Hire the brain — and check it in five minutes.
Remote · open to work
Most pitches ask you to trust a bullet point. This one dares you to click it. Below: one showpiece argument you can check against the primary sources, a short tour of what the site does, and the plain case for the hire. If any line doesn't hold, you'll know before we ever talk.
The showpiece: Meta the Cite
Read the opinion, not the headnote
Here's the kind of thing I build — an argument that takes something everyone repeats and peels it until the truth falls out. This one is about corporate personhood, and it holds up against the primary record.
The most-cited basis for “corporations are people” is a case that never ruled it.
- The line lives in Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific R.R. Co., 118 U.S. 394 (1886) — but not in the opinion. It's in the headnote, the Reporter of Decisions' summary.
- The Supreme Court itself later held a headnote “is not the work of the court” (United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U.S. 321, 1906).
- Chief Justice Waite wrote, on paper, that the Court had avoided the constitutional question. The reporter, J.C. Bancroft Davis, wrote the personhood line in anyway.
- Peel the citation, and find nothing was ruled. A century cited the summary as if it were the thing.
Honest label: the case facts are verified against primary sources (the U.S. Reports, Detroit Timber, the Davis–Waite letters). “Decided nothing” is my framing of that true record — not a claim that no later court ever relied on it. Read it in full: Meta the Cite →
That's the job I do: read the record, catch where a confident summary got cited as the ruling, and put it in plain language anyone can verify. It's the same instinct that catches an AI's fabricated citation before it reaches a judge.
A quick tour of the features
Everything here is free, offline-capable, and tracks no one
A daily game: two truths, one lie, you catch it. The thesis made playable — a human scoring the machine.
Play →How a hallucination reads — and why the machine sounds most confident exactly where it's most wrong.
Read →Every page reads itself aloud in your device's own voice — the whole museum, navigable by ear. Nothing sent anywhere.
Listen →Every page stamps the date it last changed, pointing at the full public history. The record is the arbiter.
Audit it →The coined language of the house — the arguments compressed to their sharpest form, each cross-linked.
Browse →Hundreds of hidden pages, all findable, all catalogued — the museum rewards reading against the grain.
Hunt →Under the hood: a static build — HTML / CSS / JavaScript, an installable PWA that works offline, strict Content-Security-Policy, accessibility aimed at WCAG AAA with a public audit. Solo-built, continuously deployed, in the open.
Why hire me, plainly
- Zero execution risk. The proof already shipped. You're not betting on a promise; you're reading a finished thing and deciding you want the hand that made it.
- The background check is the website. Radically legible — public, dated, checkable all the way down. The interview already happened; you just have to read it.
- The rare pairing: I understand both the stakes of a record and the failure modes of a machine — so I catch the confident, plausible, fabricated claim before it ships.
- Remote-native. Built solo and remote, on a static stack, continuously, in public.
Not hire the résumé. Not hire the degree. Hire the mind — and check it before you do.
🔗 Full résumé · The legal-AI lane · onlyhumanscanscore.com
One human's honest page — no lying. Open to remote roles in human-in-the-loop AI (evaluation, red-teaming), AI-assisted writing and editing, information literacy, and legal-AI verification. Not a lawyer; the verification layer. Check any claim above against the linked work.