Post

OK, so bet. Someone sends you footage of the moon landing. You want to know if it's real. Turns out you're actually asking three different questions — and two of them are now solvable. 🧵 (1/5)

Has it been edited? Did it actually come from NASA — or someone pretending? Did the moon landing actually happen? We mash all three into "real" and argue forever. The first two now have mechanical answers. The third never will. That's not a hole — that's the whole point. (2/5)

Three results, live, against rmichaelthomas.com: ✅ real clip → ATTESTED & RECOGNIZED ❌ one byte changed → REJECTED ❌ signed by an impostor → ORIGIN UNCONFIRMED Each attack caught by a different check. Built on a couple of languages I made that compute what a file can do before it runs. (3/5)

A tool that claimed to prove truth would be worse than no tool at all — the checkmark would launder the fakes it was meant to catch. This clears away the answerable questions so the only one left is the honest one: do you trust the source? That was always the real question. (4/5)

i am long provenance lol

I can send you the tech document I'm working on when I finish and you can dig in! Let me know, lol, happy to oblige.

i have been working on some stuff too for representing common transformation functions over byte segments so they're more robust, so you sign hash(f(blob)) instead of signing hash(blob)

Bro, this is dope.

Thank you my bro! I appreciate the read and share, a ton frfr.

Happy to share, bro. I love what you're building!