kat on X: "i personally think there are valid reasons to push back against watermarking imo: 1. the same watermarking techniques used to indicate that a text was generated by claude could be used to convey "this text was generated during a conversation with this specific user". i think it" / X
i personally think there are valid reasons to push back against watermarking imo: 1. the same watermarking techniques used to indicate that a text was generated by claude could be used to convey "this text was generated during a conversation with this specific user". i think it
i personally think there are valid reasons to push back against watermarking imo: 1. the same watermarking techniques used to indicate that a text was generated by claude could be used to convey "this text was generated during a conversation with this specific user". i think it is reasonable to expect that governments will eventually require the watermarks to carry additional information in the future. 2. from a consumer perspective, "using people without giving them credit" is not what is going on here. you are paying anthropic in exchange for a service. would you be happy to find out…
saved by
related reading
- How Claude's text watermarking worksanthropic.com
- Tenobrus (@tenobrus) on Xx.com
- The Mark of the Machinenewyorker.com
- How Claude marks AI-generated contentsupport.claude.com
- suchir.net/fair_use.htmlsuchir.net
- Detecting AI fingerprints: A guide to watermarking and beyond | Brookingsbrookings.edu
- In Defense of AI Writingevery.to
- How ChatGPT Could Embed a ‘Watermark’ in the Text It Generates - The New York Timesnytimes.com
- [2301.10226] A Watermark for Large Language Modelsarxiv.org
- God help me am I about to change my view on AI-assisted writing?rivalvoices.substack.com
- The Techniumkk.org
- AI Is Really Weirdwheresyoured.at