The OP doesn’t read like a ChatGPT comment to me, though maybe I’m easily fooled. It has a bit more personality (“High-theory”, putting “just” in quotes as an ironic wink). It’s tongue-in-cheek, not nonsensical.
Also, unless cleverly prompted, ChatGPT normally has a positive attitude. This post looks too negative and dismissive for a typical ChatGPT answer: "worse", "disastrous", "stuff", "don't bother", etc...
It follows the general construction of a ChatGPT answer though.
>It follows the general construction of a ChatGPT answer though.
In my English education in public school in California, it was hammered into my head quite strictly that A Paragraph has a very specific structure, and that no parts can be rearranged or even omitted. Thankfully I have moved on from thinking about the English language that way, but it’s not shocking to me that many real people write with a similar structure because they were taught that it was the objectively correct way to communicate in written form.
Yeah, I didn't even see that original comment but I've been on HN and Reddit long enough to know this must have been a referencing the style/format of some other sw dev related advice comment.
It's unlikely that ChatGPT penned this dreidel commentary. The nuanced understanding of dreidel spinning - especially the tactile aspects like grip and timing - reflects personal experience, something ChatGPT lacks. Also, the comment's informal tone and specific focus on practical skills over theoretical models seem more human. ChatGPT typically provides more generalized, theory-based responses, not delving deeply into the practical, less-discussed aspects of niche hobbies like dreidel spinning.
