Like so many others, I tested this "wonder tool" out. Created a post in Claude that is 100% AI and posted it ... it scanned as 100% human. Ran it through a humanizer skill, and it shows as 100% human.
First of all, most professional writers now use some form of AI, whether for grammar checks, outlining, summarizing, title-tweaking, etc. I've been a self-employed writer for 20+ years, and AI is now embedded in my workflow. If you want to remain relevant, and continue earning a living as a writer, you have to adopt some level of AI.
Second, AI learns from humans and is getting better every day. So as AI learns to sound more human, more human content will be flagged as AI.
Finally, fear of being flagged as AI is leading some people to change their natural tone and style. Which means AI has indirectly influenced your writing.
The best course of action is to judge work on its quality and merit, not how it was created.
Like it or not, AI is here and is becoming an embedded part of the writing process. It's like criticizing people in the late-80s for using a word processor.
Craig, this is one of the BEST responses in this entire thread. Thank you for this. AI seems to be a hostile topic among writers so it’s nice to hear from a 20+ year writer with open-minded thoughts about it. Brilliant!
I write my own work, without AI. But since I’m not a native English speaker, I use AI to improve my grammar and style so my text doesn’t sound clunky. Detection software can tell. But ‒ is that a "crime" on my part?
Thanks for this, Kristi. Copying and pasting my note I wrote about all these shenanigans just the other day…
I’m so so bored of the AI this AI that AI this AI that. I’ve been a working writer for 25 years so don’t use AI to write my posts for me, as I love to write and after doing it for so long I’ve got pretty good at it. But I do use AI as an admin assistant as I’m shit at admin, especially if it involves maths.
So if someone who has less confidence in their writing uses AI to take their thoughts and ideas they’ve written down and make them flow better, I don’t care. Do you, really, if you really think about it?
If someone is using AI to come up with their ideas and write their posts and it has no original thought and feeling in it, I still don’t care but I also won’t be reading more of that person’s work. Not because I’m judging them but because I want the humanity in the writing. The joy, the pain, the fear, the excitement, the confusion that comes with being human. And I don’t need another AI to tell me that it wasn’t written by a human, I can tell.
Now can anyone please tell me how I turn off this AI scanner for my posts. As I’m shit at admin and I’ve not figured it out yet!
And reading your post answered my question! Thank you! 💙
Glad to have answered your question! And as far as using AI, I am so very neutral on this topic, it's not even funny lol. To each their own! And yes, i use it to help run my business as well.
I just write shit and from a couple tests it showed me 100 percent not ai. If someone tests any of my stories and it shows ai generated then ai ought to be the one complaining lol
I think it's silly to employ an AI detection tool. Slop is slop. Humans determine what is slop. If a post is awful, no one will interact with it. That's all the measurement we need.
I wrote an article about it, inspired by your article. I'm using AI, and it makes my writing better. I left a writing group who tried to make me feel guilty about it.
Brian, this is so true. Slop is slop even if it is 100% human lol. Thanks for this perspective and I'm sorry you had to leave your group over it. People are certainly good at online shaming, hey?
I'm completely against this new “detection tool.” Not because I use AI. I do, but not in the way you already assumed I do when I wrote that sentence. Already pre-judged before I even finished the thought. AI is a tool. Nothing more. Would you condemn a writer for using a typewriter vs a pen? A computer vs a typewriter? A ghost writer vs a computer? AI vs a ghost writer? Progress is not a sin. If it were, we'd still be moving our goods a services via horseback instead of a truck that has wheels.
I almost feel like everyone wants to judge how someone writes or what they write. Should we start running all illustrations through a similar tool, all music compositions or even all human words?... We recall foods that can actually kill us. Perhaps "the powers that be" need to determine what to really concentrate on.
What I'm grappling with is not my own writing (which is fully human, flaws and all), but that of people I follow. I clicked on the AI scanner for someone I subscribe to and admire and it came up as '100% AI assisted'. I clicked on another person I follow and they had disabled the AI detector. I'm wondering what to do with this- ie. does it change how I feel about subscribing to their work? In truth it does. I feel disappointed and misled, and am sitting with the question of whether to unsubscribe...
Hi Vicki, your comment here makes me sad (and a little frustrated if I'm honest). I have SO much to say on this topic (and yes I am writing about it, slowly), but in relation to this comment specifically, can I ask... Do you mean you might unsubscribe to the person who's writing you love but now says is AI generated, or the person who has disabled the AI detector? Or both?
Eva, I appreciate your question. I don't know at this stage. Just voicing that I feel confused about whether some of the voices I have connected with here are as genuine as they seemed.... as I said, I'm still sitting with it. And I guess my assumption about people turning off AI detection is that they want to hide their AI use, though I realise there could be other reasons for turning it off.
Vicki, just to clarify, I do think turning it off might also offer protection as far as AI scraping our work and then it's in the AI ethers that they never gave permission for. That's what some people are afraid of with this.
I'm wondering the same. It wasn't clear which she was referring to. And Eva, when you write your post please let me know. I'd love to read it. Seems like such a hot topic. I haven't had this much engagement in over a year lol.
I'm frightened. I have used AI in the past to do grammar, spelling and some editing as in cutting word count, though have always instructed it to stick to only my vocabulary and not to add anything at all or re-arrange anything. I have also brainstormed titles...it has saved me quite a lot of time - but I won't do it anymore. I will just go back to doing it all myself. Why open myself to the stress? Will continue to use AI for marketing plans, how to do the stuff I haven't a clue about in book production - and how to deal with my shitty neighbours.
Wrote a post I was very proud of. I was ready to hit "publish", and then I ran it through Pangram to double check. 100% AI it said. Every word of the post was mine. It sat in my drafts for a few days because I was embarrassed to publish something a robot didn't believe I wrote.. even though I did. 🩷🦩
One additional observation that concerns me: after I inserted photographs into my article, Pangram's score dropped from 95% human to 77% human. The article itself did not change. I wrote every word myself, and the photographs were my own original images taken with my personal Iphone camera. They were not AI-generated, edited, or enhanced in any way.
If adding my own unedited photographs can lower the reported "human" score, it raises questions about what Pangram is actually evaluating and how reliable these percentages are as an indicator of human authorship.
Kriszti, the real danger is not that writers use AI. It is that an unreliable detector may begin judging authenticity on their behalf.
A tool can identify linguistic similarities, but it cannot know where an idea came from, what lived experience shaped it, or whether the writer genuinely stands behind it. A false label can damage trust far more quickly than it can protect it.
For me, the important question is not whether technology assisted the process, but whether the thinking, responsibility, and final voice still belong to the writer.
I have subscribed to your publication and recommended it because I value honest discussions like this. I would be glad if you subscribed to and recommended mine as well, so thoughtful and credible ideas can travel further.
I know many writers who are leaving or are putting things in place to leave Substack. I am deactivating scanner but on every post and every edit it’s a pain. It is ironic how many anti AI bullies are now celebrating an Ai scanning for AI (badly) - but imposing this inaccurate prejudicial app on writers is unethical at best. As a neuro diverse writer I am also concerned at its racial and ND bias
I did the same experiment. I tested an essay written in 2015 and it tested positive for AI.
Personally, those coming down on people for using AI by using an AI tool are just... funny to me.
Like so many others, I tested this "wonder tool" out. Created a post in Claude that is 100% AI and posted it ... it scanned as 100% human. Ran it through a humanizer skill, and it shows as 100% human.
It is 100% AI
This is the post ... https://proudboomerwellness.substack.com/p/hitting-220-grams-of-protein-under
This tool is a joke ...
Hahahahahah I love when a thing implodes on itself 😆😆
These tools are so inaccurate.
First of all, most professional writers now use some form of AI, whether for grammar checks, outlining, summarizing, title-tweaking, etc. I've been a self-employed writer for 20+ years, and AI is now embedded in my workflow. If you want to remain relevant, and continue earning a living as a writer, you have to adopt some level of AI.
Second, AI learns from humans and is getting better every day. So as AI learns to sound more human, more human content will be flagged as AI.
Finally, fear of being flagged as AI is leading some people to change their natural tone and style. Which means AI has indirectly influenced your writing.
The best course of action is to judge work on its quality and merit, not how it was created.
Like it or not, AI is here and is becoming an embedded part of the writing process. It's like criticizing people in the late-80s for using a word processor.
One can use AI responsibly and retain full human control and editorial integrity. It's not a binary either/or discussion.
Craig, this is one of the BEST responses in this entire thread. Thank you for this. AI seems to be a hostile topic among writers so it’s nice to hear from a 20+ year writer with open-minded thoughts about it. Brilliant!
I write my own work, without AI. But since I’m not a native English speaker, I use AI to improve my grammar and style so my text doesn’t sound clunky. Detection software can tell. But ‒ is that a "crime" on my part?
No. It is not.
I think this is totally valid!
Thanks for this, Kristi. Copying and pasting my note I wrote about all these shenanigans just the other day…
I’m so so bored of the AI this AI that AI this AI that. I’ve been a working writer for 25 years so don’t use AI to write my posts for me, as I love to write and after doing it for so long I’ve got pretty good at it. But I do use AI as an admin assistant as I’m shit at admin, especially if it involves maths.
So if someone who has less confidence in their writing uses AI to take their thoughts and ideas they’ve written down and make them flow better, I don’t care. Do you, really, if you really think about it?
If someone is using AI to come up with their ideas and write their posts and it has no original thought and feeling in it, I still don’t care but I also won’t be reading more of that person’s work. Not because I’m judging them but because I want the humanity in the writing. The joy, the pain, the fear, the excitement, the confusion that comes with being human. And I don’t need another AI to tell me that it wasn’t written by a human, I can tell.
Now can anyone please tell me how I turn off this AI scanner for my posts. As I’m shit at admin and I’ve not figured it out yet!
And reading your post answered my question! Thank you! 💙
Glad to have answered your question! And as far as using AI, I am so very neutral on this topic, it's not even funny lol. To each their own! And yes, i use it to help run my business as well.
I just write shit and from a couple tests it showed me 100 percent not ai. If someone tests any of my stories and it shows ai generated then ai ought to be the one complaining lol
I think it's silly to employ an AI detection tool. Slop is slop. Humans determine what is slop. If a post is awful, no one will interact with it. That's all the measurement we need.
I wrote an article about it, inspired by your article. I'm using AI, and it makes my writing better. I left a writing group who tried to make me feel guilty about it.
Brian, this is so true. Slop is slop even if it is 100% human lol. Thanks for this perspective and I'm sorry you had to leave your group over it. People are certainly good at online shaming, hey?
It let me know it was not the right group for me. Buncha Luddites. ;-)
🙌
I'm completely against this new “detection tool.” Not because I use AI. I do, but not in the way you already assumed I do when I wrote that sentence. Already pre-judged before I even finished the thought. AI is a tool. Nothing more. Would you condemn a writer for using a typewriter vs a pen? A computer vs a typewriter? A ghost writer vs a computer? AI vs a ghost writer? Progress is not a sin. If it were, we'd still be moving our goods a services via horseback instead of a truck that has wheels.
I almost feel like everyone wants to judge how someone writes or what they write. Should we start running all illustrations through a similar tool, all music compositions or even all human words?... We recall foods that can actually kill us. Perhaps "the powers that be" need to determine what to really concentrate on.
What I'm grappling with is not my own writing (which is fully human, flaws and all), but that of people I follow. I clicked on the AI scanner for someone I subscribe to and admire and it came up as '100% AI assisted'. I clicked on another person I follow and they had disabled the AI detector. I'm wondering what to do with this- ie. does it change how I feel about subscribing to their work? In truth it does. I feel disappointed and misled, and am sitting with the question of whether to unsubscribe...
Hi Vicki, your comment here makes me sad (and a little frustrated if I'm honest). I have SO much to say on this topic (and yes I am writing about it, slowly), but in relation to this comment specifically, can I ask... Do you mean you might unsubscribe to the person who's writing you love but now says is AI generated, or the person who has disabled the AI detector? Or both?
No malice by the way, just genuinely interested. This whole topic fascinates me! ☺️
Eva, I appreciate your question. I don't know at this stage. Just voicing that I feel confused about whether some of the voices I have connected with here are as genuine as they seemed.... as I said, I'm still sitting with it. And I guess my assumption about people turning off AI detection is that they want to hide their AI use, though I realise there could be other reasons for turning it off.
Vicki, just to clarify, I do think turning it off might also offer protection as far as AI scraping our work and then it's in the AI ethers that they never gave permission for. That's what some people are afraid of with this.
Oh that's interesting to hear… what a minefield 😖
LOL you can say that again. It’s mind-numbing.
I'm wondering the same. It wasn't clear which she was referring to. And Eva, when you write your post please let me know. I'd love to read it. Seems like such a hot topic. I haven't had this much engagement in over a year lol.
I'm frightened. I have used AI in the past to do grammar, spelling and some editing as in cutting word count, though have always instructed it to stick to only my vocabulary and not to add anything at all or re-arrange anything. I have also brainstormed titles...it has saved me quite a lot of time - but I won't do it anymore. I will just go back to doing it all myself. Why open myself to the stress? Will continue to use AI for marketing plans, how to do the stuff I haven't a clue about in book production - and how to deal with my shitty neighbours.
LOL dealing with shitty neighbors is the best use I’ve ever heard for AI hahahaa.
And I have to say it's been remarkably helpful!
Wrote a post I was very proud of. I was ready to hit "publish", and then I ran it through Pangram to double check. 100% AI it said. Every word of the post was mine. It sat in my drafts for a few days because I was embarrassed to publish something a robot didn't believe I wrote.. even though I did. 🩷🦩
Ugh. That's utter garbage!!! I hate that AI has made everyone question everyone now.
One additional observation that concerns me: after I inserted photographs into my article, Pangram's score dropped from 95% human to 77% human. The article itself did not change. I wrote every word myself, and the photographs were my own original images taken with my personal Iphone camera. They were not AI-generated, edited, or enhanced in any way.
If adding my own unedited photographs can lower the reported "human" score, it raises questions about what Pangram is actually evaluating and how reliable these percentages are as an indicator of human authorship.
Interesting. Because I believe it's only supposed to evaluate the text.
Thought the same thing. I have no idea why it did that.
Kriszti, the real danger is not that writers use AI. It is that an unreliable detector may begin judging authenticity on their behalf.
A tool can identify linguistic similarities, but it cannot know where an idea came from, what lived experience shaped it, or whether the writer genuinely stands behind it. A false label can damage trust far more quickly than it can protect it.
For me, the important question is not whether technology assisted the process, but whether the thinking, responsibility, and final voice still belong to the writer.
I have subscribed to your publication and recommended it because I value honest discussions like this. I would be glad if you subscribed to and recommended mine as well, so thoughtful and credible ideas can travel further.
I know many writers who are leaving or are putting things in place to leave Substack. I am deactivating scanner but on every post and every edit it’s a pain. It is ironic how many anti AI bullies are now celebrating an Ai scanning for AI (badly) - but imposing this inaccurate prejudicial app on writers is unethical at best. As a neuro diverse writer I am also concerned at its racial and ND bias