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

Check if a file was made with Claude

claude.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 144 posts

Re: Check if a file was made with Claude

#101

Post by nnevatie »

huhtenberg wrote: post #97

For anyone wondering who the text watermarking works: Instead of using an arbitrary random number generator to pick the next word, watermarking uses a secret key and a few words that come before to settle what word the model should pick. https://www.anthropic.com/news/claude-text-watermark * Edited the above from initially asking if anyone has any ideas how it works. Found the answer, rewrote the comment.

They basically twiddle with the distribution of used output tokens so that the pattern is recognizable by machine means. Nothing to do with special characters.

Re: Check if a file was made with Claude

#102

Post by sleepybrett »

AmazingTurtle wrote: post #41
Retr0id wrote: post #24

Under what circumstances does the metadata get added? When Claude Code CLI needs a media file usually I just see it run an imagemagick or ffmpeg command to create one, which isn't going to have C2PA metadata. Edit: I asked Opus 5 for "a jpg of a cat" via the web chat. It did it by writing an svg and then rendering that to a jpeg. Clicking the "download" button saved a jpg which did have C2PA metadata, seemingly injec…

Well, guess they are just trying to conform all the weird EU checkmarks

I'm not sure that 'preventing ai-generated fraud' is really a 'weird checkmark'

Re: Check if a file was made with Claude

#103

Post by AareyBaba »

bilalq wrote: post #100
mhitza wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is where their responsibility ends in terms of the EU AI Act. And that is fine and how it should be, no secret watermarks.

There's no way text watermarking isn't causing a degradation in writing quality.

Text watermarking will surely cause a degradation in quality writing.

There's is no text watermarking that doesn't cause a decline in writing quality.

Writing quality will surely deteriorate if text watermarking is implemented.

Re: Check if a file was made with Claude

#104

Post by huhtenberg »

cm2187 wrote: post #78

Does code also get watermarked? Surely you can't add non printable characters, except perhaps in comments?

Much harder to do apparently, but they can still watermark comments.

https://www.anthropic.com/news/claude-text-watermark, Ctrl-F for "What about code?"

Re: Check if a file was made with Claude

#105

Post by andai »

The idea of forcing an entity (or entire categories of entity) to add traceable watermarks to all the work they create is... an interesting precedent.

Translating that into the human realm, it would be like if every digital thing you touched were "fingerprinted" with your identity, or at least with a proof of what category of individual you have been categorized as.

Due to the flood of AI, which may soon become indistinguishable from human video, I expect to see something similar. Blue checkmark, but for humans.

Re: Check if a file was made with Claude

#106

Post by pixl97 »

dgellow wrote: post #98
pixl97 wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, if we're developing an AGI do you expect it not to be able to generate misinformation?

I have no idea how you’re reading that from my comment

Associations are generally two ways. You could possibly build something that just generated misinformation in a non-generalized way, but you cannot build a generalized writing machine that can't write misinformation.

I mean, I got what you were trying to say, I just turned it around on you using the same framework.

Re: Check if a file was made with Claude

#107

Post by [deleted] »

Retr0id wrote: post #91
panarky wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

C2PA cryptographically guarantees that the bytes came from a hardware/software signer and that the signed payload has not been modified since that signature was applied. So no, C2PA is not as easy to spoof as EXIF. And no, the existence of DRM doesn't validate the integrity or the provenance of the bytes.

And what happens when someone tells the hardware signer to sign the bytes of a fake image? What happens when someone extracts the signing key? The presence of cryptography doesn't magically make something trustworthy.

[deleted]

Re: Check if a file was made with Claude

#108

Post by seplox »

panarky wrote: post #96
Retr0id wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And what happens when someone tells the hardware signer to sign the bytes of a fake image? What happens when someone extracts the signing key? The presence of cryptography doesn't magically make something trustworthy.

Just because you can imagine how a thing could theoretically be broken does not make it broken. It's like saying a prisoner has the same freedoms as everyone else because he could theoretically escape.

We've been here before: https://blog.elcomsoft.com/2011/04/nikon-image-authenticatio...

Re: Check if a file was made with Claude

#109

Post by Retr0id »

panarky wrote: post #96
Retr0id wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And what happens when someone tells the hardware signer to sign the bytes of a fake image? What happens when someone extracts the signing key? The presence of cryptography doesn't magically make something trustworthy.

Just because you can imagine how a thing could theoretically be broken does not make it broken. It's like saying a prisoner has the same freedoms as everyone else because he could theoretically escape.

It's not a theory, I've done it.

Here's a cryptographically signed + timestamped photo of me winning the lottery: https://verify.contentauthenticity.org/?source=https%3A%2F%2...

Would you like to buy my winning ticket from me?

(Compare against winning numbers and draw timestamp at https://www.euro-millions.com/results/28-08-2026 )

Re: Check if a file was made with Claude

#110

Post by basedpolymer »

dgellow wrote: post #45
basedpolymer wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most critics of watermarking have no idea how it works. Yet there are valid arguments against (and for) it, but they prefer to be misleading

What are the valid arguments against? Is it about the fact that the output isn’t “optimal”?

Rather, concerns related to user identification combined with copyright issues

I don't believe it, but I still haven't seen any in-depth discussions on these issues

Post reply on HN