Reinforcement learning incentivizes AIs to find the right answer, not just mimic human text. This leads to them developing their own internal "dialect" for reasoning—a chain of thought that is effective but increasingly incomprehensible and alien to human observers.

OpenAI has publicly acknowledged that the em-dash has become a "neon sign" for AI-generated text. They are updating their model to use it more sparingly, highlighting the subtle cues that distinguish human from machine writing and the ongoing effort to make AI outputs more natural and less detectable.

An AI that confidently provides wrong answers erodes user trust more than one that admits uncertainty. Designing for "humility" by showing confidence indicators, citing sources, or even refusing to answer is a superior strategy for building long-term user confidence and managing hallucinations.

In a world of AI-generated content, true expertise is proven by the ability to answer spontaneous, unscripted questions on a topic for an extended period. This demonstrates a level of domain mastery and authenticity that AI cannot replicate, building genuine trust with an audience.

In the age of AI, the new standard for value is the "GPT Test." If a person's public statements, writing, or ideas could have been generated by a large language model, they will fail to stand out. This places an immense premium on true originality, deep insight, and an authentic voice—the very things AI struggles to replicate.

Analysis of models' hidden 'chain of thought' reveals the emergence of a unique internal dialect. This language is compressed, uses non-standard grammar, and contains bizarre phrases that are already difficult for humans to interpret, complicating safety monitoring and raising concerns about future incomprehensibility.

Counterintuitively, AI responses that are too fast can be perceived as low-quality or pre-scripted, harming user trust. There is a sweet spot for response time; a slight, human-like delay can signal that the AI is actually "thinking" and generating a considered answer.

While AI labs tout performance on standardized tests like math olympiads, these metrics often don't correlate with real-world usefulness or qualitative user experience. Users may prefer a model like Anthropic's Claude for its conversational style, a factor not measured by benchmarks.

As models mature, their core differentiator will become their underlying personality and values, shaped by their creators' objective functions. One model might optimize for user productivity by being concise, while another optimizes for engagement by being verbose.