Economists push back on Pangram AI-detection policing of academic writing
paulnovosad · x · 2026-10-22
Reacting to Barbara Biasi's thread on people running documents through Pangram and erupting at AI-positive results, economist Paul Novosad reflects on the downsides of "Pangram policing" in academia.
- He oscillates between "I don't care about the score as long as it communicates decent ideas" and "if it's AI-written I won't bother reading it"
- He argues hybrid texts where authors use AI to improve language and strengthen logical constructs can be legitimate; outrage at every detection hit isn't always warranted
- The harder unresolved question: how to assign credit for academic and intellectual work when AI is in the loop — he admits having no clue
Related event: Scholars Debate Pangram AI Detector's False Alarms in Academia(3 posts)→
More from AGI Musings
- Grady Booch Slams Altman and Amodei: AGI Hype Is Irrational and Untrustworthy — Grady_Booch · 2026-10-22
- Crosby trains judge models to evaluate legal AI where no unit tests exist — graceisford · 2026-10-22
- BaseLabs open-sources mammoth-1 and elephant-1, top-ranked decision models — saranormous · 2026-10-22
- AI-generated short dramas wipe out makeup artists, extras and lighting crews — TuhinChakr · 2026-10-22
- Seth, Block and Tononi in Nature: AI isn't conscious and probably won't be — Justgototheeffinmoon · 2026-10-22
- Tyler Cowen: Reading AI Writing Is an Option on Future Connections Worth Near Zero — paulnovosad · 2026-10-22