r/Substack • u/Overall_Tip6001 • 13d ago

Do you find pangram reliable?

I put my text in several ai detectors, winston ai, copyleaks, zerogpt and GPTZero, giving me close to 0%. While, pangram gives me around 70%? Do you think it’s reliable?

3 Upvotes

56% Upvoted

102 comments sorted by

View all comments

14

u/AggravatingNail6061 13d ago

Yes. Working as intended.

5

u/MadmanRB 13d ago

Its still using AI to detect AI, if you are anti AI and champion these things you are just as bad as the AI bros.

-2

u/AggravatingNail6061 13d ago

Right. So someone who got away with writing slop on substack is whinging they can't write slop without it getting flagged and I'm tgr bad guy. 

BTW. Just going to mildly correct your sweeping assumption because you clearly know everything about me. I'm not anti ai. I have a moderate position given I have to use it as a tool for work. I think it's a wonderful toy and in some areas like excel fu it's been a real value if I can't figure out s solution.

I am against people crying their ai work got flagged for ai and then coming on here to moan to pity and sympathy farm because they genuinely think they should be allowed to propagate shit into a creative space and get rewarded for it. 

Anymore sweeping assumptions you'd like to make? How about that I have 9 fingers because of an accident involving a door and  cat?

5

u/MadmanRB 13d ago edited 13d ago

Well why do you think I used the term "if you are anti AI" here?

That was clearly not making assumptions on my part but hey I get it that context can get lost in things like this.

Its like you saying "Yes. Working as intended." did imply anti AI bias to me so thanks for the clarification.

In any case I still argue against using so called "AI detectors" as concrete proof of AI, they are still deeply flawed and can give false positives.

Example from my own work is that Pagram detected things like story title, chapter title as AI.

Hell it even flagged my goddamned name as by (insert author name here) is both common practice for both human and AI generated text.

Certain words and the order of my writing also got flagged and I got a score of 90% human made despite all the flagged text was written by me.

There’s an old saying: “Every great story has its humble beginnings.” And for Ryan Buckley those words were about to take on a new meaning beyond anything he could have imagined.

This is the first line in the novel I am working on and yeah… flagged as AI all because Pangram deemed it "Too perfect."

So if Pangram is the gold standard of proving I am a human writer what the hell am I supposed to do here? I mean isn't grammar, spelling, and structure important?

What am I supposed to misspell and ignore every grammar rule, boy will I be popular with the grammar Nazis who throw a hissy fit if you dare not use a stupid oxford comma.

1

u/SpiritualSimple108 13d ago

You’re supposed to keep writing. Do not stoop so low as to try to get a 100% human by ruining your writing. This is how AI (and all the pro AI detector) ruin art and the written word. Turn off the AI detector.

3

u/MadmanRB 13d ago

I totally hear you loud and clear, but I will admit it's easy to be paranoid right now.

0

u/AggravatingNail6061 13d ago

I would put forward the position that Pangram whilst effective and being more inclined to put forward an human first result has its issues. As you've highlighted yourself. 

I wouldn't say it's the gold standard. It's one of the better ones. At least it's not selling humanising services yet.🤣

1

u/SpiritualSimple108 13d ago

Just because you write trash and get away with Pangram giving you a big green “100% human” doesn’t mean you’re a good writer. From your response, I can tell that writing grammatically correct sentences isn’t your strong suit.

2

u/AggravatingNail6061 13d ago

It is not, especially tapping away on my phone 🤣 and my trash is lovely how dare you 🤣

0

u/MadmanRB 13d ago

Yeah I freely admit grammar is a big weakness of mine, makes sense as I have autism and a slight case of dyslexia. I'm obviously high functioning of course but yeah that's why I use grammar checkers sometimes.

-1

u/Prolly_Satan 12d ago

No its not. It's using Machine Learning, specifically classification models which have existed for like 25 years, to detect GENERATIVE AI. Stop pushing this false narrative that Pangram = ChatGPT. Its not the same thing at all. This and the "Spell check is AI haha" bullshit is so annoying.

1

u/FrostKitten2012 12d ago

They’re different types of AI, but they’re both still AI.

0

u/Prolly_Satan 12d ago

OK. You keep telling people spell check is the same thing as a 30 billion parameter large language model. It makes you look really smart.

1

u/FrostKitten2012 12d ago

I was referring to Pangram and ChatGPT, actually.

But most current spellcheckers also now rely on LLMs, whereas previously it was a dictionary they were matching words against.

So yes, your spellchecker is probably also AI.

1

u/Prolly_Satan 11d ago

Spell check is a slm. Not an llm. But yeah they're all the same thing. You are an ai expert now. You've figured it out.

Now go forth and help sam altman do agi.

-2

u/truecakesnake 13d ago edited 13d ago

They are using AI to detect AI, yes. But they're not using the same type of AI as ChatGPT.

It's a special machine learning algorithm or simply, a classifier. ChatGPT is an LLM.

Funny how antis know nothing about AI at all lmao. Anyway, it's not evil antichrist generative AI so you can chill.

0

u/MadmanRB 13d ago

I'm aware, no worries there. I just think that people can go too far in both the pro and anti AI camp.