of cargo-cult?

https://github.com/badlogic/pi-mono/blob/main/.pi/prompts/is...

I love that he's telling his tools not to trust people in his comments here!

I wrote earlier why the agent stack is splitting into specialized layers, and this is a good example of what drives it. Monolithic tools waste the most on their own overhead. https://philippdubach.com/posts/dont-go-monolithic-the-agent...

[meta] I frequently see criticism about an article having been obviously written by an LLM. Often the author apologizes for it in the HN comments. I wonder what is wrong with me that I am totally unaware of this LLM stench.

I have gotten a lot of value from hearing people criticize candidates' LLM usage in technical interviews and conversations. I adjusted my style from talking about axioms and best practices. Instead I always relate a personal anecdote to explain a technical decision. This has been universally well-received.

So I am hoping that someone can respond with some helpful holistic answers beyond a checklist of "uses em-dashes" and "says 'not X, but Y'". I suspect my writing style could be easily declared as having been written by an LLM.