3 ms·
First of all, I don't want to run anyone's code without proper explanation, so help me understand this. Let's start with the verifier. The 3rd party verifier re
by Charon77 7mo ago
First of all, I don't want to run anyone's code without proper explanation, so help me understand this.
Let's start with the verifier. The 3rd party verifier receives a bundle, not knowing what the content is, not having access to the tool used to measure, and just run a single command based on the bundle which presumably contains expected results and actual measurements, both of which can easily be tampered. What good does that solve?
- Lama9901 7mo agoRight question. Bundle alone proves nothing — you're correct. Two things make it non-trivial to fake: The pipeline is public. You can read scripts/steward_audit.py before running anything. It's not a black box. For materials claims — the expected value isn't in the bundle. Young's modulus for aluminium is ~70 GPa. Not my number. Physics. The verifier checks against that, not against something I provided. ML and pipelines — provenance only, no physical grounding. Said so in known_faults.yaml :: SCOPE_001.
- wasabi991011 7mo agoIf I may ask, how much of the code, original post, and comments are AI generated?
- Lama9901 7mo agoHeavily AI-assisted, not AI-generated. Claude + Cursor wrote the structure. I fixed hundreds of errors — wrong tests, broken pipelines, docs that didn't match the code. That's literally why the verification layer exists. AI gets it wrong constantly. This comment — also Claude, on my direction. That's the point. Tool, not author. Clone it and run it. If it doesn't work, tell me.