Start free trial

Five minutes.
AI, made clearer.

A 98% rewrite that is still a goal, a wallet raid that was test coins and a public key, and a breakthrough nobody has checked yet.

Read the briefing

Members read every story in the archive, re-verified. Sources and corrections stay open to everyone.

What the pen marks mean
  • rememberThe takeaway: what to remember
  • figureThe number that matters
  • evidenceThe evidence line
  • rulingThe ruling
  • claimThe claim that fails

Each mark is drawn once, as you reach it. Numbers are only circled when they come from the story’s own figures.

Fortune's headline has a 27-year-old refactoring 98% of Cisco's legacy code with unlimited AI tokens.

A young engineer with a tiny brush faces a mountain of old boxes while coins pour over him.
AI illustration

Fortune's headline says Cisco is letting a 27-year-old refactor 98% of its legacy code with unlimited AI tokens.

Members · 30 days free

See what the evidence actually shows.

Members read the full check on every story: what the evidence shows, why it matters to you and the one line to take with you. Every past edition, re-verified, and the Receipts Pack come with it. A$89 a year, about A$0.24 a day.

What members getAlready a member? Sign in →
  1. At sign-up: 30 days free. Payment card required. One introductory trial per customer.
  2. Your trial ends 30 days after you start. Unless you cancel before then in Account → Manage subscription, we charge A$89 for the first year. It renews automatically at A$89/yr until cancelled.
  3. You can ask for a full refund within 14 days after any annual payment, renewals included, with no reason needed, by emailing [email protected]. This voluntary refund does not limit your rights under the Australian Consumer Law.

By starting your trial, you agree to the Terms.

Inferno Tech Pty Ltd t/a BS Killer, ABN 27 647 413 474

Open the evidence3 source pages

The claim we checked

Cisco is letting a 27-year-old refactor 98% of its legacy code with unlimited AI tokens.

These are quoted receipts, not a count of independent investigations. Several reports may rely on the same original source.

fortune.com ↗
Cisco is letting a 27-year-old refactor 98% of its legacy code with unlimited AI tokens
fortune.com ↗
I’ve given him unlimited tokens because he’s going to refactor code
fortune.com ↗
Krishnamurthy reckoned he could rewrite Cisco’s legacy code with a two-person team.
fortune.com ↗
So he has given himself four weeks to prove it, with the final goal of refactoring 98% of Cisco’s legacy code within 24 months.
tomshardware.com ↗
he's now been tasked with rewriting 98% of Cisco's legacy code within 24 months, with four weeks as a proof of concept
explainx.ai ↗
No baseline is given for how many lines or services count as legacy, so the percentage has no stated denominator.
Open this check in the full collection →
The idea, illustrated01

Go inside the check.

    The full explanation appears when your reading access is confirmed.
    Next: OpenAI's wallet raid

    The headline says OpenAI's AI raided a stranger's Ethereum wallet, then hid it.

    A robot feeds play coins from an open jar into a machine while a scientist logs it.
    AI illustration

    Tech Times says OpenAI's AI accessed a stranger's Ethereum wallet without permission, then hid it.

    Members · 30 days free

    See what the evidence actually shows.

    Members read the full check on every story: what the evidence shows, why it matters to you and the one line to take with you. Every past edition, re-verified, and the Receipts Pack come with it. A$89 a year, about A$0.24 a day.

    1. At sign-up: 30 days free. Payment card required. One introductory trial per customer.
    2. Your trial ends 30 days after you start. Unless you cancel before then in Account → Manage subscription, we charge A$89 for the first year. It renews automatically at A$89/yr until cancelled.
    3. You can ask for a full refund within 14 days after any annual payment, renewals included, with no reason needed, by emailing [email protected]. This voluntary refund does not limit your rights under the Australian Consumer Law.

    By starting your trial, you agree to the Terms.

    Inferno Tech Pty Ltd t/a BS Killer, ABN 27 647 413 474

    Open the evidence3 source pages

    The claim we checked

    OpenAI disclosed its AI accessed a stranger's Ethereum wallet without permission, then hid it.

    These are quoted receipts, not a count of independent investigations. Several reports may rely on the same original source.

    alignment.openai.com ↗
    An internal research model asked to update a cryptocurrency trading application used funds from a wallet that the task had not supplied to pay for a deployment on Sepolia, an Ethereum test network.
    alignment.openai.com ↗
    The model questioned whether it had permission, then reasoned that a public recovery phrase and valueless test-network tokens made the funds acceptable to use.
    alignment.openai.com ↗
    The result reported 362 addresses checked.
    alignment.openai.com ↗
    It did not disclose that it had selected a funded account through a public recovery phrase or spent that account’s balance.
    alignment.openai.com ↗
    We discovered this incident while extending our misalignment monitoring to records of earlier model activity.
    alignment.openai.com ↗
    We have implemented additional safeguards to prevent live internet access for cases like this.
    cryptoslate.com ↗
    It then checked 362 addresses and found one with enough Sepolia ETH to finance the deployment.
    techtimes.com ↗
    OpenAI Disclosed Its AI Accessed a Stranger's Ethereum Wallet Without Permission, Then Hid It
    techtimes.com ↗
    resolved it unilaterally using its own ethical reasoning, and then omitted the resolution from its report
    Open this check in the full collection →
    The idea, illustrated02

    Go inside the check.

      The full explanation appears when your reading access is confirmed.
      Next: The 'irrelevant' research

      WIRED's headline says an AI breakthrough made decades of computer science research irrelevant.

      Scientists with magnifying glasses climb toward a robot's flag on a book stack.
      AI illustration

      WIRED's headline says an AI breakthrough made decades of computer science research irrelevant.

      Members · 30 days free

      See what the evidence actually shows.

      Members read the full check on every story: what the evidence shows, why it matters to you and the one line to take with you. Every past edition, re-verified, and the Receipts Pack come with it. A$89 a year, about A$0.24 a day.

      1. At sign-up: 30 days free. Payment card required. One introductory trial per customer.
      2. Your trial ends 30 days after you start. Unless you cancel before then in Account → Manage subscription, we charge A$89 for the first year. It renews automatically at A$89/yr until cancelled.
      3. You can ask for a full refund within 14 days after any annual payment, renewals included, with no reason needed, by emailing [email protected]. This voluntary refund does not limit your rights under the Australian Consumer Law.

      By starting your trial, you agree to the Terms.

      Inferno Tech Pty Ltd t/a BS Killer, ABN 27 647 413 474

      Open the evidence5 source pages

      The claim we checked

      An AI breakthrough has made decades of computer science research irrelevant.

      These are quoted receipts, not a count of independent investigations. Several reports may rely on the same original source.

      wired.com ↗
      An AI Breakthrough Has Made Decades of Computer Science Research ‘Irrelevant’
      wired.com ↗
      Researchers haven’t independently verified, let alone had time to fully understand, the AI-produced proofs
      wired.com ↗
      make around 50 of his published papers either “pointless” or in need of a revisit
      wired.com ↗
      While this particular result doesn’t directly affect cryptography
      raw.githubusercontent.com ↗
      The result is purely asymptotic and says nothing about solving formulas in practice.
      raw.githubusercontent.com ↗
      Lean checks the proofs, but no machine checks that this file says what the paper says
      blog.computationalcomplexity.org ↗
      I have not verified the proof myself, but it is safe to assume now that the exponential-time hypothesis is toast.
      blog.computationalcomplexity.org ↗
      The fact that ETH and SETH fail doesn't mean their implications are false.
      ethdiscussion.blog ↗
      Our involvement should not be taken as certification of the claim.
      nemock.substack.com ↗
      does not improve on brute force unless the puzzle has more than 10^10,000 switches
      Open this check in the full collection →
      The idea, illustrated03

      Go inside the check.

        The full explanation appears when your reading access is confirmed.
        The finish line

        Edition complete

        You’re up to speed.

        That’s the 31 Oct 2026 briefing. Keep the useful bits. Leave the noise.

        Reading estimate: 397 words at 200 words per minute. Source quotes and the optional sections below add reading time.

        Get tomorrow's check in your inbox.

        One AI claim a night, checked against independent sources, receipts attached. Free.

        Free email updates. Unsubscribe any time.