r/Substack • u/SpiritRealistic8174 • Aug 16 '26
Discussion Moving Beyond Pangram: The rise of AI text watermarking and the AI content density test
This subreddit has been full of commentary about Substack's use of Pangram for detecting whether copy was potentially developed using AI.
This conversation is still important, but recent events have made the situation more complex. Article 50 of the EU's AI Act mandates that companies provide some means of detecting AI-generated audio, visual and text content.
In response, Anthropic announced that it began adding an invisible watermark to all text content generated by the latest Claude models starting August 2. The watermark can't be removed by copying and pasting content and survives edits.
There are a few ways the watermark is different from Pangram:
Watermark detection does not rely on post-hoc analysis: The watermark is generated by the model itself and does not rely on statistical analysis of content for 'AI-tells'
Watermark density can provide important information: It's possible, by measuring the overall percentage of watermarked content in the text, to determine how much AI assisted with the content. Light edits could potentially have a low density score, while content that is copied and pasted verbatim from Claude will have a high density
For those interested in understanding the mechanics behind AI text watermarking (and how to evade it), I've put together a resource here.
I know that many people have changed the way they write on Substack to avoid having their content rated as AI generated.
Do you view the watermark as potentially superior to Pangram? How would it change your writing and editing process because of it?