Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Claude users are mad that Anthropic's new watermarks will catch them using it

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 99 posts

Re: Claude users are mad that Anthropic's new watermarks will catch them using it

#81

Post by matheusmoreira »

fzeroracer wrote: post #77
matheusmoreira wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People should not be dismissing other people's work at all, AI generated or not. If you're looking for signals, it's because you want to do something based on the result. Maybe people should work on getting rid of that impulse instead.

If you're a gamer: Have you seen the amount of AI slop on Steam? Or the amount of poorly created translations banged out with AI? Or the amount of shitty decomps appearing daily developed with Claude? People are looking for signals because AI usage is a strong signal of poor quality trash. You are not going to overcome that barrier by complaining it's being made obvious of it or complaining that people are being 'pre…

> Have you seen the amount of AI slop on Steam?

I think I might have purchased some of those.

> Or the amount of shitty decomps appearing daily developed with Claude?

I'm developing one of those "shitty" decomps.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49267102

I'm still annotating the game myself though. Because I care about it and actually want to learn how it works.

> People are looking for signals because AI usage is a strong signal of poor quality trash.

Yes, I understand you want to dismiss works based purely on provenance without actually evaluating it on its merits.

Pre-judgement, as I said. Prejudice.

No, I will not help you do it.

> the only way you will overcome it is by proving you have something of actual worth

Ah yes, please continue. Do tell me about the worth of my own projects. GitHub and website links are on my profile.

Re: Claude users are mad that Anthropic's new watermarks will catch them using it

#82

Post by JohnFen »

matheusmoreira wrote: post #76
JohnFen wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But in the absence of a reliable signal (which I doubt this is anyway, so I'm speaking hypothetically), lots of people will get their work dismissed as AI-generated when it isn't.

People should not be dismissing other people's work at all, AI generated or not. If you're looking for signals, it's because you want to do something based on the result. Maybe people should work on getting rid of that impulse instead.

> People should not be dismissing other people's work at all, AI generated or not.

It depends on what the nature of the work is. If it's a work where technical soundness is the most important thing, then I agree. The criteria should be whether or not the work is sound.

But not everything is like that. Take fine art, for instance, where being human-made is a core part of its value.

Re: Claude users are mad that Anthropic's new watermarks will catch them using it

#83

Post by matheusmoreira »

JohnFen wrote: post #82
matheusmoreira wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People should not be dismissing other people's work at all, AI generated or not. If you're looking for signals, it's because you want to do something based on the result. Maybe people should work on getting rid of that impulse instead.

> People should not be dismissing other people's work at all, AI generated or not. It depends on what the nature of the work is. If it's a work where technical soundness is the most important thing, then I agree. The criteria should be whether or not the work is sound. But not everything is like that. Take fine art, for instance, where being human-made is a core part of its value.

It's fine to appreciate human art for what it is. I can empathize with the idea that the art is an external expression of the author's mind. The output of the weights of the author's brain, if you will.

I absolutely draw the line at thoughtlessly dismissing AI art as "slop" though.

Re: Claude users are mad that Anthropic's new watermarks will catch them using it

#84

Post by fzeroracer »

matheusmoreira wrote: post #81
fzeroracer wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're a gamer: Have you seen the amount of AI slop on Steam? Or the amount of poorly created translations banged out with AI? Or the amount of shitty decomps appearing daily developed with Claude? People are looking for signals because AI usage is a strong signal of poor quality trash. You are not going to overcome that barrier by complaining it's being made obvious of it or complaining that people are being 'pre…

> Have you seen the amount of AI slop on Steam? I think I might have purchased some of those. > Or the amount of shitty decomps appearing daily developed with Claude? I'm developing one of those "shitty" decomps. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49267102 I'm still annotating the game myself though. Because I care about it and actually want to learn how it works. > People are looking for signals because AI usage i…

> Yes, I understand you want to dismiss works based purely on provenance without actually evaluating it on its merits.

I have gone over almost 20,000 games on Steam because I focus on indie game curation. If you have actually paid attention around you to the kinds of things people are throwing out there then you would understand. I have seen games that literally do not function with a bunch of generated assets [1], games whose sole providence is combining generated hollow art with a generated hollow story [2]. You are dealing with thousands of people who are doing exactly the same thing as you, with the same quality and the same reasoning. Your work can and will get filtered out along with the rest of them because you are using the same signal in the same way.

[1] https://store.steampowered.com/app/2832640/DEAD_GET_REKT/

[2] https://store.steampowered.com/app/3694060/Manos_The_Hands_O...

Re: Claude users are mad that Anthropic's new watermarks will catch them using it

#85

Post by ModernMech »

matheusmoreira wrote: post #83
JohnFen wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> People should not be dismissing other people's work at all, AI generated or not. It depends on what the nature of the work is. If it's a work where technical soundness is the most important thing, then I agree. The criteria should be whether or not the work is sound. But not everything is like that. Take fine art, for instance, where being human-made is a core part of its value.

It's fine to appreciate human art for what it is. I can empathize with the idea that the art is an external expression of the author's mind. The output of the weights of the author's brain, if you will. I absolutely draw the line at thoughtlessly dismissing AI art as "slop" though.

It's a thought-terminating cliche at this point.

Re: Claude users are mad that Anthropic's new watermarks will catch them using it

#86

Post by matheusmoreira »

fzeroracer wrote: post #84
matheusmoreira wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Have you seen the amount of AI slop on Steam? I think I might have purchased some of those. > Or the amount of shitty decomps appearing daily developed with Claude? I'm developing one of those "shitty" decomps. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49267102 I'm still annotating the game myself though. Because I care about it and actually want to learn how it works. > People are looking for signals because AI usage i…

> Yes, I understand you want to dismiss works based purely on provenance without actually evaluating it on its merits. I have gone over almost 20,000 games on Steam because I focus on indie game curation. If you have actually paid attention around you to the kinds of things people are throwing out there then you would understand. I have seen games that literally do not function with a bunch of generated assets [1], g…

Sounds like you want a quality filter, not an AI filter.

> You are dealing with thousands of people who are doing exactly the same thing as you, with the same quality and the same reasoning.

So you've just concluded I'm one of those people you keep reviewing on Steam. Very nice.

Did you actually look at my projects?

Re: Claude users are mad that Anthropic's new watermarks will catch them using it

#87

Post by port11 »

pizzly wrote: post #8

Not sure why Anthropic is getting all the attention here. Google been doing this since at least late 2024[1] and openai I believe is doing this around 9 days ago[2]. [1] https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-024-08025-4 [2] https://help.openai.com/en/articles/8912793-provenance-signa...

I don’t think they are:

> One need look no further than Reddit to find evidence of brewing discontent, though other posters on the site are not in agreement.

It’s a post about some Reddit comments, a nothing-burger.

Re: Claude users are mad that Anthropic's new watermarks will catch them using it

#88

Post by JohnFen »

matheusmoreira wrote: post #83
JohnFen wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> People should not be dismissing other people's work at all, AI generated or not. It depends on what the nature of the work is. If it's a work where technical soundness is the most important thing, then I agree. The criteria should be whether or not the work is sound. But not everything is like that. Take fine art, for instance, where being human-made is a core part of its value.

It's fine to appreciate human art for what it is. I can empathize with the idea that the art is an external expression of the author's mind. The output of the weights of the author's brain, if you will. I absolutely draw the line at thoughtlessly dismissing AI art as "slop" though.

> I absolutely draw the line at thoughtlessly dismissing AI art as "slop" though.

Fair enough. I don't call it "slop" unless it is, and slop can certainly be made without involving computers. But genAI has without question made slop very easy to generate and so we're seeing quite a lot more of it these days.

I'm just saying why genAI art, sloppy or not, is of no interest to me and why I get angry when I've been deceived about it. Watermarking, if it were possible to reliably do (which I think it isn't), would solve that particular issue by making deception impossible. Without a reliable signal, a lot of stuff made after a certain date will inevitably and necessarily be suspect. Not saying that's right or wrong, just that it is. Maybe think of it as the audience being self-protective.

A reliable signal might even make acceptance of machine-generated art easier, by eliminating or reducing the chances that people will feel tricked.

Re: Claude users are mad that Anthropic's new watermarks will catch them using it

#89

Post by potsandpans »

SeriousM wrote: post #29

So we finally tackle the issue of ai-text pollution and probably found a way to clean up the internet (from now on), yet people start complaining that "their" output is marked as spam. Well, the solution is quite easy: start thinking on your own again and write the lines yourself. I welcome this watermarking. Finally it's an easy detectable signal that someone just generated some request/answer to waste my time by fo…

Oh look, another anti ai sermonizing flame bait comment at the top of the hackernews comment section.

That's so cool and insightful.

Post reply on HN