Substack adds an AI detector to help spot blogs written by no one

Substack 新增 AI 检测工具，助力识别“无人撰写”的博客

Substack will now help users determine whether what they’re reading may have been written by AI. A new tool coming to the platform can scan posts, notes, replies, and comments to provide an estimate of how much text could be AI-generated or written with AI assistance, according to a blog post published on Tuesday.

Substack 现在将帮助用户判断他们阅读的内容是否由 AI 撰写。根据周二发布的一篇博客文章，该平台推出了一款新工具，可以扫描文章、笔记、回复和评论，并估算其中有多少文本可能是由 AI 生成或在 AI 辅助下完成的。

The tool is powered by an AI detection company called Pangram and is rolling out across the web and the iOS app, with an Android launch coming “soon.” Readers can analyze content longer than 100 words by choosing the “Scan for AI text” option from the three-dot menu in the top-right corner of a post.

该工具由一家名为 Pangram 的 AI 检测公司提供技术支持，目前正逐步在网页端和 iOS 应用中上线，Android 版本也将“很快”推出。读者只需点击文章右上角的三点菜单，选择“扫描 AI 文本”（Scan for AI text）选项，即可分析超过 100 字的内容。

Substack co-founder and CEO Chris Best says the Pangram integration is meant to increase transparency on the platform as AI becomes more prevalent on social media. “The core problem is not people using AI, or the quality of its output,” Best writes. “The problem is when there is a mismatch between a reader’s expectation and reality, especially when they unwittingly invest their attention in something with no human thought on the other end. That’s Claudefishing.”

Substack 联合创始人兼首席执行官 Chris Best 表示，随着 AI 在社交媒体上日益普及，集成 Pangram 旨在提高平台的透明度。Best 写道：“核心问题不在于人们是否使用 AI，也不在于其输出质量。问题在于读者的期望与现实之间存在错位，尤其是当他们无意中将注意力投入到背后没有任何人类思考的内容上时。这就是所谓的‘Claudefishing’（伪装成人类的 AI 写作）。”

In line with this change, Substack will also allow creators to explain their writing process to readers with a new “How I make this” statement. Writers can scan their drafts with Pangram, too, and will have an option to report inaccurate results.

配合这一变化，Substack 还将允许创作者通过新增的“我如何创作此文”（How I make this）声明，向读者解释其写作过程。作者也可以使用 Pangram 扫描自己的草稿，并有权对不准确的检测结果进行反馈。

Best notes that “Pangram can only detect whether AI was used to make the text, not whether great human care went into creating it, nor whether AI tools were used as a source.” But the goal, according to Best, is to make it easier for someone to choose to invest their time reading a blog post. “When readers have to wonder if what they’re reading is real, it undermines trust in authorship and threatens the livelihood of writers — including those who use AI tools thoughtfully to produce work they believe in,” Best writes. “Platforms that reward fakeness will create a race to the bottom.”

Best 指出：“Pangram 只能检测文本是否由 AI 生成，无法判断创作者是否投入了大量心血，也无法判断 AI 工具是否仅被用作参考资料。”但据 Best 所述，其目标是让读者能更轻松地决定是否值得花时间阅读某篇博客。Best 写道：“当读者不得不怀疑所读内容是否真实时，这会破坏对作者身份的信任，并威胁到创作者的生计——包括那些深思熟虑地使用 AI 工具来创作自己所信奉作品的作者。奖励虚假内容的平台只会引发一场逐底竞争。”