一、文本简介

全文约4700字，预计阅读时长18分钟。阅读原文请点击：

Summary 要点总结

Beyond the em dash and the word "delve," there are hallmarks of AI writing that make essayist Sam Kriss cringe. "It knows that good writing involves subtlety: things that are said quietly or not at all, things that are halfway present and left for the reader to draw out themselves. So to reproduce the effect, it screams at the top of its voice about how absolutely everything in sight is shadowy, subtle and quiet. Good writing is complex. A tapestry is also complex, so A.I. tends to describe everything as a kind of highly elaborate textile."

除了破折号和"深究"这个词，人工智能写作的标志性特征让散文家萨姆·克里斯感到不适。"它明白好的写作需要含蓄：一些事物轻声说出或完全不言，一些事物半露半掩，留给读者自行体会。因此，为了再现这种效果，它会用最大音量尖叫着描述眼前的一切是多么朦胧、微妙而静谧。好的写作是复杂的。一幅织锦也是复杂的，所以人工智能倾向于将一切描述为一种极其精致的纺织品。"

Thought-provoking questions 导读问题

If A.I. settles on a limited set of favored words, tropes and rhythms, how will that homogenization reshape what we consider stylistically “good” or authentic writing?

如果人工智能局限于使用特定的偏好词汇、修辞手法和韵律节奏，这种同质化将如何重塑我们对于风格"优秀"或真实写作的认知？
To what extent are the peculiar affective patterns of A.I. prose (quietness, echoes, triplets, spectral imagery) artifacts of training data and optimization, versus reflections of deeper limits in how machines model meaning?

人工智能写作中独特的情感模式（宁静感、回声效应、三连句、幽灵意象）在多大程度上是训练数据与算法优化的产物，又多大程度反映了机器在意义建模方面更深层的局限？
If everyday communication increasingly passes through an “Omniwriter,” who controls its taste and rhetorical defaults, and what cultural or political consequences follow from that concentration of stylistic power?

若日常沟通日益经由“全能写作器”进行，那么谁来掌控其品味和修辞默认设置？这种文体权力的集中又将引发怎样的文化或政治后果？

二、Why Does A.I. Write Like ... That? | AI写作为什么“看起来很文学”，却越来越空洞？

If only they were robotic! Instead, chatbots have developed a distinctive — and grating — voice.

倘若它们真有机器般精准该多好！现实是聊天机器人已形成一种独特——且令人烦躁的口吻。

In the quiet hum of our digital era, a new literary voice is sounding. You can find this signature style everywhere — from the pages of best-selling novels to the columns of local newspapers, and even the copy on takeout menus. And yet the author is not a human being, but a ghost — a whisper woven from the algorithm, a construct of code. A.I.-generated writing, once the distant echo of science-fiction daydreams, is now all around us — neatly packaged, fleetingly appreciated and endlessly recycled. It’s not just a flood — it’s a groundswell. Yet there’s something unsettling about this voice. Every sentence sings, yes, but honestly? It sings a little flat. It doesn’t open up the tapestry of human experience — it reads like it was written by a shut-in with Wi-Fi and a thesaurus. Not sensory, not real, just … there. And as A.I. writing becomes more ubiquitous, it only underscores the question — what does it mean for creativity, authenticity or simply being human when so many people prefer to delve into the bizarre prose of the machine?