+0.22 Modeling Cycles of Grift with Evolutionary Game Theory

Name: HRCB Evaluation: Modeling Cycles of Grift with Evolutionary Game Theory
Item: Modeling Cycles of Grift with Evolutionary Game Theory
Rating: 0.1
Author: HN HRCB

Model: deepseek/deepseek-v3.2-20251201 +0.10 @cf/meta/llama-4-scout-17b-16e-instruct lite 0.00 @cf/meta/llama-3.3-70b-instruct-fp8-fast lite +0.10 claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 +0.20 Compare

+0.22	Modeling Cycles of Grift with Evolutionary Game Theory (www.oranlooney.com S:+0.15 )
	96 points by ibobev 5 days ago \| 41 comments on HN \| Mild positive Editorial · v3.7 · 2026-02-28 11:53:17 0

Summary Free Expression & Inquiry Acknowledges

The content is a technical blog post applying Evolutionary Game Theory to model cyclical patterns of social fraud and skepticism. It most directly engages with human rights themes of freedom of thought and expression (Articles 18 & 19) and the right to education and cultural participation (Articles 26 & 27). The overall evaluation is neutral to mildly positive, acknowledging these rights through the act of analytical publication without strong advocacy.

Article Heatmap

Negative Neutral Positive No Data

Aggregates

Editorial Mean	+0.22	Structural Mean	+0.15
Weighted Mean	+0.10	Unweighted Mean	+0.10
Max	+0.10 Article 19	Min	+0.10 Article 19
Signal	3	No Data	28
Volatility	0.00 (Low)
Negative	0	Channels	E: 0.6 S: 0.4
SETL ℹ	+0.16	Editorial-dominant
FW Ratio ℹ	52%	68 facts · 62 inferences

Evidence 5% coverage ℹ

  1M  4L  26 ND 

Theme Radar

HN Discussion 13 top-level · 11 replies

apothegm 2026-02-24 14:01 UTC link

Maybe, but… the cycle can be very long. Everyone in Russia is a skeptic or a grifter, and it’s been that way for decades with no sign of grift being on its way out.

bediger4000 2026-02-24 14:13 UTC link

This is a great post. It's even got useful ternary diagrams, and it gives an explanation of why the NFT grift disappeared. Too bad cryptocurrency in general is only mentioned in the context of rug pulls. This theory must not extend as far as whatever powers crypto.

MarkusQ 2026-02-27 18:15 UTC link

The meta strategy seems clear: if the world seems full of grifters, stop being a Mark, and start being a Skeptic.

Or, I suppose, go on thinking this time is different.

smogcutter 2026-02-27 18:18 UTC link

I think a missing piece of this analysis for the present is the way that hyper-skepticism can come back around and make you just a different type of mark. Sovereign citizens, for example.

w10-1 2026-02-27 18:42 UTC link

To this model I would add the transaction costs for vetting a transaction, the cost of identifying and engaging transaction partners, and the relative sensitivity to a negative outcome (the stake as a percentage of total stake).

I believe that would enable you to identify more or less corrupt industries.

Unfortunately, both stakes and information costs make governance prone to abuse. To see why it’s not nearly as corrupt as one might expect from this model, you’d need reputation cost and benefit, where trusted governments and leaders attract higher functioning citizens and industries.

jurschreuder 2026-02-27 19:26 UTC link

A population of Marks is a highly efficient one. At the speed of trust.

In a company you will want to cultivate this, since interactions within the company are far more frequent than with the outside world.

intalentive 2026-02-27 19:27 UTC link

I am going to steal this code and run a different analysis. The author mentions that skeptics avoid grifters without punishing them. I am curious how things play out in the Seven Samurai model, where instead of marks you have peasants and instead of grifters you have bandits. What happens if you have samurai not skeptics? Who both take rice from the peasants and protect them from greater exploitation by bandits.

This would be a simple governance model, and you could predict something like “revolution” when the cost of samurai exceeds their benefit.

FrustratedMonky 2026-02-27 19:47 UTC link

this "The start of a slide into a new post-truth dark age?"

Not sure we'll evolutionarily get out of the loop this time.

From 2016 to 2026. That is 10 years for Republicans to realize they are being grifted, scammed, etc... Not sure they will ever be realizing it. Will take another generation. Which I guess is the point, another generation of evolution cycles might break the loop.

UncleOxidant 2026-02-27 21:14 UTC link

What about grifters who are also marks? Grifters aren't immune from grift.

notatoad 2026-02-27 21:28 UTC link

>Grift is cyclical, and any period of high grift will soon give way to a period of high skepticism

so how do you explain the immediate jump from crypto grift straight into AI grift? i'm not saying all crypto or all AI is pure grift, but both of those industries have had higher than average levels of grift, without any skepticism in between them. The NFT crash did not seem to be followed by any period of skepticism at all.

Glyptodon 2026-02-27 22:38 UTC link

I think a further development is that skeptics are, in many contexts, losing the tools and leverage needed to reject the grifters.

For example, if you need cell phone service, and all the options have converged on requiring binding arbitration, being a skeptic about binding arbitration will not help you.

Maybe more on point, if you want to be an AI skeptic, but are also aware that AI can work, how can you establish a plausible level of skepticism accurately? Laypeople probably can't.

So the rise of grift might also be seen as a sign of the systemic frustration of effective skepticism.

georgeecollins 2026-02-27 23:11 UTC link

This is old wine in new bottles. Read: https://www.amazon.com/Evolution-Cooperation-Robert-Axelrod-...

From 1984!

exmadscientist 2026-02-28 01:55 UTC link

What is the location of the (clearly unstable) equilibrium/fixed point there?

The obvious trick of computing the eigenvectors didn't seem to work (I got 20%/40%/40%, which does not look right) and I'm out of time for this particular nerd snipe.

energy123 2026-02-27 18:22 UTC link

Don't believe the latest fashion on social media, including the latest thing it's fashionable to be sceptical about. That rule of thumb performed well the last 10 years.

w10-1 2026-02-27 18:45 UTC link

The vast majority have justified skepticism from long history of abuse. But very few people are grifters, because that would require an expensive roof. missing from my transactional analysis is a general goodwill, the likelihood that someone would help if it didn’t cost much. In Russia, the skepticism is so high that one only helps one’s close friends.

Edman274 2026-02-27 18:59 UTC link

People that don't buy insurance because they think it's a scam, then end up impoverished after a foreseeable accident or theft, as a more common one.

mnky9800n 2026-02-27 19:17 UTC link

Sovereign citizenry is such a strange thing to me. It’s all the parts of a conspiracy theory with none of the interesting things like aliens or lizard people. No those are replaced with strange interpretations of laws and ordinances.

lukas099 2026-02-27 19:34 UTC link

Sounds like they've reached an evolutionarily stable equilibrium and the conditions that sustain it are stable too.

kruffalon 2026-02-27 20:35 UTC link

I don't think that's a viable strategy.

If you're a Mark (=trusting person) I don't think you can just decide to become a Skeptic.

I admit I skimmed the article and even if I would read more closely I don't think I would understand it better.

I'll use my intuition for how individuals transition between the roles.

Mark -> Skeptic: requires to be have been grifted and possibly having the grift explained by a Skeptic. Or possibly having someone close to you get grifted.

Mark -> Grifter: I'm not sure it's possible, but maybe the corruption pdf posted[0] is a clue.

Skeptic -> Grifter: desillusion about the point of not grifting since everyone else is doing it too. So maybe late stage corruption[0] or just nihilism based on seeing grifts succeed so much.

Skeptic -> Mark: honestly... Shrooms maybe? Or finding and being chosen into a trusting community.

Grifter -> Skeptic: I think realising that you've hurt someone in an unexpectedly harsh way could help this transition. Otherwise I don't really know besides being short of Marks.

---

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47177186

dooglius 2026-02-27 20:36 UTC link

What exactly is hyper-skeptical about them?

Muromec 2026-02-27 21:48 UTC link

The same applies to the country population -- it's always them others who are up to something.

MoltenMan 2026-02-27 21:49 UTC link

I think this makes sense as part of the existing 'skeptic cost'

kerblang 2026-02-27 21:54 UTC link

I don't [think] there is some threshold of extreme skepticism at which someone suddenly reverses polarity under skeptical duress and flips over into a mark. Rather, you just have a mark trying to be good at skepticism and failing horribly.

downboots 2026-02-28 05:14 UTC link

And of course 2017 :) https://ncase.me/trust/

Editorial Channel

What the content says

+0.10

Article 19 Freedom of Expression

Low Framing

Editorial

+0.10

SETL

Article models social dynamics of trust and deception; implicitly engages with marketplace of ideas and information.

+0.10

Article 26 Education

Low Coverage

Editorial

+0.10

SETL

Article is an educational piece teaching mathematical modeling; contributes to sharing knowledge.

+0.10

Article 27 Cultural Participation

Low Coverage

Editorial

+0.10

SETL

Article shares author's creative and scientific work (model, code, visualizations).

Preamble Preamble

Content is a technical blog post analyzing fraud cycles via game theory; does not mention or engage with UDHR principles.

Article 1 Freedom, Equality, Brotherhood

No discussion of inherent dignity, equality, or brotherhood.

Article 2 Non-Discrimination

No mention of discrimination, rights, or entitlements.

Article 3 Life, Liberty, Security

No discussion of life, liberty, or security of person.

Article 4 No Slavery

No mention of slavery or servitude.

Article 5 No Torture

No mention of torture or cruel treatment.

Article 6 Legal Personhood

No discussion of recognition as a person before the law.

Article 7 Equality Before Law

No mention of equal protection or non-discrimination.

Article 8 Right to Remedy

No discussion of effective remedy for rights violations.

Article 9 No Arbitrary Detention

No mention of arbitrary arrest, detention, or exile.

Article 10 Fair Hearing

No discussion of fair public hearing.

Article 11 Presumption of Innocence

No mention of presumption of innocence or criminal procedure.

Article 12 Privacy

No discussion of privacy, family, home, or correspondence.

Article 13 Freedom of Movement

No mention of freedom of movement or residence.

Article 14 Asylum

No discussion of asylum from persecution.

Article 15 Nationality

No mention of nationality or change of nationality.

Article 16 Marriage & Family

No discussion of marriage, family, or consent.

Article 17 Property

No mention of property ownership.

Article 18 Freedom of Thought

No discussion of freedom of thought, conscience, or religion.

Article 20 Assembly & Association

No mention of assembly or association.

Article 21 Political Participation

No discussion of participation in government or elections.

Article 22 Social Security

No mention of social security or economic rights.

Article 23 Work & Equal Pay

No discussion of work, employment, or unions.

Article 24 Rest & Leisure

No mention of rest, leisure, or working hours.

Article 25 Standard of Living

No discussion of standard of living, health, or welfare.

Article 28 Social & International Order

No discussion of social and international order.

Article 29 Duties to Community

No mention of duties, community, or limitations on rights.

Article 30 No Destruction of Rights

No discussion of rights destruction.

Structural Channel

What the site does

Domain Context Profile

Element	Modifier	Note
Legal & Terms
Privacy	—	No privacy policy or cookie banner directly observable on this page. No structural signals for or against privacy rights.
Terms of Service	—	No terms of service or community guidelines linked from this page. No observable structural signals.
Identity & Mission
Mission	—	Personal blog focused on computer science, math, and visualization. No explicit mission statement concerning human rights.
Editorial Code	—	No editorial code of ethics, corrections policy, or comment moderation rules visible on page.
Ownership	—	Personal blog authored by Oran Looney. No corporate or institutional affiliation declared on page.
Access & Distribution
Access Model	—	Content is freely accessible. No paywall, registration, or significant data collection required to view.
Ad/Tracking	—	No visible advertisements or third-party trackers on page. Clean, minimal layout.
Accessibility	—	Page uses semantic HTML and legible typography. No explicit accessibility statement, but no observed barriers.

Preamble Preamble

Site is a personal blog; no structural features (banners, policies) referencing human dignity, rights, or freedoms.

Article 1 Freedom, Equality, Brotherhood

No structural features promoting equality, dignity, or brotherhood.

Article 2 Non-Discrimination

No structural features addressing non-discrimination.

Article 3 Life, Liberty, Security

No structural features protecting life, liberty, or security.

Article 4 No Slavery

No structural features opposing slavery.

Article 5 No Torture

No structural features opposing torture.

Article 6 Legal Personhood

No structural features affirming legal personhood.

Article 7 Equality Before Law

No structural features promoting equal protection.

Article 8 Right to Remedy

No structural features providing remedies.

Article 9 No Arbitrary Detention

No structural features protecting against arbitrary detention.

Article 10 Fair Hearing

No structural features supporting fair hearings.

Article 11 Presumption of Innocence

No structural features related to criminal justice.

Article 12 Privacy

No structural privacy protections visible on page.

Article 13 Freedom of Movement

No structural features related to movement.

Article 14 Asylum

No structural features related to asylum.

Article 15 Nationality

No structural features related to nationality.

Article 16 Marriage & Family

No structural features related to family rights.

Article 17 Property

No structural features protecting property.

Article 18 Freedom of Thought

No structural features supporting freedom of thought.

Article 19 Freedom of Expression

Low Framing

No structural features promoting or restricting expression.

Article 20 Assembly & Association

No structural features supporting assembly.

Article 21 Political Participation

No structural features related to political participation.

Article 22 Social Security

No structural features related to social security.

Article 23 Work & Equal Pay

No structural features related to labor rights.

Article 24 Rest & Leisure

No structural features related to rest and leisure.

Article 25 Standard of Living

No structural features related to standard of living.

Article 26 Education

Low Coverage

No structural features promoting education.

Article 27 Cultural Participation

Low Coverage

No structural features protecting or sharing cultural/scientific work.

Article 28 Social & International Order

No structural features promoting a rights-respecting order.

Article 29 Duties to Community

No structural features related to duties or limitations.

Article 30 No Destruction of Rights

No structural features that could destroy rights.

Supplementary Signals

How this content communicates, beyond directional lean. Learn more

Epistemic Quality ℹ

How well-sourced and evidence-based is this content?

0.81 low claims

Sources		0.7
Evidence		0.8
Uncertainty		0.9
Purpose		1.0

Propaganda Flags ℹ

No manipulative rhetoric detected

0 techniques detected

Emotional Tone ℹ

Emotional character: positive/negative, intensity, authority

measured

Valence		-0.1
Arousal		0.2
Dominance		0.6

Transparency ℹ

Does the content identify its author and disclose interests?

1.00

✓ Author

More signals: context, framing & audience

Solution Orientation ℹ

Does this content offer solutions or only describe problems?

0.32 mixed

Reader Agency

0.2

Stakeholder Voice ℹ

Whose perspectives are represented in this content?

0.40 2 perspectives

Speaks: individuals

About: individuals

Temporal Framing ℹ

Is this content looking backward, at the present, or forward?

present medium term

Geographic Scope ℹ

What geographic area does this content cover?

global

California, Yukon

Complexity ℹ

How accessible is this content to a general audience?

moderate medium jargon domain specific

Longitudinal 462 HN snapshots · 53 evals

Audit Trail 73 entries

2026-03-02 11:36	eval_success	Evaluated: Mild positive (0.10)	- -
2026-03-02 11:36	eval	Evaluated by deepseek-v3.2: +0.10 (Mild positive) 11,012 tokens -0.04
2026-03-01 03:25	eval_success	Evaluated: Mild positive (0.14)	- -
2026-03-01 03:25	eval	Evaluated by deepseek-v3.2: +0.14 (Mild positive) 11,539 tokens +0.14
2026-03-01 03:25	rater_validation_warn	Validation warnings for model deepseek-v3.2: 0W 1R	- -
2026-03-01 03:00	dlq_auto_replay	DLQ auto-replay: message 97881 re-enqueued	- -
2026-03-01 02:01	dlq_auto_replay	DLQ auto-replay: message 97891 re-enqueued	- -
2026-03-01 00:57	eval_success	Evaluated: Neutral (0.00)	- -
2026-03-01 00:57	eval	Evaluated by deepseek-v3.2: 0.00 (Neutral) 11,998 tokens -0.21
2026-02-28 23:26	eval_failure	Evaluation failed: AbortError: The operation was aborted	- -
2026-02-28 23:20	dlq	Dead-lettered after 1 attempts: Modeling Cycles of Grift with Evolutionary Game Theory	- -
2026-02-28 23:20	eval_failure	Evaluation failed: AbortError: The operation was aborted	- -
2026-02-28 23:18	eval_failure	Evaluation failed: AbortError: The operation was aborted	- -
2026-02-28 22:11	dlq	Dead-lettered after 1 attempts: Modeling Cycles of Grift with Evolutionary Game Theory	- -
2026-02-28 22:11	eval_failure	Evaluation failed: AbortError: The operation was aborted	- -
2026-02-28 22:11	eval_failure	Evaluation failed: AbortError: The operation was aborted	- -
2026-02-28 21:37	dlq	Dead-lettered after 1 attempts: Modeling Cycles of Grift with Evolutionary Game Theory	- -
2026-02-28 21:37	eval_failure	Evaluation failed: AbortError: The operation was aborted	- -
2026-02-28 21:12	eval_failure	Evaluation failed: AbortError: The operation was aborted	- -
2026-02-28 17:52	dlq	Dead-lettered after 1 attempts: Modeling Cycles of Grift with Evolutionary Game Theory	- -
2026-02-28 17:52	eval_failure	Evaluation failed: AbortError: The operation was aborted	- -
2026-02-28 17:48	eval_failure	Evaluation failed: AbortError: The operation was aborted	- -
2026-02-28 17:29	dlq	Dead-lettered after 1 attempts: Modeling Cycles of Grift with Evolutionary Game Theory	- -
2026-02-28 16:44	eval	Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
	reasoning Editorial on grift cycles using evolutionary game theory, neutral rights stance
2026-02-28 15:37	eval	Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) -0.10
	reasoning Editorial on grift cycles using evolutionary game theory, neutral rights stance
2026-02-28 15:24	eval	Evaluated by llama-3.3-70b-wai: +0.10 (Mild positive) 0.00
	reasoning Mathematical model of grift cycles
2026-02-28 13:20	eval	Evaluated by llama-3.3-70b-wai: +0.10 (Mild positive) 0.00
	reasoning Mathematical model of grift cycles
2026-02-28 12:55	eval	Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: +0.10 (Mild positive) +0.10
	reasoning Editorial on grift cycles using evolutionary game theory, neutral rights stance
2026-02-28 12:49	eval	Evaluated by llama-3.3-70b-wai: +0.10 (Mild positive) 0.00
	reasoning Mathematical model of grift cycles
2026-02-28 12:22	eval	Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) -0.10
	reasoning Editorial on grift cycles using evolutionary game theory, neutral rights stance
2026-02-28 11:53	eval	Evaluated by deepseek-v3.2: +0.21 (Mild positive) 13,160 tokens +0.08
2026-02-28 11:25	eval	Evaluated by claude-haiku-4-5-20251001: +0.22 (Mild positive)
2026-02-28 10:25	eval	Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: +0.10 (Mild positive) +0.10
	reasoning Editorial on grift cycles using evolutionary game theory, neutral rights stance
2026-02-28 10:22	eval	Evaluated by llama-3.3-70b-wai: +0.10 (Mild positive) +0.10
	reasoning Mathematical model of grift cycles
2026-02-28 10:09	eval	Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
	reasoning Editorial on grift cycles using evolutionary game theory, neutral rights stance
2026-02-28 09:00	eval	Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
	reasoning Editorial on grift cycles using evolutionary game theory, neutral rights stance
2026-02-28 08:27	eval	Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
	reasoning Editorial on grift cycles using evolutionary game theory, neutral rights stance
2026-02-28 07:59	eval	Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
	reasoning Editorial on grift cycles using evolutionary game theory, neutral rights stance
2026-02-28 07:38	eval	Evaluated by llama-3.3-70b-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) -0.10
	reasoning Mathematical model of grift cycles
2026-02-28 07:35	eval	Evaluated by llama-3.3-70b-wai: +0.10 (Mild positive) +0.10
	reasoning Mathematical model of grift cycles
2026-02-28 07:33	eval	Evaluated by llama-3.3-70b-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
	reasoning Mathematical model of grift cycles
2026-02-28 07:13	eval	Evaluated by deepseek-v3.2: +0.13 (Mild positive) 11,283 tokens
2026-02-28 06:37	eval	Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
	reasoning Editorial on grift cycles using evolutionary game theory, neutral rights stance
2026-02-28 06:35	eval	Evaluated by llama-3.3-70b-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) -0.10
	reasoning Mathematical model of grift cycles
2026-02-28 06:35	eval	Evaluated by llama-3.3-70b-wai: +0.10 (Mild positive) +0.10
	reasoning Mathematical model of grift cycles
2026-02-28 06:17	eval	Evaluated by llama-3.3-70b-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) -0.10
	reasoning Mathematical model of grift cycles
2026-02-28 06:01	eval	Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
	reasoning Editorial on grift cycles using evolutionary game theory, neutral rights stance
2026-02-28 05:43	eval	Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
	reasoning Editorial on grift cycles using evolutionary game theory, neutral rights stance
2026-02-28 05:40	eval	Evaluated by llama-3.3-70b-wai: +0.10 (Mild positive) +0.10
	reasoning Mathematical model of grift cycles
2026-02-28 05:30	eval	Evaluated by llama-3.3-70b-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
	reasoning Mathematical model of grift cycles
2026-02-28 05:13	eval	Evaluated by llama-3.3-70b-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) -0.20
	reasoning Mathematical model of grift cycles
2026-02-28 04:58	eval	Evaluated by llama-3.3-70b-wai: +0.20 (Mild positive) 0.00
	reasoning Mathematical model of grift cycles
2026-02-28 04:45	eval	Evaluated by llama-3.3-70b-wai: +0.20 (Mild positive) 0.00
	reasoning Mathematical model of grift cycles
2026-02-28 04:32	eval	Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
	reasoning Editorial on grift cycles using evolutionary game theory, neutral rights stance
2026-02-28 04:25	eval	Evaluated by llama-3.3-70b-wai: +0.20 (Mild positive) 0.00
	reasoning Mathematical model of grift cycles
2026-02-28 04:06	eval	Evaluated by llama-3.3-70b-wai: +0.20 (Mild positive) 0.00
	reasoning Mathematical model of grift cycles
2026-02-28 03:39	eval	Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
	reasoning Editorial on grift cycles using evolutionary game theory, neutral rights stance
2026-02-28 03:31	eval	Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
	reasoning Editorial on grift cycles using evolutionary game theory, neutral rights stance
2026-02-28 03:29	eval	Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
	reasoning Editorial on grift cycles using evolutionary game theory, neutral rights stance
2026-02-28 02:59	eval	Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
	reasoning Editorial on grift cycles using evolutionary game theory, neutral rights stance
2026-02-28 02:30	eval	Evaluated by llama-3.3-70b-wai: +0.20 (Mild positive) 0.00
	reasoning Mathematical model of grift cycles
2026-02-28 02:29	eval	Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
	reasoning Editorial on grift cycles using evolutionary game theory, neutral rights stance
2026-02-28 02:21	eval	Evaluated by llama-3.3-70b-wai: +0.20 (Mild positive) 0.00
	reasoning Mathematical model of grift cycles
2026-02-28 02:14	eval	Evaluated by llama-3.3-70b-wai: +0.20 (Mild positive) 0.00
	reasoning Mathematical model of grift cycles
2026-02-28 02:11	eval	Evaluated by llama-3.3-70b-wai: +0.20 (Mild positive) 0.00
	reasoning Mathematical model of grift cycles
2026-02-28 02:00	eval	Evaluated by llama-3.3-70b-wai: +0.20 (Mild positive) 0.00
	reasoning Mathematical model of grift cycles
2026-02-28 01:49	eval	Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
	reasoning Editorial on grift cycles using evolutionary game theory, neutral rights stance
2026-02-28 01:44	eval	Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
	reasoning Editorial on grift cycles using evolutionary game theory, neutral rights stance
2026-02-28 01:38	eval	Evaluated by llama-3.3-70b-wai: +0.20 (Mild positive) 0.00
	reasoning Mathematical model of grift cycles
2026-02-28 01:29	eval	Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
	reasoning Editorial on grift cycles using evolutionary game theory, neutral rights stance
2026-02-28 01:18	eval	Evaluated by llama-3.3-70b-wai: +0.20 (Mild positive)
	reasoning Mathematical model of grift cycles
2026-02-28 01:01	eval	Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
	reasoning Editorial on grift cycles using evolutionary game theory, neutral rights stance
2026-02-28 00:57	eval	Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: 0.00 (Neutral)
	reasoning Editorial on grift cycles using evolutionary game theory, neutral rights stance

build 1ad9551+j7zs · deployed 2026-03-02 09:09 UTC · evaluated 2026-03-02 11:31:12 UTC