It’s an interesting subject, so I was dissapointed when it became clear that this text is written by AI. AI uses the following structure very often: “It’s not X, it’s Y”, so the list below tells me it’s AI beyond doubt.
I.
-
This is not speculation. This is not inference from supply chain tightness or price movements or anecdotal reports from frustrated procurement officers. This is the documented operational reality of…
-
This is not an analysis of a commodity market experiencing temporary tightness. This is a reconnaissance report from the front lines of a new form of economic warfare
-
This is not the blunt instrument of a traditional export ban. This is a scalpel.
-
The pattern suggests not reactive retaliation but proactive strategy.
-
The restrictions announced in 2023, 2024, and 2025 are not isolated policy responses to specific trade disputes. They are nodes in an integrated campaign
-
Tungsten is not the final escalation. It is another proof of concept.
-
The question for Western policymakers and corporate strategists and institutional investors is not whether to take this seriously (…) The question is what to do about it
II.
-
This is not marketing rhetoric from mining promoters or special pleading from industry lobbyists. This is physics.
-
These properties are not arbitrary. They emerge from tungsten’s electronic structure
-
This is not an abstract supply chain concern. This is industrial capacity disappearing in real time
III.
- This is not a simple on-off switch. It is a tunable instrument with multiple control parameters
(Anything further is for paid subscribers.)
I am most likely unable to spot all AI-generated articles, but when I start noticing that a typical AI giveaway appears so many times, it bothers me. In the same way as that I probably couldn’t spot all the English language errors, but when there are so many that I start noticing them, it becomes annoying and it undermines the credibility of the author. Especially given the fact that this article doesn’t cite any sources.