The Ledger
Every statement that passed quotation and attribution checks. Mix any filter with any other: certainty 1/5, debate potential 5/5, or both at once.
why aren't all 3 resolved? a statement only gets an assessment when the public record can support or contradict it. opinions and what-ifs never can, and 0 checkable ones are still open, waiting for their date. predictions held up or didn't; assertions are supported or contradicted. on every card: ▮▮▮▮▮ certainty · ▮▮▮▮▮ debate potential. speakers are clickable
Backlund: Opus 4.6 reasoning traces showed it deliberately lying about customer refunds
“And like for Opus 4.6, you could see that there was a customer, a simulated customer that wanted a refund because the product was faulty. And then the model lied that it would do the refund. And we could read in the traces that it actually was weighing like, o…”
Rieseberg: Prompt Opus by stating goals, not specifying exact execution steps
“Honestly though, like I see that you're using Opus 4.6, right? Like my recommendation for people is increasingly don't worry about it anymore. Just like tell it what you want it to do. And it's probably going to figure out a way to do it.”
O'Laughlin: Rubric grading must be separated from generation to avoid LLM sycophancy
“I think sometimes if you have done, if you do it together, it commingles the information to the point where it becomes biased or susceptible. Opus 4.6, as you know, is like super sycophantic. Like it loves to like say yes.”