This article gives me vibes that someone wrote a few lines outlining the situation and asked the AI to write the article itself. Interestingly though, I think most people would just rather read the outline, less time wasted and less llm.

A part that screams AI would be:

This wasn’t subtle venue security—your biometric data became part of the artistic statement, whether you consented or not.

"This isn't this--it's that" is an extremely common AI sentence structure, further exposed by the fact that the part before the em-dash doesn't even make sense to begin with. No one was asking themselves whether it was part of subtle venue security.

As a sidenote, sometimes I read sentences like this and I wonder "could this ever even have been written by a human?" I think that there's a very low chance that this article didn't have at least some amount of AI involved, but I know that somewhere out there there must be some people who actually write like this. And that's kind of sad.

tbh I don't even know why I even wrote this, the entire article appears to be one big example of generic AI writing

But that's what capitalism is all about! Efficiency.

Now one journal-ist can produce hundreds of art-ickles per hour!

/s