Anthropic secretly adds a watermark to the output of Claude: Reddit is in turmoil, and some users angrily denounced "digital tattoos" Anthropic recently decided to add a watermark to the content generated by Claude, which is to embed invisible code in the text produced by the chatbot to mark the content as generated by AI.

Anthropic secretly adds a watermark to the output of Claude: Reddit is in turmoil, and some users angrily denounced "digital tattoos." Anthropic recently decided to add a watermark to the content generated by Claude, which is to embed invisible code in the text produced by the chatbot to mark the content as generated by AI. The policy is in line with the EU's Artificial Intelligence Act transparency norms, which oblige tech companies to label AI-generated or edited content in a computer-readable way. Regulators may be satisfied, but some AI users are clearly not convinced, and Reddit has become a quarrel. One of the fiercest posts came from user visionode, whose account has been registered for less than three weeks. He believes that the watermarking system is a "harsh conspiracy" to make innocent chatbot users the victims. His core point is: Experts who are familiar with Claude can hide traces of use by rewriting or using other AI services, while ordinary users can only manipulate it. "Digital Tattoo" Debate: Who is the real victim? Visionode painted a portrait of the "victims": "Who will be caught? It's you - the student who asked Claude to help reorganize the text; the reporter who asked AI to summarize the 200 pages of interview transcripts; the writer who asked AI to provide synonyms. When these people are finished, they will all have a digital tattoo on their foreheads." However, these examples were quickly refuted: If reporters only use AI When summarizing the material, the watermark will not have any real impact unless he pastes the AI summary into the article intact; if a student directly copies the AI-rewritten paragraphs into the paper, it itself violates academic ethics. Other users did not support his anger. Some people just left a sentence of "look at this guy", while others advised him to "take a deep breath". Another critic denounced the watermark as "unethical" and "disgusting", emphasizing that he provided instructions, background information and countless modifications during the use of Claude. "Claude is just a tool. What kind of credit is it asking for?" However, the opponent responded that the watermark is not asking for credit, but to achieve traceability in a scenario where AI-generated content is prone to risks. There are also users who question it from a deeper level: cutting-edge AI models are generally trained by absorbing other people's works. Adding watermarks to such AI-generated content has a "terrifying irony" in itself. However, overall, most users still tend to support the watermark mechanism. One user's summary is quite representative: "The only reason why you don't want this mechanism to appear is that you want to lie to others." via AI News (auth