Start with the channel change
Copy only the relevant excerpt and record its publication date and source URL. Keep the full original separately.
Open the companion tool →Why this matters
Use the ledger for any company statement about evaluations, audits, safeguards, third-party review, or capability thresholds. “Audited” can mean many things; ask who reviewed what, against which criteria, with what access, and what the result does not cover.
This guide does not endorse or dismiss a company’s position, and it does not decide whether AI development should be paced. It keeps the reader at the level of claims they can inspect.
The protocol
- Copy only the relevant excerpt and record its publication date and source URL. Keep the full original separately.
- Rewrite the promise as a testable sentence. Highlight scope words such as “we intend,” “where feasible,” “selected models,” or “under these conditions.”
- Record the evidence offered: evaluation, audit, benchmark, incident report, or future plan. Note who performed it and whether the underlying method is available.
- Write one open question and one action for yourself, such as waiting for a report, checking an independent source, or limiting what you authorize until the scope is clearer.
Literacy without a verdict
The reader gets a claim ledger, not a trust score. The meaningful output is a narrower statement of what the announcement supports and what it does not yet establish.
Limit first: This is not technical assurance, a policy position, or a guarantee about a company’s safety. It cannot verify an announcement’s evidence or replace an expert review for a high-stakes deployment.
Build your safety claim reading guide →One human next step
Open the original source, check its date and scope, and compare any evidence claim with an independent technical or regulatory source before relying on it for a high-stakes decision.
Research log and safety checks
AI-assist path: not used to render a company-trust verdict. §6.10: passed — this is explicitly a reader-actionable literacy tool, neutral on whether capability growth should be accelerated, slowed, or regulated. Claims require a fresh source check on the 30-day cadence.
§0.5 protection result: category is informed-consent-literacy; crisis-adjacent: no; fear/urgency/scarcity toolkit used: no. The protective function is free and the paid feature is convenience only.