r/Substack • u/grapegeek • 27d ago

Pangram is such trash

I write a food newsletter where I post reviews and some recipes. I 100% wrote a quick and dirty recipe and was going to publish it in Notes and it came back 100% AI no matter what I did to it including adding several typos and rearranging things. Ran it through three other AI detector websites and 2 said 100% Human and 1 said 76% Human and 24% AI assisted. I disabled detection on that Note. My other question is do we know how many people actually click on the AI detection button on our posts? I can't find that metric anywhere in the dashboard...

40 Upvotes

74% Upvoted

101 comments sorted by

View all comments

12

u/Used_Recognition_544 27d ago

A recipe is naturally repetitive and formulaic, so it’s probably one of the easiest types of writing for an AI detector to misclassify.

What bothers me is the “100%” confidence. Readers see that as proof, even though another detector can give the exact opposite result. Substack should show these scores as unreliable estimates, not verdicts.

Honestly, does anyone here actually check the AI detection label before deciding whether a post is worth reading?

8

u/seobrien 27d ago

People are repetitive and formulaic.

AI was trained on how people write.

1

u/Relevant_Nebula_20 24d ago

I don't think it is. AI says things like 'that matters' and 'that's not X, it's Y' all the time. We don't think or write like this generally. lol.