+0.02 OpenAI Fires an Employee for Prediction Market Insider Trading (www.wired.com S:-0.06 )
278 points by bookofjoe 22 hours ago | 144 comments on HN | Neutral Editorial · v3.7 · 2026-03-01 08:07:00 0
Summary Corporate Governance Neutral
This WIRED article reports on OpenAI firing an employee for alleged insider trading on prediction markets. The content is a standard news report, primarily engaging with themes of corporate policy and labor termination. It demonstrates a mild positive lean regarding freedom of expression through its existence as journalism, but is largely neutral on most human rights provisions. The structural evaluation reflects standard commercial media practices with advertising.
Article Heatmap
Preamble: -0.12 — Preamble P Article 1: 0.00 — Freedom, Equality, Brotherhood 1 Article 2: 0.00 — Non-Discrimination 2 Article 3: 0.00 — Life, Liberty, Security 3 Article 4: 0.00 — No Slavery 4 Article 5: 0.00 — No Torture 5 Article 6: 0.00 — Legal Personhood 6 Article 7: 0.00 — Equality Before Law 7 Article 8: +0.10 — Right to Remedy 8 Article 9: 0.00 — No Arbitrary Detention 9 Article 10: 0.00 — Fair Hearing 10 Article 11: 0.00 — Presumption of Innocence 11 Article 12: -0.09 — Privacy 12 Article 13: 0.00 — Freedom of Movement 13 Article 14: 0.00 — Asylum 14 Article 15: 0.00 — Nationality 15 Article 16: 0.00 — Marriage & Family 16 Article 17: 0.00 — Property 17 Article 18: 0.00 — Freedom of Thought 18 Article 19: +0.11 — Freedom of Expression 19 Article 20: 0.00 — Assembly & Association 20 Article 21: 0.00 — Political Participation 21 Article 22: 0.00 — Social Security 22 Article 23: +0.10 — Work & Equal Pay 23 Article 24: 0.00 — Rest & Leisure 24 Article 25: 0.00 — Standard of Living 25 Article 26: 0.00 — Education 26 Article 27: -0.01 — Cultural Participation 27 Article 28: 0.00 — Social & International Order 28 Article 29: 0.00 — Duties to Community 29 Article 30: 0.00 — No Destruction of Rights 30
Negative Neutral Positive No Data
Aggregates
Editorial Mean +0.02 Structural Mean -0.06
Weighted Mean +0.01 Unweighted Mean +0.00
Max +0.11 Article 19 Min -0.12 Preamble
Signal 31 No Data 0
Volatility 0.04 (Low)
Negative 3 Channels E: 0.6 S: 0.4
SETL ℹ +0.15 Editorial-dominant
FW Ratio ℹ 52% 36 facts · 33 inferences
Evidence 26% coverage ℹ
5M 26L
Theme Radar
Foundation Security Legal Privacy & Movement Personal Expression Economic & Social Cultural Order & Duties Foundation: -0.04 (3 articles) Security: 0.00 (3 articles) Legal: 0.02 (6 articles) Privacy & Movement: -0.02 (4 articles) Personal: 0.00 (3 articles) Expression: 0.04 (3 articles) Economic & Social: 0.03 (4 articles) Cultural: -0.01 (2 articles) Order & Duties: 0.00 (3 articles)
HN Discussion 20 top-level · 22 replies
bookofjoe 2026-02-28 13:46 UTC link
xrd 2026-02-28 14:00 UTC link
A fun aside: this person obviously created a bunch of new Bitcoin accounts to hide their activity.

It makes you think that if you were able to surreptitiously add malicious side channel software into a popular npm package that you wouldn't just need to hunt for crypto wallets with balances.

You could also probably find a market for crypto wallets with small balances or zero balances. The history and date of creation would be the value to some.

This openai employee should have gone on the dark web to buy older addresses to cloak their activity.

It's sad to say that almost all crypto use cases point to fraud. I'm excited about crypto and there is some fascinating research around anonymous transactions (like zcash). But, that real utility is always overshadowed by the actions of charlatans or worse.

chazftw 2026-02-28 14:14 UTC link
That’s pretty common, you may think you own the data you work on, but you don’t. It’s proprietary confidential.
cjonas 2026-02-28 14:24 UTC link
Insider trading is so trivial on the prediction markets. I'd guess that it's actually the "feature" that results in the outcomes being so accurate.
rapind 2026-02-28 14:24 UTC link
Bad leaders get bad followers.
helsinkiandrew 2026-02-28 14:37 UTC link
Interestingly Kalshi has ‘banned’ insider trading, whilst polymarkets often tweets that some of their users must have inside information

https://news.kalshi.com/p/kalshi-trading-violation-enforceme...

https://x.com/polymarketmoney/status/2001056273500954784?s=4...

seydor 2026-02-28 14:45 UTC link
I can't believe these markets are still legal
senkora 2026-02-28 14:45 UTC link
EDIT: I am wrong, see children

> The employee, she said, “used confidential OpenAI information in connection with external prediction markets (e.g. Polymarket).”

Note that “insider trading” is not illegal on prediction markets. The particular issue here is that the employee “disclosed” confidential information on a public forum by influencing the prices assigned to certain outcomes by prediction markets.

7777777phil 2026-02-28 15:09 UTC link
77 suspicious positions across 60 wallets, 13 brand-new accounts appearing 40 hours before the browser launch. First confirmed case of a major tech company firing over prediction market trades.

I wrote about why prediction markets have a structural insider trading problem that nobody's solved yet: https://philippdubach.com/posts/the-absolute-insider-mess-of...

Havoc 2026-02-28 16:20 UTC link
Good.

I do hope corporations in general take a harder stance on this. From a society perspective people with inside knowledge fleecing randoms is not a win. We've got that somewhat under control on the stock exchange, but have this absurd situation where on prediction markets it is a free for all and everyone pretends this is fine.

I also think corporations should distance themselves from individuals willing to fleece randoms. Trading in general is very wild west survival of the fittest but active exploitation of insider knowledge speak of very poor morale character

MengerSponge 2026-02-28 16:26 UTC link
Wouldn't those prediction markets be more efficient if positions were associated with people's real names?

Like, a 100k wager from a finance dude carries some information, but a 10k wager from a staffer says a lot more!

peterjliu 2026-02-28 17:11 UTC link
I mentioned a potential OpenAI insider in https://x.com/peterjliu/status/2024901585806225723, that was from 5 minutes of investigation. There are probably more. And then there's a lot of other companies.
ddp26 2026-02-28 17:11 UTC link
Prediction markets are interesting when they are predicting future things nobody knows for sure.

"Predicting" private, known information is the wrong use case.

mrkramer 2026-02-28 17:44 UTC link
Inside trading on the public market and on the public blockchain, that's smart!
shevy-java 2026-02-28 18:30 UTC link
We can not trust these AI corporations and organisations.
blindriver 2026-02-28 19:04 UTC link
I find it absurd that someone can create an unregulated market like Kalshi, and then all of us need to be beholden to it, even though the idea is stupid. How is it possible that someone can create a product that none of us agree on, and now everyone else has to conform to the rules around it because of the problems that it creates. I would rather Kalshi get shut down than the precedent of allowing this to control employees or people.
MarceliusK 2026-02-28 20:35 UTC link
Makes you wonder how much "market accuracy" on these platforms is actually just leakage
rohitpaulk 2026-02-28 22:07 UTC link
Two questions I'd have expected the article to answer:

(a) how did they identify the employee, and (b) how come they weren't sent to jail

tabs_or_spaces 2026-03-01 05:08 UTC link
Openai employees already get crazy salaries. What motivates someone to do this?

I would understand a low salaried person doing this, but not someone from a really high paying org

blitzar 2026-03-01 07:55 UTC link
They bet "no" on AGI this year?
0x3f 2026-02-28 14:32 UTC link
I don't really understand. You can create wallets at will. What would be the value of one that someone else happened to create?
Analemma_ 2026-02-28 14:59 UTC link
Manifold actually explicitly encourages insider trading, arguing that it leads to more accurate pricing. This was possibly defensible back when it was a cute funtime project run by a Bay Area polycule, but it’s probably going to get them in deep shit sooner or later, even though they don’t even use real-money betting.
dontknowbtc 2026-02-28 15:01 UTC link
> created a bunch of new Bitcoin accounts to hide their activity

tell me you don’t understand crypto without telling me you don’t understand crypto.

agency 2026-02-28 15:04 UTC link
I don't think this is true, though enforcement is another thing and the standard is different than in securities markets. Prediction markets are regulated by the CFTC and the insider trading standard is “misappropriation of confidential information in breach of a pre-existing duty of trust and confidence to the source of the information” (vs any “material non-public information” for securities) https://www.cftc.gov/PressRoom/SpeechesTestimony/phamstateme...
qoez 2026-02-28 15:08 UTC link
It is most definitely against the rules of the sites and illegal, especially on kalshi
re-thc 2026-02-28 15:10 UTC link
> you may think you own the data you work on, but you don’t

It's called <open>AI.

morkalork 2026-02-28 15:20 UTC link
Why would Washington ban their staffers' bonus program?
ruined 2026-02-28 15:22 UTC link
you can't "change the password" on a wallet, so a "used" wallet is highly unattractive. anything you put in it could be taken by the original keyholder who sold it to you.
crazygringo 2026-02-28 15:23 UTC link
Yup. There are good reasons why it's a problem in financial markets but NOT usually a problem in prediction markets:

https://www.economist.com/leaders/2026/02/18/why-insider-tra...

> In prediction markets, informed trading is not a crime or an injustice—it is a valuable service.

A big exception, however, is using prediction markets to make predictions on events regarding publicly traded companies.

throwaway5752 2026-02-28 15:23 UTC link
Prediction markets exist to bypass gambling restrictions and monetize insider trading. It isn't a problem, it is their raison d'etre.
gtowey 2026-02-28 15:23 UTC link
Insider trading is the raison d'etre of these products.
ohyoutravel 2026-02-28 15:29 UTC link
Archived version: https://archive.ph/XWrTA
dgellow 2026-02-28 15:49 UTC link
why would you think you own data you work on
tyre 2026-02-28 16:47 UTC link
Yes and no.

If you see prediction markets as how they were originally pitched (price ~approximating likelihood), then insider trading is good. It provides discovery.

If you look at what prediction markets are today (gambling, especially on sports, especially in states that have banned it), then insider trading is bad. Particularly when the people trading can influence the outcome (e.g. a pitcher purposefully throwing into the dirt.)

strix_varius 2026-02-28 17:12 UTC link
Honestly it seems stupid but fine to me. Like if someone random comes up to me on the sidewalk and says hey if OpenAI announces a browser tomorrow, you give me $100. If not I'll give you $1000. Obviously I'm not going to take them up on it, they clearly have inside information.

If you're betting on a prediction market without insider information then you're just... The fool who is soon parted from his money one way or another.

I generally feel like people should be free to do whatever insane stuff they want with their own lives.

0xTJ 2026-02-28 17:22 UTC link
Who would think that? At every corporation where I've worked it's been explicit in both the contract and in HR training that this is explicitly not allowed.
idiotsecant 2026-02-28 17:31 UTC link
Of course. The point is not to make individual players money (that does sometimes happen as a side effect) it's to leverage their greed to find truth.
raincole 2026-02-28 18:10 UTC link
It's interesting that the both replies under this comment are saying exact same thing, with the exact same term ("raison d'etre"... how often do you hear two random people think of this phrase at the same time?).

It might be nothing, but it'd be funny if karma farming bots are doing some 'reply frontrunning' over the internet.

MarceliusK 2026-02-28 20:45 UTC link
Prediction markets are probably most "accurate" when at least some participants have genuinely superior information
MarceliusK 2026-02-28 20:46 UTC link
What investigators often look for isn't just wallet age, but funding patterns, timing, and linkages between wallets
hephaes7us 2026-02-28 23:08 UTC link
This is just one way information goes from being private to being public. It is sensible that people who provide intelligence to the market be compensated, whether they're better at inferring/predicting or whether they just know something we don't.

Obviously, in a case like this, an individual would be violating the terms of their employment/non-disclosure agreement. I agree that is bad!

I don't think that damns the concept of "predicting known information".

anonnon 2026-03-01 05:10 UTC link
> Openai employees already get crazy salaries. What motivates someone to do this?

Given what OpenAI does, what kind of person, and with what moral character, do you think works there?

EDIT: AI in general seems to attract bad actors, for whatever reason. Remember Anthony Levandowski or Marvin Minsky?
Editorial Channel
What the content says
+0.30
Article 19 Freedom of Expression
Medium Coverage
Editorial
+0.30
SETL
+0.32

Article is itself an exercise in freedom of expression—reporting news. It also mentions prediction markets (Polymarket, Kalshi) as platforms for information exchange.

+0.10
Article 8 Right to Remedy
Medium Coverage
Editorial
+0.10
SETL
ND

Article mentions the employee was fired for allegedly violating company policy; implies a process (investigation) but does not detail remedies.

+0.10
Article 23 Work & Equal Pay
Medium Coverage
Editorial
+0.10
SETL
ND

Article centers on a work-related incident (termination). Implicitly touches on 'just and favourable conditions of work' and protection against unemployment, but frames it as a breach of policy, not a rights violation.

+0.10
Article 27 Cultural Participation
Medium Coverage
Editorial
+0.10
SETL
+0.12

Article is a cultural product (journalism) and discusses prediction markets as a form of participatory culture/information sharing.

0.00
Preamble Preamble
Low
Editorial
0.00
SETL
+0.05

Article is a factual report on a corporate incident, not an exposition of human dignity or rights foundations.

0.00
Article 1 Freedom, Equality, Brotherhood
Low
Editorial
0.00
SETL
ND

No mention of inherent dignity, equality, or brotherhood.

0.00
Article 2 Non-Discrimination
Low
Editorial
0.00
SETL
ND

No discussion of non-discrimination based on race, sex, religion, etc., in the context of the firing.

0.00
Article 3 Life, Liberty, Security
Low
Editorial
0.00
SETL
ND

No mention of threats to life, liberty, or security of person in this corporate context.

0.00
Article 4 No Slavery
Low
Editorial
0.00
SETL
ND

No mention of slavery or servitude.

0.00
Article 5 No Torture
Low
Editorial
0.00
SETL
ND

No mention of torture or cruel/inhuman/degrading treatment.

0.00
Article 6 Legal Personhood
Low
Editorial
0.00
SETL
ND

No discussion of legal personhood.

0.00
Article 7 Equality Before Law
Low
Editorial
0.00
SETL
ND

No discussion of equality before the law or protection against discrimination.

0.00
Article 9 No Arbitrary Detention
Low
Editorial
0.00
SETL
ND

No mention of arbitrary arrest, detention, or exile.

0.00
Article 10 Fair Hearing
Low
Editorial
0.00
SETL
ND

No mention of a fair or public hearing.

0.00
Article 11 Presumption of Innocence
Low
Editorial
0.00
SETL
ND

No discussion of presumption of innocence or ex post facto laws.

0.00
Article 12 Privacy
Medium
Editorial
0.00
SETL
+0.10

No discussion of privacy, attacks on honor, or interference.

0.00
Article 13 Freedom of Movement
Low
Editorial
0.00
SETL
ND

No mention of freedom of movement or residence within borders, or right to leave/return.

0.00
Article 14 Asylum
Low
Editorial
0.00
SETL
ND

No discussion of asylum from persecution.

0.00
Article 15 Nationality
Low
Editorial
0.00
SETL
ND

No discussion of nationality or deprivation thereof.

0.00
Article 16 Marriage & Family
Low
Editorial
0.00
SETL
ND

No mention of marriage, family, or consent.

0.00
Article 17 Property
Low
Editorial
0.00
SETL
ND

No discussion of property ownership, alone or in association.

0.00
Article 18 Freedom of Thought
Low
Editorial
0.00
SETL
ND

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

0.00
Article 20 Assembly & Association
Low
Editorial
0.00
SETL
ND

No mention of peaceful assembly or association.

0.00
Article 21 Political Participation
Low
Editorial
0.00
SETL
ND

No discussion of participation in government, equal access to public service, or genuine elections.

0.00
Article 22 Social Security
Low
Editorial
0.00
SETL
ND

No mention of social security, economic rights, or national effort.

0.00
Article 24 Rest & Leisure
Low
Editorial
0.00
SETL
ND

No mention of rest, leisure, or reasonable working hours.

0.00
Article 25 Standard of Living
Low
Editorial
0.00
SETL
ND

No discussion of standard of living, health, well-being, or special care for motherhood/childhood.

0.00
Article 26 Education
Low
Editorial
0.00
SETL
ND

No mention of education, its purposes, or parental rights.

0.00
Article 28 Social & International Order
Low
Editorial
0.00
SETL
ND

No discussion of a social/international order where rights can be realized.

0.00
Article 29 Duties to Community
Low
Editorial
0.00
SETL
ND

No mention of duties to community, limitations for rights of others, or morality/public order.

0.00
Article 30 No Destruction of Rights
Low
Editorial
0.00
SETL
ND

No discussion of destruction of rights or interpretation justifying state/group action.
Structural Channel
What the site does
Element Modifier Affects Note
Legal & Terms
Privacy —
Privacy policy accessible; site uses ads and tracking.
Terms of Service —
Terms of service accessible; standard commercial media terms.
Identity & Mission
Mission —
WIRED covers technology, science, culture, and business; editorial focus on innovation impact.
Editorial Code —
No explicit editorial code visible on page; brand implies journalistic standards.
Ownership —
Owned by Condé Nast; commercial media entity.
Access & Distribution
Access Model -0.05
Preamble Article 19 Article 27
Primary content is accessible, but some articles may be behind a paywall or registration; page contains prominent newsletter sign-up prompts.
Ad/Tracking -0.05
Preamble Article 12
Page contains multiple ad placeholders and tracking scripts; user data collection for advertising implied.
Accessibility —
Site has responsive design; no specific accessibility statement observed on page.
-0.05
Preamble Preamble
Low
Structural
-0.05
Context Modifier
-0.10
SETL
+0.05

Site is a commercial news platform with ads and potential paywalls, which can limit universal access to information.

-0.05
Article 19 Freedom of Expression
Medium Coverage
Structural
-0.05
Context Modifier
-0.05
SETL
+0.32

Site publishes news, enabling expression, but potential paywalls/registration limit universal access.

-0.05
Article 27 Cultural Participation
Medium Coverage
Structural
-0.05
Context Modifier
-0.05
SETL
+0.12

Site hosts cultural content (news), but access may be limited by paywalls/registration.

-0.10
Article 12 Privacy
Medium
Structural
-0.10
Context Modifier
-0.05
SETL
+0.10

Site uses advertising and tracking technologies, which imply data collection.

ND
Article 1 Freedom, Equality, Brotherhood
Low

No structural features observed that engage with this principle.

ND
Article 2 Non-Discrimination
Low

No structural signals observed related to non-discrimination.

ND
Article 3 Life, Liberty, Security
Low

No structural features observed that protect or threaten security.

ND
Article 4 No Slavery
Low

No structural signals observed.

ND
Article 5 No Torture
Low

No structural signals observed.

ND
Article 6 Legal Personhood
Low

No structural signals observed.

ND
Article 7 Equality Before Law
Low

No structural signals observed.

ND
Article 8 Right to Remedy
Medium Coverage

No structural signals observed.

ND
Article 9 No Arbitrary Detention
Low

No structural signals observed.

ND
Article 10 Fair Hearing
Low

No structural signals observed.

ND
Article 11 Presumption of Innocence
Low

No structural signals observed.

ND
Article 13 Freedom of Movement
Low

No structural signals observed.

ND
Article 14 Asylum
Low

No structural signals observed.

ND
Article 15 Nationality
Low

No structural signals observed.

ND
Article 16 Marriage & Family
Low

No structural signals observed.

ND
Article 17 Property
Low

No structural signals observed.

ND
Article 18 Freedom of Thought
Low

No structural signals observed.

ND
Article 20 Assembly & Association
Low

No structural signals observed.

ND
Article 21 Political Participation
Low

No structural signals observed.

ND
Article 22 Social Security
Low

No structural signals observed.

ND
Article 23 Work & Equal Pay
Medium Coverage

No structural signals observed.

ND
Article 24 Rest & Leisure
Low

No structural signals observed.

ND
Article 25 Standard of Living
Low

No structural signals observed.

ND
Article 26 Education
Low

No structural signals observed.

ND
Article 28 Social & International Order
Low

No structural signals observed.

ND
Article 29 Duties to Community
Low

No structural signals observed.

ND
Article 30 No Destruction of Rights
Low

No structural signals observed.
Supplementary Signals
How this content communicates, beyond directional lean. Learn more
Epistemic Quality ℹ
How well-sourced and evidence-based is this content?
0.72 low claims
Sources
0.7
Evidence
0.6
Uncertainty
0.8
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
0.3
Transparency ℹ
Does the content identify its author and disclose interests?
0.33
✓ Author
More signals: context, framing & audience
Solution Orientation ℹ
Does this content offer solutions or only describe problems?
0.24 problem only
Reader Agency
0.1
Stakeholder Voice ℹ
Whose perspectives are represented in this content?
0.40 2 perspectives
Speaks: corporationinstitution
About: workersindividuals
Temporal Framing ℹ
Is this content looking backward, at the present, or forward?
present immediate
Geographic Scope ℹ
What geographic area does this content cover?
national
United States
Complexity ℹ
How accessible is this content to a general audience?
moderate medium jargon general
Longitudinal 548 HN snapshots · 62 evals
+1 0 −1 HN
Audit Trail 82 entries
2026-03-01 08:12 eval_success Lite evaluated: Neutral (0.00) - -
2026-03-01 08:12 eval Evaluated by llama-3.3-70b-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
reasoning
ED neutral on insider trading
2026-03-01 08:10 eval_success Lite evaluated: Mild positive (0.10) - -
2026-03-01 08:10 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: +0.10 (Mild positive) 0.00
reasoning
Editorial on tech company policy, no explicit rights discussion
2026-03-01 08:07 eval_success Evaluated: Neutral (0.01) - -
2026-03-01 08:07 eval Evaluated by deepseek-v3.2: +0.01 (Neutral) 16,452 tokens
2026-03-01 07:24 eval_success Lite evaluated: Neutral (0.00) - -
2026-03-01 07:24 eval Evaluated by llama-3.3-70b-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) -0.10
reasoning
ED neutral on insider trading
2026-03-01 07:18 eval_success Lite evaluated: Mild positive (0.10) - -
2026-03-01 07:18 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: +0.10 (Mild positive) 0.00
reasoning
Editorial on tech company policy, no explicit rights discussion
2026-03-01 07:13 eval_success Lite evaluated: Mild positive (0.10) - -
2026-03-01 07:13 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: +0.10 (Mild positive) 0.00
reasoning
Editorial on tech company policy, no explicit rights discussion
2026-03-01 06:37 eval_success Lite evaluated: Mild positive (0.10) - -
2026-03-01 06:37 eval Evaluated by llama-3.3-70b-wai: +0.10 (Mild positive) +0.10
reasoning
ED neutral on insider trading
2026-03-01 06:32 eval_success Lite evaluated: Neutral (0.00) - -
2026-03-01 06:32 eval Evaluated by llama-3.3-70b-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
reasoning
ED neutral on insider trading
2026-03-01 06:29 eval_success Lite evaluated: Mild positive (0.10) - -
2026-03-01 06:29 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: +0.10 (Mild positive) 0.00
reasoning
Editorial on tech company policy, no explicit rights discussion
2026-03-01 05:49 eval_success Lite evaluated: Neutral (0.00) - -
2026-03-01 05:49 eval Evaluated by llama-3.3-70b-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) -0.10
reasoning
ED neutral on insider trading
2026-03-01 05:47 eval_success Lite evaluated: Mild positive (0.10) - -
2026-03-01 05:47 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: +0.10 (Mild positive) 0.00
reasoning
Editorial on tech company policy, no explicit rights discussion
2026-03-01 05:10 eval_success Lite evaluated: Mild positive (0.10) - -
2026-03-01 05:10 eval Evaluated by llama-3.3-70b-wai: +0.10 (Mild positive) 0.00
reasoning
ED neutral on insider trading
2026-03-01 05:06 eval_success Lite evaluated: Mild positive (0.10) - -
2026-03-01 05:06 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: +0.10 (Mild positive) 0.00
reasoning
Editorial on tech company policy, no explicit rights discussion
2026-03-01 05:01 eval_success Lite evaluated: Mild positive (0.10) - -
2026-03-01 05:01 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: +0.10 (Mild positive) 0.00
reasoning
Editorial on tech company policy, no explicit rights discussion
2026-03-01 04:27 eval_success Lite evaluated: Mild positive (0.10) - -
2026-03-01 04:27 eval Evaluated by llama-3.3-70b-wai: +0.10 (Mild positive) 0.00
reasoning
ED neutral on insider trading
2026-03-01 04:10 eval_success Lite evaluated: Mild positive (0.10) - -
2026-03-01 04:10 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: +0.10 (Mild positive) 0.00
reasoning
Editorial on tech company policy, no explicit rights discussion
2026-03-01 03:49 eval_success Lite evaluated: Mild positive (0.10) - -
2026-03-01 03:49 eval Evaluated by llama-3.3-70b-wai: +0.10 (Mild positive) 0.00
reasoning
ED neutral on insider trading
2026-03-01 03:22 eval_success Lite evaluated: Mild positive (0.10) - -
2026-03-01 03:22 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: +0.10 (Mild positive) 0.00
reasoning
Editorial on tech company policy, no explicit rights discussion
2026-03-01 03:06 eval_success Lite evaluated: Mild positive (0.10) - -
2026-03-01 03:06 eval Evaluated by llama-3.3-70b-wai: +0.10 (Mild positive) 0.00
reasoning
ED neutral on insider trading
2026-03-01 02:51 eval_success Lite evaluated: Mild positive (0.10) - -
2026-03-01 02:51 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: +0.10 (Mild positive) 0.00
reasoning
Editorial on tech company policy, no explicit rights discussion
2026-03-01 02:46 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: +0.10 (Mild positive) 0.00
reasoning
Editorial on tech company policy, no explicit rights discussion
2026-03-01 02:24 eval Evaluated by llama-3.3-70b-wai: +0.10 (Mild positive) 0.00
reasoning
ED neutral on insider trading
2026-03-01 02:19 eval Evaluated by llama-3.3-70b-wai: +0.10 (Mild positive) +0.10
reasoning
ED neutral on insider trading
2026-03-01 02:01 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: +0.10 (Mild positive) 0.00
reasoning
Editorial on tech company policy, no explicit rights discussion
2026-03-01 01:55 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: +0.10 (Mild positive) 0.00
reasoning
Editorial on tech company policy, no explicit rights discussion
2026-03-01 01:33 eval Evaluated by llama-3.3-70b-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) -0.10
reasoning
ED neutral on insider trading
2026-03-01 01:28 eval Evaluated by llama-3.3-70b-wai: +0.10 (Mild positive) +0.10
reasoning
ED neutral on insider trading
2026-03-01 01:20 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: +0.10 (Mild positive) 0.00
reasoning
Editorial on tech company policy, no explicit rights discussion
2026-03-01 00:44 eval Evaluated by llama-3.3-70b-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) -0.10
reasoning
ED neutral on insider trading
2026-03-01 00:26 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: +0.10 (Mild positive) 0.00
reasoning
Editorial on tech company policy, no explicit rights discussion
2026-03-01 00:04 eval Evaluated by llama-3.3-70b-wai: +0.10 (Mild positive) +0.10
reasoning
ED neutral on insider trading
2026-02-28 23:39 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: +0.10 (Mild positive) 0.00
reasoning
Editorial on tech company policy, no explicit rights discussion
2026-02-28 23:11 eval Evaluated by llama-3.3-70b-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
reasoning
ED neutral on insider trading
2026-02-28 22:41 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: +0.10 (Mild positive) 0.00
reasoning
Editorial on tech company policy, no explicit rights discussion
2026-02-28 22:36 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: +0.10 (Mild positive) 0.00
reasoning
Editorial on tech company policy, no explicit rights discussion
2026-02-28 22:20 eval Evaluated by llama-3.3-70b-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
reasoning
ED neutral on insider trading
2026-02-28 21:56 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: +0.10 (Mild positive) 0.00
reasoning
Editorial on tech company policy, no explicit rights discussion
2026-02-28 21:36 eval Evaluated by llama-3.3-70b-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
reasoning
ED neutral on insider trading
2026-02-28 21:32 eval Evaluated by llama-3.3-70b-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
reasoning
ED neutral on insider trading
2026-02-28 21:08 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: +0.10 (Mild positive) 0.00
reasoning
Editorial on tech company policy, no explicit rights discussion
2026-02-28 20:48 eval Evaluated by llama-3.3-70b-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
reasoning
ED neutral on insider trading
2026-02-28 20:16 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: +0.10 (Mild positive) 0.00
reasoning
Editorial on tech company policy, no explicit rights discussion
2026-02-28 20:11 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: +0.10 (Mild positive) 0.00
reasoning
Editorial on tech company policy, no explicit rights discussion
2026-02-28 20:03 eval Evaluated by llama-3.3-70b-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
reasoning
ED neutral on insider trading
2026-02-28 19:22 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: +0.10 (Mild positive) 0.00
reasoning
Editorial on tech company policy, no explicit rights discussion
2026-02-28 19:16 eval Evaluated by llama-3.3-70b-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
reasoning
ED neutral on insider trading
2026-02-28 19:16 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: +0.10 (Mild positive) 0.00
reasoning
Editorial on tech company policy, no explicit rights discussion
2026-02-28 19:11 eval Evaluated by llama-3.3-70b-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
reasoning
ED neutral on insider trading
2026-02-28 18:38 eval Evaluated by llama-3.3-70b-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
reasoning
ED neutral on insider trading
2026-02-28 18:37 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: +0.10 (Mild positive) 0.00
reasoning
Editorial on tech company policy, no explicit rights discussion
2026-02-28 18:13 eval Evaluated by llama-3.3-70b-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
reasoning
ED neutral on insider trading
2026-02-28 18:11 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: +0.10 (Mild positive) 0.00
reasoning
Editorial on tech company policy, no explicit rights discussion
2026-02-28 17:50 eval Evaluated by llama-3.3-70b-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
reasoning
ED neutral on insider trading
2026-02-28 17:47 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: +0.10 (Mild positive) 0.00
reasoning
Editorial on tech company policy, no explicit rights discussion
2026-02-28 17:25 eval Evaluated by llama-3.3-70b-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
reasoning
ED neutral on insider trading
2026-02-28 17:20 eval Evaluated by llama-3.3-70b-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
reasoning
ED neutral on insider trading
2026-02-28 17:19 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: +0.10 (Mild positive) 0.00
reasoning
Editorial on tech company policy, no explicit rights discussion
2026-02-28 16:56 eval Evaluated by llama-3.3-70b-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
reasoning
ED neutral on insider trading
2026-02-28 16:53 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: +0.10 (Mild positive) 0.00
reasoning
Editorial on tech company policy, no explicit rights discussion
2026-02-28 16:51 eval Evaluated by llama-3.3-70b-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
reasoning
ED neutral on insider trading
2026-02-28 16:26 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: +0.10 (Mild positive)
reasoning
Editorial on tech company policy, no explicit rights discussion
2026-02-28 16:24 eval Evaluated by llama-3.3-70b-wai: 0.00 (Neutral)
reasoning
ED neutral on insider trading