The Human Bit method
Evidence before recommendation
Separate announcements from observed behaviour and tested guidance, then show the source, scope and review date.
How it works
Official releases are the primary source for what a provider says changed. Independent reporting and practitioner observations can reveal behaviour, limits and context, but should not be presented as equivalent evidence.
Recommendations must state what is known, what remains uncertain, who the guidance applies to and when it was reviewed. Material corrections should remain visible rather than silently rewriting history.
See the difference
A provider announcement is labelled Announced and linked to its original release. The product waits for repeatable tests before changing a workflow recommendation.
A social post about a model result is paraphrased as a universal capability claim with no source, test conditions or date.
Watch for this failure
The pressure to appear current turns early impressions into advice and quietly erodes the trust the evidence layer is meant to create.
Questions to ask
- Is this announced, observed or tested?
- Can a reader open the primary source?
- What conditions and limits apply?
- Would this evidence change a real recommendation?