News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:SynthID by jamiecode on Thursday February 26, 2026 @02:08PM (#47170581)
The text watermarking is the more interesting problem here. Image watermarking is fairly tractable - you can embed a robust signal in spatial or frequency domains. Text watermarking works by biasing token selection at generation time, and detection is a statistical test over that distribution.

Which means short texts are basically useless. A 50-token reply has too little signal for the test to reach any confidence. The original SynthID text paper puts minimum viable detection at a few hundred tokens - so for most real-world cases (emails, short posts, one-liners) it just doesn't work.

The other thing: paraphrase attacks break it. Ask any other model to rewrite watermarked text and the watermark is gone, because you're now sampling from a different distribution. EU compliance built on top of this feels genuinely fragile for anything other than long-form content from controlled providers.

Re:SynthID by pegasus on Thursday February 26, 2026 @02:33PM (#47170912)
Long-form content from controlled providers is by far the lion's share of what needs this regulation, at least at the moment. Perfect is the enemy of good enough. Or at least of better than the status-quo.
Re:SynthID by dpe82 on Thursday February 26, 2026 @02:24PM (#47170794)
The act doesn't explicitly require watermarking, does it?
Re:SynthID by ekjhgkejhgk on Thursday February 26, 2026 @02:34PM (#47170918)
Link to the paper please?
Re:SynthID by doctorpangloss on Thursday February 26, 2026 @02:25PM (#47170798)
haha "you" say this, when your comment was written by an LLM! it's watermarked!