>>212699649
alright retard, see my picrel for what your exact prompt outputs. Now compare to >>212699376, which contains absolutely ZERO of the telltale signs of being AI (egregious em-dash usage, over-reliance on [X, Y, and Z] type sentence structures, out of place flowery adjectives, etc). What exactly makes you so convinced that this anon's post was AI, other than being long and descriptive, something which a human who cares is entirely capable of writing unlike you, who's probably never written more than a couple sentences in their lifetime since leaving school?