Pangram's biggest flaw is users turning its scores into public shaming

From the source

Pangram hired an "attack dog" to shame alleged AI users on social media. But the campaign blurs two things that aren't the same: Pangram only somewhat reliably measures whether AI was used, while the shaming implies the person didn't think or work on their own. A high AI score hits a text built on hours of original research just as easily as one cranked out from a ten-second prompt. The article Pangram's biggest flaw is users turning its scores into public shaming appeared first on The Decoder.