Live data from Hacker News

RFC 454545 – Human Em Dash Standard

gist.github.com

11–20 of 132 posts

Re: RFC 454545 – Human Em Dash Standard

#15
post #3

Related: Em dash leaderboard https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45071722

Claims Dang is using AI, and that other people are using AI even though most of the flagged post predate popular AI products. Really destroys the whole EM-Dash === AI thing.

Re: RFC 454545 – Human Em Dash Standard

#17
What's to stop an LLM from using this? Nothing, obviously. A "MUST NOT" in an RFC won't stop an LLM. They don't care about copyright why would they care about RFCs.

The instructions for how to decide whether to enter these additional unicode codepoints are also highly suspect.

Performative, but not helpful.

Re: RFC 454545 – Human Em Dash Standard

#18
post #6

There's a serious proposal along the same lines: https://www.unicode.org/L2/L2025/25241-ai-watermarks.pdf

I feel like there is an unofficial version of AGTI already in place for certain AI providers.

Whenever I generate a large amount of code, there is a ~20% chance that my editor will pop a warning "Some unicode characters in this file could not be saved in the current codepage".

I suggest taking a look at the raw outputs of a major AI provider in a hex editor. That (zero-width) whitespace could be hiding a lot of information.

Re: RFC 454545 – Human Em Dash Standard

#20
A simpler solution may be to use an en dash, even though they are not interchangeable and em dashes are the proper punctuation for parenthetical phrases. As a typography pedant, I’m annoyed that LLMs have forced us to talk about this.
Post reply on HN