What if you gave Claude a document that was 100% written by you, asking it if anything could be adjusted for clarity, and the only reason it modified any words or structure was in order for it to embed its "Authored by AI" watermark? ๐ค
@TokenGremlin "The danger isnโt just whether the watermark works. Itโs that nobody can control what society later decides the watermark means."
DISCLAIMER: AI wrote that in my discussion with it on the topic. I'm just the meat proxy.
@data_gent@johnennis What if AI was used on an early draft that underwent sufficient review, etc but enough of the fingerprint remained to taint the final text?
Just think. Humans and companies have been getting away with using content written by human copywriters all this time! Those copywriters should have been watermarking their work.
@Dan_Jeffries1 I'm almost certain this post was written either completely or partially by AI. But I don't care. Because I agree with what it says, and that should be all that matters.
@data_gent@johnennis I can't wait for the first lawyer to use the "this law is invalid because AI wrote it" defence in court. It's meaningless. But that doesn't mean it won't potentially sway human judges or jurors.