Tuhin Chakrabarty

tuhinchakr.bsky.social

16 September 2026 15:56

I trust no one but @vauhinivara.bsky.social to come up with something so good. It’s brilliantly researched and engages thoroughly with the space of AI detection. There is a funny bit in the article that talks about how I got introduced to @pangram.com and the rest is history !!

Ben Horrigan

ben.s91.media

16 September 2026 14:49

My new update to this rule is using @pangram.com to confirm whether the text is AI-generated... It's usually obvious, but it's always good to check they're not just a really bad copywriter with really good spelling.

Vauhini Vara

vauhinivara.bsky.social

16 September 2026 14:49

I profiled the startup behind Pangram, the AI detector everyone’s talking about. It works really, really well. I wanted to understand how they did it. and also: why people still don’t trust them. (also, news: Penguin Random House is using it.) gift link! ✨

Will Oremus

willoremus.com

13 August 2026 15:06

It might sound like a rhetorical question but I'm genuinely interested in how folks answer it. Obviously purveyors of AI writing don't want this. But what about people who hate AI slop but also disapprove of AI use in general, or worry deeply about false accusations? How do you weigh the tradeoff?

Will Oremus

willoremus.com

13 August 2026 15:06

The case for using Pangram as at least an indicator of likely AI writing is much stronger than it was for Turnitin/GPTZero. Its widespread use would also deter a lot of folks from even trying to pass off AI slop as authentic. Is that enough to justify it, or is any nonzero error rate intolerable?