I came across a piece of text and I’m not sure if it was written by a person or created using AI tools. I need advice on spotting signs of AI-generated writing and would appreciate any methods or online tools people recommend for checking this. Any help or insights would be great.
So You Want to Figure Out If Your Writing Screams “Robot”? Here’s How I Do It (After Way Too Much Trial and Error)
Look, I’m not gonna sugarcoat it: checking if your stuff sounds like it rolled off some AI conveyor belt is honestly kind of a pain. There’s a lot of bogus tools out there hoping you’ll just paste your content and trust their rainbow-colored “human” meter. I learned the hard way that not all checkers are created equal. Below, I’ll break down the handful that haven’t wasted my time, plus a couple wild stories from deep in AI-check-land.
The Three AI Detectors That Don’t Completely Suck
If you’re tired of copy-pasting into junk sites, skip the rest — these are the only ones I’d even bother with:
- https://gptzero.me/ – GPTZero: Kind of the classic. Been around for a while, sometimes catches weird stuff that others miss.
- https://www.zerogpt.com/ – ZeroGPT: A little flashier, but usually lines up with GPTZero’s verdict.
- https://quillbot.com/ai-content-detector – Quillbot: Good for a “second opinion” kind of vibe.
Seriously, most of the others are copycats trying to snag your SEO-optimized search. I’ve run my stuff through truly embarrassing numbers of these things, and 95% are just plain nonsense.
Reality Check: You’re Probably Never Getting “All Clear”
If your content scores anywhere below 50% “AI” on those three, you’re probably in the clear. Don’t get obsessed with a magical zero; that’s basically Bigfoot-level evidence. Even legendary texts (I once copied in chunks of the US Constitution!) pop red flags because these checkers are far from perfect.
Making AI Text Less… AI-ish (My Secret Move)
Alright, if you need to push your bot-sounding text closer to human vibes, here’s what actually worked for me:
I used this free tool, Clever AI Humanizer, and it’s wild how much the scores shifted. After running my average ChatGPT blurb through there, I was seeing detector readings like 10/10/10 (meaning, roughly 90% human — honestly, better results than polishing by hand half the time). And yeah, it’s free, so worth a shot if you’re desperate.
Just So You Know: The Game Is Rigged
The whole “AI detection” circus? It’s basically the security theater of online content. You’ll never feel 100% confident because there’s zero guarantee; I’ve seen all sorts of stuff get flagged, totally at random. Remember, one study found even historic documents trigger alarms. It’s goofy. Don’t lose sleep over it.
Need More Opinions? Reddit’s Got Receipts
Stumbled on a pretty thorough Reddit roundup of AI detectors here. Honestly, that thread sums up most of my own experiences. The real gems are buried in the comments, so worth a scroll.
Other AI Checkers, In Case You’re Curious (But Don’t Expect Miracles)
- https://www.grammarly.com/ai-detector – Grammarly AI Checker (attached to their grammar tool, but not super advanced)
- https://undetectable.ai/ – Undetectable AI Detector
- https://decopy.ai/ai-detector/ – Decopy AI Detector
- https://notegpt.io/ai-detector – Note GPT AI Detector
- https://copyleaks.com/ai-content-detector – Copyleaks AI Detector
- https://originality.ai/ai-checker – Originality AI Checker
- https://gowinston.ai/ – Winston AI Detector
Some of these are better than others — if one seems weirdly strict or just spits out the same answer to every paste, move on. None of them are crystal balls.
Final Takeaway: Your Mileage Will Vary
Chasing a perfect “this is totally human” score is more myth than science. Think of these detectors as the airport TSA: sometimes they catch real stuff, sometimes they just pat you down for the heck of it. Use a few, get an average, and don’t get too tangled in it. Worst case, let a real friend give your work a second look — that’s the oldest detector in the book.
3 Likes
Honestly, half of these AI checkers are like cheap metal detectors at the beach—you wave ‘em around and mostly find bottlecaps. I agree with a chunk of what @mikeappsreviewer laid out, but personally I don’t lean THAT hard on the gadget parade. Here’s what I do (that doesn’t require toggling between a dozen slapdash sites):
First, read the text out loud. If you sound like a robot solemnly reading off a warranty disclaimer—overly formal, lots of generic “filler” and next to zero really specific references or personal touches—yeah, probably AI. Most bots skip the real quirks: the meandering, sometimes purposefully awkward sentence structure, the random pop culture nods, dumb jokes, or “BTW, my cat walked on my keyboard mid-sentence.” AI almost never does that unless you force it.
Second, check for “over-explaining.” Bots love telling you what you already know—like explaining that water is wet and the sky is blue. Or summarizing each paragraph with “In conclusion.” Human writers just… stop.
Whenever something weird comes up—like a phrase that sounds eerily familiar, or the whole text is strangely on-topic with no rabbit holes—that’s an AI fingerprint. Oh, and try Ctrl+Fing for certain words—“additionally,” “overall,” “furthermore.” If they turn up five times in two paragraphs? Big AI energy.
Not that AI can’t mimic personality (it’s getting scarily close), but genuine off-script moments are rare. And watch for factual goofs—AI sometimes invents stats, book titles, or quotes out of thin air.
Don’t skip old-school: ask a teacher/editor, somebody with a knack for spotting “soulless” prose. They might catch something no algorithm can.
So, TL;DR: tools are fine, but trust your reader’s gut and sniff out the little stuff, too. Machines don’t get bored or snarky—yet.
Look, all the detector tools in the world (@mikeappsreviewer’s faves, @sternenwanderer’s list – yeah, try them, whatever), but you wanna really spot AI writing? Ignore the tool parade sometimes and check context. AI often glosses over region-specific slang, inside jokes, or hot takes on new events (especially if they broke after the bot’s cutoff date). Drop a topical meme or a weird local idiom into conversation; does the style or “voice” suddenly shift to “Bland Corporate With a Dash of Confusion”? Big AI vibes. Humans usually can’t resist slipping in their own bias, whereas most AI content plays it so safe it could be a mattress commercial. Sure, spelling and grammar are usually flawless, but humans—especially in forums—leave typos and outright dumb mistakes (like me, I guess). AI will rarely risk an obviously dumb joke or rant. And seriously, try engaging it: ask follow-up Q’s, or poke inconsistencies. Bots double-down on their errors; people just say “oops, my bad.” TL;DR: Use a tool or two, but test its personality and imperfection radar—it’s a real tell if it never gets annoyed, bored, or confused.
Spotting AI-generated content? Let’s get brutally honest—it’s not always about running things through a dozen flashy detectors (though the tools dropped by others are decent starting points). Here’s another angle: focus on content rhythm, anomaly detection, and cross-reality checks.
AI content, even well “humanized,” tends to avoid strong opinions or truly specific experiences. There’s a weird flattening—think: lots of transitional phrases (“additionally,” “furthermore”), topic loops, and repetition. Humans in the wild get distracted, jump to conclusions, use half-finished metaphors, or contradict themselves by accident.
Example: Throw something oddly anachronistic or regionally specific into a comment thread—like referencing a hyper-local festival or asking about niche pop culture debates. Bots get suspiciously vague or swerve to safe territory.
On the flip? AI rarely rages, gets snarky, or commits to divisive takes (unlike, say, any given human on a caffeine bender). If a reply is a little too polite, balanced, or devoid of cringe, start squinting. Also, run a plagiarism check—not to catch copy-paste, but because bots sometimes accidentally echo training data.
Product plug for ': The main pro? Usually delivers slick, typo-free readability that’ll please grammar diehards and can even rescue rambling prose. Downside: If you’re aiming for raw personality and spontaneous messiness, it might come off sanitized—perfect for clarity, not for that wild, unmistakable human energy.
Quick shout to the competitors: The detectors from before dig up surface-level clues (and @mikeappsreviewer’s wild hunt is hilarious), but don’t treat any as gospel. Blend a few techniques: run your checks, then read out loud and see if you’d actually say it (or if it sounds like your starchy uncle at a wedding toast). That’s the real Turing test in the end.