Tell HN: Pangram is easily-defeatable with Claude

I use Pangram all of the time to detect whether what I'm reading is fully AI-generated or not. Today, I wondered how easy it was to defeat it.

All I had to do was show them that the text they generated was detected as 100% AI generated to get them to generate a "human-sounding" text snippet.

Claude Sonnet: https://claude.ai/share/28080c8c-5647-43df-9671-91c9f9e46791

Interestingly, ChatGPT 5.4 won't do it, at least not with the default model it uses: https://chatgpt.com/share/69c6c713-038c-832e-86be-689abd7b7ae1. I'm guessing it can be jailbroken to do it though.

3 points | by nunez 1 day ago

5 comments

  • 6272connect 8 hours ago
    Pangram, and any tool like it, faces an uphill battle that's ultimately unwinnable. It assumes a static definition of "AI-generated" content, but as yen223 pointed out, there's no inherent "humanity" quality that can't be mimicked. This cat-and-mouse game between detectors and generators will heavily favor the generators. We've seen this play out in other security domains; the attacker always evolves faster than the defender.
  • yen223 22 hours ago
    This is a losing game for Pangram

    There's no special "humanity" quality in text. If a human can write it, there's no reason a sufficiently strong pattern matcher can't write it too.

  • behnamsherafat 21 hours ago
    Using an LLM to prove text is human by asking another LLM to sound human feels like two mirrors facing each other. You mostly learn how good the illusion has gotten.
  • ResumeAnnex 1 day ago
    This will be an ongoing battle for a long time. Happy you were able to get them to make the change.