{
  "video_id": "reddit_1vlghjq",
  "channel_slug": "ClaudeAI",
  "channel_handle": "r/ClaudeAI",
  "title": "People are worried about watermarks when the slop they put out is the biggest watermark that can be",
  "url": "https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1vlghjq/people_are_worried_about_watermarks_when_the_slop/",
  "external_url": null,
  "upload_date": "20260811",
  "published_at": "2026-08-11T12:47:02+00:00",
  "transcript": "At first I didn't like the idea but ultimately what does it change? If like me you use AI to code then there is something in the code that says Claude made it. So what? Not hiding from that. \n\nThe same people who would have issues with it are the ones who show no care in design, one shot apps/websites, and link to websites that are so generic and slop-like that the watermark doesn't even need to be seen. If you're creative enough and take the time to design and use AI as an executer, the watermark doesn't change much more... I mean Claude already writes \"Co-authored by Opus\" when it commits to Git. \n\nAnd for text... yeah AI writing is pure slop so the fact that you didn't take the time to write is not something you were ever going to hide. If it ads something when spell-checking I would agree it sucks but just reviewing the final draft allows you to remove whatever it added.\n\n\n\n--- Top Comments ---\n\n\n[18 upvotes] More than anything else, I think a lot of people fail to realize that neither humans nor AI have ever and likely will ever be able to consistently put out a finished product that does not itself go through rigorous third party human testing. I’m using AI to help create an app myself, but I’m doing a whole bunch of human testing with basically as many people as I can give developer codes to before I even consider generally marketing it. From there I can take the feedback I get and continue to work on the app, and then once everyone is happy, then I market it.  \n\nThis has always been true of human made apps. Why would we expect AI generated apps to be any different?\n\n[6 upvotes] It is yet another case of Anthropic wanting to control things beyond what they're paid for.\n\nBuild the tool, sell the tool. We shouldn't need to tell them to shut the fuck up and put the fries in the bag all the time.\n\n[4 upvotes] For clarification, say you use it for grammar, readability checks on a finished draft.  The output now is watermarked?  Because that’s a world of difference from it creating work from a prompt. \n\n[3 upvotes] completely agree, they can't even type with their own fingers responses on reddit, they copy paste paragraphs of AI slop and expect people to think its amazing... i think that if a watermark helps identify books made with AI so legit authors aren't potentially flagged as AI thats a good thing, hopefully it can be used that way and benefit original thinking and work and help preserve it. I use AI every day to augment me, but i would never expect someone to consume my AI slop and high five me. My body litteraly shuts down on reddit when i see the usual AI paragraph and i immediately lose interest.",
  "transcript_chars": 2654,
  "ingested_at": "2026-08-11T13:30:06.945150+00:00",
  "source": "reddit",
  "yt_meta": {
    "score": 82,
    "upvote_ratio": 0.84,
    "num_comments": 40,
    "author": "CutBulkMaintain",
    "is_self": true
  }
}