WIRED Investigation into Pangram AI Detector Draws Sharp Backlash
Critics including writers question the reporting and its implications for an AI detection tool.
TLDR
WIRED published a piece on Pangram's AI detection tool and its growing use in publishing. Multiple replies called the article embarrassing and irresponsible. Freelance writer Alex Bronzini-Vender posted a quote from the story with the remark that AI detection is racist. The same writer also described the piece as innuendo that should not have been published. Staff writer Will Oremus at The Atlantic said the reporting was interesting but noted it never supplied concrete examples of the tool making mistakes. The visible replies focus on the article's claims about the tool's accuracy and impact.
Combined views
—
6 Sources, first seen ago
Sources
TL 
Tom Lee@tjl@NatPurser The only thing that would be more suspicious is if he’d kept his camera placement static, preventing the reporter from seeing the objects (people? tech executives??) who might be listening, in the room, just off camera. Either way: damning
LY LysanderSpoonedher@spoonedher@MikeIsaac @WillOremus The question is fine, the focus on max's demeanor, and quoted from random professors regarding unrelated tools are unacceptable, unprofessional, and make me think that the author of said article is not someone trustworthy
NC nic carter@nic_carter@WIRED I think I figured out why high performers love Pangram and the mediocre revile it. Because the latter group know they will never be as good as a frontier model, and want to discredit the tool that exposes them for cheating their way through life
WA Will Anderson@wlanderson0@WIRED Pangram is providing an unbelievably valuable social service. This article is ridiculous
? 🥥🌴@Meritocrating@alexbronzini Racism is good, beautiful, and true.