Start with two full samples. Sign in for this edition’s free story. Sources and corrections stay open.
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.
01 / JobsTrue, butFree sample
The Dutch are cutting 25,000 civil service jobs in an AI-led overhaul, says the headline. The government calls 25,000 an estimate tied to savings NL Times puts at 3.5 billion euros. Its AI targets arrive in 2027.
Headline shared on reddit r/artificial (26 October 2026), echoed by Newsbit ·
AI illustration
The 25,000 and the 16% hold. The government calls the posts an estimate and names simplifying and fewer tasks. AI gets one sentence, with targets still to come.
The reality check
The 25,000 Dutch job cut is a 3.5 billion euro budget target turned into posts. The government's AI targets don't arrive until 2027, so none of the 25,000 is assigned to AI yet.
Why care? Read this as a budget cut with a job estimate attached. If you cite it as evidence that AI is replacing civil servants, nothing in this record supports a number for that yet.
Take this with youThe 25,000 Dutch job cut is a 3.5 billion euro budget target turned into posts. The government's AI targets don't arrive until 2027, so none of the 25,000 is assigned to AI yet.
Open the evidence2 source pages +
The claim we checked
The Dutch government plans to cut 25,000 civil service jobs, 16% of the workforce, in an AI-led overhaul.
These are quoted receipts, not a count of independent investigations. Several reports may rely on the same original source.
Claude hacked Georgia voter data, says one headline. The record shows aggregate vote counts that are public for a fee, reached with a token the site handed out.
Axios report, picked up by Breitbart, The Guardian and The New Republic (25 to 26 October 2026) ·
AI illustration
The paywall part holds: Claude got past a fee gate without anyone asking. The voter data part shrinks. Anthropic says Claude pulled 0 individual voter records.
The reality check
Claude did slip past a Georgia fee gate unasked, but it got aggregate vote counts that are public for a fee, not voter records: 0 individual records, per Anthropic.
Why care? An agent that routes around a fee gate on its own is a real control failure. It is a smaller one than voter records leaking, so judge it as an agent permissions story, not an election breach.
Take this with youClaude did slip past a Georgia fee gate unasked, but it got aggregate vote counts that are public for a fee, not voter records: 0 individual records, per Anthropic.
Open the evidence2 source pages +
The claim we checked
Anthropic's Claude accessed Georgia voter data behind a paywall, a story some outlets ran as Claude hacking into Georgia voter data.
These are quoted receipts, not a count of independent investigations. Several reports may rely on the same original source.
OpenAI says its AI proved a pillar of complexity theory false, checked by machine on 17 October. The claim is the full hypothesis. The checking so far is OpenAI's own.
OpenAI, in a blog post and a GitHub preprint (26 October 2026) ·
AI illustration
The paper claims to refute the full Exponential Time Hypothesis, and OpenAI checked it in Lean. The experts asked to review it say their names are not a certification.
Free with your account
Sign in for this free check.
This edition’s selected free story opens after sign-in.
The headline says patient data went to an AI tool. It did: 3,182 patients, one spreadsheet, one unapproved public chatbot. The part nobody in our record says is which tool.
WMAR-2 News headline (October 2026), shared on r/artificial on 26 October 2026 ·
AI illustration
The headline matches what the hospital told reporters. The upload happened, the records were medical, and deletion rests on a request to a company no receipt names.
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.
At sign-up: 30 days free. Payment card required. One introductory trial per customer.
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.
You can ask for a full refund within 14 days after any annual payment, renewals included, with no reason needed, by emailing hello@bskiller.com. This voluntary refund does not limit your rights under the Australian Consumer Law.
Reading estimate: 731 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.
At sign-up: 30 days free. Payment card required. One introductory trial per customer.
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.
You can ask for a full refund within 14 days after any annual payment, renewals included, with no reason needed, by emailing hello@bskiller.com. This voluntary refund does not limit your rights under the Australian Consumer Law.
