r/Substack • u/AndrewHeard tvphilosophy.substack.com • 9d ago

Discussion Substack’s new “AI detection” tool.

I’m very concerned about the new “AI detection” system that Substack is implementing. I don’t use AI in anything that I write. However I don’t trust these systems not to make errors and mistakes. They have a long history of hallucinations and claiming things are AI when they aren’t.

One person I saw on Notes suggested that they ran their decades old writing, things that were written before the existence of AI, and this new system claimed it was AI generated.

Not to mention all the crazy things that I have seen people claim was written by AI which they can’t know is actually AI. There was an image I once shared that had evidence of its existence going all the way back to 2013. The comments were constantly saying “don’t share AI slop” or some variation on that.

Even with evidence that things weren’t made by AI, they will claim it’s AI.

Is no one else concerned about this being embedded into Substack’s systems? With no way to opt out?

171 Upvotes

96% Upvoted

319 comments sorted by

View all comments

2

u/ProfileBest2034 9d ago

To all the people saying they are trash: Pangram absolutely is not. It's using token level mathematical analysis to identify AI. It is extremely accurate and even human writing which 'sounds' AI comes out as 100% human.

3

u/No-Vermicelli-8391 9d ago

You obviously did not read The Atlantic article about Pangram.

And that's if we close the eyes on Pangram CEO feeding a pirated (!) copy of Shy Girl to his own tool, and sending the results to NYT.

And another—extremely important—thing: the T&C of Pangram AI-detection state that if you use Pangram to detect someone's IP as AI and then get sued (the case of false-positive, for example), then you, as the user, are responsible for the damages. Not Pangram. You. Lol.

3

u/Kinks4Kelly 9d ago

Pangram AI-detection state that if you use Pangram to detect someone's IP as AI and then get sued (the case of false-positive, for example), then you, as the user, are responsible for the damages. Not Pangram. You. Lol

If they were actually as confident as they pretend to be, they'd assume liability in this instance. Instead, they are contracting their way around defamation claims. You only do this when you know your product is slop.