seven steps, nothing pre-recorded
Make one. Then try
to fake it.
Stills or a clip from your brief. You pick one and say why.
It is signed, and the signature goes in the file where your computer can show it.
Then you edit it, and the proof stops agreeing.
Say what you want, and how it should look.
One brief, one house style, every candidate submitted together. Same instruction every time, and they will not all come back equally good. That is the whole reason a gate exists.
what to make
house style
The style is a preset, so the full prompt is ours and stays withheld. Your brief is your own words and is shown back to you.
You choose. Say why in your own words.
Click the one you want and write the reason you picked it. No model here can see a picture, so nothing pretends to judge your taste. Your reason is what the rejection notes are written from: say the stance was better and the notes answer on stance, not on file sizes.
Your name goes into the record and into the file, so the approval has a person on it. Everything you did not pick is stored too, with the note on why it lost.
Check it against its own record.
The chosen file carries a hash and a reference struck into it, plus your sign-off written where a file browser will show it. Nothing is taken on trust: the checker re-hashes the exact bytes you would download.
Now change it.
Two kinds of edit, and the record refuses both. The record itself stays valid the whole time. It simply stops describing this file.
An edit you can see
The sort of thing that happens between approval and publication, every day.
An edit you cannot
One byte, deep in the image data. Your eye will not catch it. The hash will.
Check the edited one.
Same checker, same record. The record still verifies against itself. The media no longer matches it.
The rejects are the interesting part.
Every attempt from this run is kept in storage, not just the winner. Acceptance rates, latency and what a usable asset really costs are unknowable if you bin the failures. Note that only the chosen one is signed: download a reject and its properties are bare, because nobody approved it.
The note under each one is not a caption. It went into the record before the record was hashed, alongside your name, so rewriting why something lost breaks the signed file in step 3. Each note also says how it was worded: you gave the judgement, a language model turned it into one line per candidate.
Now take the paperwork with you.
From 2 August 2026 an output like this has to be marked in a machine readable way, and someone eventually has to show that it was. This record covers everything you have generated in this browser, not just the run above, so go back to step 1 and make something else and it grows. For each file it gives which marks it actually carries, measured by reading it, the hash to check it by, and what the record does not claim. The ones nobody picked are on it too, carrying nothing, because that is true, and each one carries the note on why it was refused and who worded that note.
Pick something first and this appears.