> Chain of reputation. If you can trace back the claim to a person or persons who have reputation to stake on this, then it's unlikely to be completely fabricated.

AKA "Provenance" but digital, for those who want to look at existing methodologies. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Provenance

Additionally, in a very concrete technical sense, "whatever1" must rely on the "chain of reputation" of the https certificate system to have confidence that what they saw is not sora.

This is an important analysis to perform but it's far from a sure thing. Motives can be murky and hard to assess. Maybe there is one particular scientist that has a baby on the way and fears he is about to be laid off unless he can get a sensational article published asap. A little helping hand from ai could be just the thing, and it's based on a true story just touched up a little bit and besides it's not like the readers will suffer any real harm from this tiny little transgression. Just one little shortcut one little time off course after that it's right back to honest science.

Game theory or Bayesian inference?

The bat and rat were identified as non visa holders by ICE.

[dead]