"Feel" is doing a lot of work here.

You can recognize 70% of those (true positive rate) and still have a false negative rate of 30%, while thinking you got 100% of the AI ones!

The problem is that you'd be oblivious to those you don't recognize.

But the Turing test involves a conversation you can steer and I think that's where indeed it's a lot easier to smell LLMs.

70%? Are we just making up numbers now?

I was quite surprised on how difficult it is to tell when chatting with an uncensored LLM a friend is running (it's too big to run on any of my computers but he got some B200s). You can input your own "system prompt" to make it behave like a normal internet user and the prose writes very similarly to internet comments with none of the LLMisms from ChatGPT, Claude, Grok, etc.

Yes, I'm sure it's possible to get LLMs to respond more like an average human would.

Emphasis on "feel"

Can't even tell if you're real or a bot by reading one comment.

Great times!