OSINT-6 CHANGELOG 260817

Generative AI has become another subject on which silence is treated as a position. OSINT-6 doesn't use generative AI in producing its books. That statement describes our production practice. It isn't an invitation to declare that every use of the technology is beneficial, that every use is unethical, or that everyone must adopt our position somewhere between those claims.

The technology has damaged trust in publishing. Readers have encountered undisclosed synthetic text and images, fabricated citations, misleading credits, and low-effort products. Writers have also faced demands to disclose private working material, document every stage of creation, and prove that a prohibited tool never entered the process.

That second demand doesn't restore trust. Showing drafts can document part of a process, but it can't prove a universal negative. An automated detector score can't establish authorship or demonstrate non-use. Requiring writers to satisfy an undefined and potentially endless burden turns suspicion into the standard and treats an accusation as its own evidence.

Our position is narrower. We believe in the principle of innocent until proven guilty, including in the court of public opinion. This isn't a claim that public criticism operates under criminal procedure. It's a refusal to reverse the burden of proof merely because verification is difficult.

Specific, credible evidence can be examined. Errors in a published book can be identified and corrected. Sources, licenses, factual claims, and credited contributions can be checked. A demand to prove that something never happened is different, and we won't build a public performance of innocence around it.

We won't campaign for generative AI, campaign against every possible use, or demand ideological agreement from readers and other publishers. OSINT-6 will state its own practice, apply its sourcing and credit standards, and leave the wider political argument outside the books.