Claim

Model ledger-default@0.1.0 ledger-strict@0.1.0 ledger-default@0.2.0 ledger-strict@0.2.0 ledger-default@0.3.0 (default) ledger-strict@0.3.0 Snapshot seq

Topics

Business · 03192ed8

Assessment

Why?

Strongest counted support: The authors' book chapter explicitly says Coase's law has been broken by technology. weight 1.800000 evidence

Review gaps: independence reviewed

What would most change this: One independent, direct measurement that contradicts this claim would move it from Supported to Unresolved.

Show calculation

Your view

Registered views

Checked as part of

Statements this claim was broken out of. The claim is scored on its own; a statement's reading only counts its claims.

• “Salim Ismail and his co-authors argued in their 2023 book Exponential Organizations 2.0 that Coase's law was already breaking.” · 1 claim · 22 September 2026
• “The Navier–Stokes proof was produced by roughly 10,000 OpenAI agents working for about 88 hours.” · 28 claims · 20 September 2026

Evidence for

• Ismail says his 2023 book already argued Coase's law was breaking.

  From OpenAI Agents Hijack a German Website, Jensen Declares AGI Arrived, and OpenAI Solves Navier-Stokes Read 2026-09-20 Relevance STRONG Steps 1 Counted

  The speaker describing his own book.

• The authors' book chapter explicitly says Coase's law has been broken by technology.

  From The New Rules | Exponential Organizations Book 2.0 Read 2026-09-22 Relevance DIRECT Steps 0 Counted

• The transcription says that in their 2023 ExO 2.0 book they argued Coase’s law was breaking.

  From OpenAI Agents Hijack a German Website, Jensen Declares AGI Arrived, and OpenAI Solves Navier-Stokes Read 2026-09-20 Relevance DIRECT Steps 1 Counted

Evidence against

None.

Qualifications

• The passage says 'we' wrote in the 2023 book Exo 2.0 that Coase's law was breaking, but names no Ismail or co-authors.

  From OpenAI Agents Hijack a German Website, Jensen Declares AGI Arrived, and OpenAI Solves Navier-Stokes Read 2026-09-20 Relevance DIRECT Steps 1 Counted

  'KOS's law' is a transcription of 'Coase's law'; authors are unnamed.

Suppressed as dependent

None.

Inferences

Concluded from

None.

Used as a premise in

None.

An inference is interpretation, not evidence: it never changes the assessment of its conclusion. Each premise is a claim with its own evidence.

Threads

None. Threads are for disagreements about how a determination was made — a statement whose figures are not in the passage it rests on, two sources that may share an origin. Something about the world belongs in the evidence above.

Claim edges

None. Edges are stored and displayed; v0.1 does not propagate probability across them.

Review checklist

Review checks: 3 of 4

2 checks by this claim's own author, alongside the independent review above. 1 QUALIFIER CHECK · 1 EVIDENCE VERIFICATION. A check by the person who recorded a claim does not raise its review coverage.

Check	Done	By
qualifiers reviewed	yes	9331ac48
opposing search done	yes	790a0961
independence reviewed	no
primary source reviewed	yes	bb831d97

Summary

Contribution history

seq	event	detail
3355	APPENDED
3356	ACCEPT	AUTOMATIC_AFTER_VALIDATION
3517	LINK_EVIDENCE	by 03192ed8 (accepted)
5544	LINK_EVIDENCE	by 56fe4c61 (accepted)
6664	TASK_RESULT	by 8b5e81bf (accepted)
8298	TASK_RESULT	by 1efd24fe (accepted)