I think it's pretty dishonest of Anthropic to frame their watermark as EU regulation compliance. The EU regulation, from my understanding, requires AI content to be labeled for human viewers. In the meanwhile the Anthropic new release on the watermark says this.

> The difference between watermarked and un-watermarked text will not be distinguishable to readers

https://www.anthropic.com/news/claude-text-watermark

Which is to say, it does not actually meet the EU AI act requirements which require transparency to humans. Not to mention that if the detection requires access to the base models, it makes anthropic the only entity who gets the say on if a piece of text comes out of Claude. Anthropic is both the player and the referee here.

If there is one takeaway you should have from this fiasco it is that you should be wary of using tools that doesn't serve your needs and your needs only.

▲

cubefox 2 hours ago | parent [-]

> The EU regulation, from my understanding, requires AI content to be labeled for human viewers.

How would that work? Claude appending " written by AI" to each of its messages? That would both be impractical and useless.

	▲	inigyou 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I think there are two separate requirements? One that if you post something like an AI video on the internet or anywhere else, you must label it as AI. And another one that AI providers must watermark their outputs. If you get caught uploading watermarked media without the clear label, you're in big trouble, mister.