Discussion about this post

User's avatar
thepast's avatar

This is extremely funny.

Randall Randall's avatar

I lost some confidence in Pangram based on the Hacker News comments on this (otherwise unrelated) story: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49857899

It seemed to be AI-written to me, so when I saw some say Pangram told them "100% human" I used the free plan to check myself, and it said 29% AI. Others claimed Pangram told them "100% AI" and various other numbers, akin to rolling a D100. It could be that all those other people were just making it up, or not pasting in the whole article for some reason, but even if a lot of people are honestly holding it wrong, it at least means that you can't trust Pangram numbers that get reported without checking each discussed passage yourself.

18 more comments...

No posts

Ready for more?