alt Hacker News> people's preference for AI generated content over human content when the provenance of the content is blind, which flips on its head when provenance is not blind
I don't think this shows what you think it shows. AI output (in short clumps) looks like human output; it's designed to do that. Naturally people will sometimes prefer it to other stuff that looks like human output, but crucially this shifts when they realise they're not actually being communicated with.
> this shifts when they realise
I think this is pretty much is what they were saying about the provenance being blind. If you are able to deduce the LLM usage through the long-form text then that removes the blindness and objectivity.
I wonder if you view adversarially humanised LLM-generated content in the same light as that which hasn't been obfuscated. I recall seeing some paper with examples posted here a few months ago, where I (and the participants in the study) literally couldn't tell the difference between them and human writing. I have considered using humanisation myself but there is both less control over the output and it (obviously) loses the LLM-like structure that I find so easy to read - and is therefore antithesis to my own objectives.