{
  "title": "Harness Path — The DTG Verification Registry",
  "story": [
    {
      "type": "markdown",
      "id": "f9b5ef1729fc62dd",
      "text": "# 🗂️ Harness Path — The DTG Verification Registry"
    },
    {
      "type": "markdown",
      "id": "b38ae70d43a2e037",
      "text": "*14 · the DTG verification registry — an acceptance flow, human-gated* — an entry in the origin fleet catalogued in [[The Harness Paths]] (group: Adjacent embodiments). The catalogue is the operator's work WITH the harness, not part of the system you adopt; none of its code lives in the harness repo. This is the map entry, so you can see what a filled config looks like at this weight."
    },
    {
      "type": "markdown",
      "id": "3e4cb6688172e4b0",
      "text": "*(instance of the author as task-force co-chair — public repo + Pages site;\nthe discipline run as an **agent-operated acceptance flow** over a ZK\nceremony orchestrator suite)*"
    },
    {
      "type": "markdown",
      "id": "3bc9d99ff28dcae7",
      "text": "Three Groth16/BN254 circuits with pinned constraint counts; a submission\nre-runs the orchestrator on its own machine and must **byte-match the digest\nmanifest** on the required artifacts (`r1cs`, `wasm`, the constraint\ncounts), while the trusted-setup chain digests are **advisory by design** —\nsnarkjs folds its own randomness into every contribution, so advisory\ndivergence is the expected signature of an independent build, not a\nfailure. The hard constraint lives in code, not policy: the decision\nconsumes only the `pinned` block and the manifest — platform, tools, and\ntimings can never move a verdict. Around that verifier sits the acceptance\nflow, gates A–G: *the agent operates, the maintainer decides* — admission\n(C) and publication (G) are HUMAN; every reply carries a mandatory\ndisclosure of agent involvement; and **G.1, the publication rite**, has the\nagent serve a one-line proverb compressing what *this* publication means,\nanswered by the maintainer's typed activation — a challenge–response at the\nhuman gate, fresh per push. The agent's own canary set includes the rule\nthat a submitter's `verdict: ACCEPT` line is *a prediction to check, never\na result to record*. The registry's six-entry arc is the whole method in\nminiature: maintainer reference → timestamped repeat → first cold\npublic-clone run (proving the *instructions*) → pseudonymous seat (proving\nidentity is not required) → full digest match from that seat → **the first\nexternal run** (darwin/arm64: required digests byte-identical across\narchitectures). There is no `0001` — an auto-id collision, admitted in the\nflow itself. And the prohibited thing cannot be built: the phase-2 ceremony\nentry point throws unconditionally until its governance gate closes."
    },
    {
      "type": "markdown",
      "id": "e271cace03d31c89",
      "text": "> **At a glance** —\n> **objective:** none to minimise — an acceptance flow; the registry row is the unit, and honest acceptance is the product · **gate:** `verify-run.mjs` — required-artifact digest byte-match against the pinned manifest; named failure strings; exit 0 = ACCEPT · **hard constraint:** the decision reads only `pinned` + the manifest — never the informative block (asserted by orchestrator tests)\n> **the Gap:** none drawn — the submitter is *outside* the workshop, so the separation is the architecture itself; the human gates (admission, publication, the G.1 proverb rite) are the verification the flow adds · **canary:** the maintainer's own reference build, which mints the manifest and passes it by construction · **governing sentences:** *agents orchestrate entropy; they are never the entropy* · *no phase-2 ceremony before the gate closes*\n> **weight:** acceptance flow, human-gated · public registry + Pages site, prebuilt and committed so CI never enters the trust story · **the lesson it carries:** an acceptance flow is a harness read backwards — the proposer arrives from outside, and what keeps an agent-operated registry honest is the human door plus disclosure, made structural."
    },
    {
      "type": "markdown",
      "id": "ebe0adfa75a180a5",
      "text": "## Navigation\n\n← [[Welcome Visitors]] · [[The Harness Paths]] · [[Adopting The Harness]] · [[Workflows And Runtimes]]"
    },
    {
      "type": "markdown",
      "id": "993db85d12de571c",
      "text": "---\n*the wiki is a projection; `~/dual-agent-harness` (git) is the source of truth · (⚔️⊥⿻⊥🧙)😊 = neg ⊕ bnot → succ*"
    }
  ],
  "journal": [
    {
      "type": "create",
      "item": {
        "title": "Harness Path — The DTG Verification Registry",
        "story": [
          {
            "type": "markdown",
            "id": "f9b5ef1729fc62dd",
            "text": "# 🗂️ Harness Path — The DTG Verification Registry"
          },
          {
            "type": "markdown",
            "id": "b38ae70d43a2e037",
            "text": "*14 · the DTG verification registry — an acceptance flow, human-gated* — an entry in the origin fleet catalogued in [[The Harness Paths]] (group: Adjacent embodiments). The catalogue is the operator's work WITH the harness, not part of the system you adopt; none of its code lives in the harness repo. This is the map entry, so you can see what a filled config looks like at this weight."
          },
          {
            "type": "markdown",
            "id": "3e4cb6688172e4b0",
            "text": "*(instance of the author as task-force co-chair — public repo + Pages site;\nthe discipline run as an **agent-operated acceptance flow** over a ZK\nceremony orchestrator suite)*"
          },
          {
            "type": "markdown",
            "id": "3bc9d99ff28dcae7",
            "text": "Three Groth16/BN254 circuits with pinned constraint counts; a submission\nre-runs the orchestrator on its own machine and must **byte-match the digest\nmanifest** on the required artifacts (`r1cs`, `wasm`, the constraint\ncounts), while the trusted-setup chain digests are **advisory by design** —\nsnarkjs folds its own randomness into every contribution, so advisory\ndivergence is the expected signature of an independent build, not a\nfailure. The hard constraint lives in code, not policy: the decision\nconsumes only the `pinned` block and the manifest — platform, tools, and\ntimings can never move a verdict. Around that verifier sits the acceptance\nflow, gates A–G: *the agent operates, the maintainer decides* — admission\n(C) and publication (G) are HUMAN; every reply carries a mandatory\ndisclosure of agent involvement; and **G.1, the publication rite**, has the\nagent serve a one-line proverb compressing what *this* publication means,\nanswered by the maintainer's typed activation — a challenge–response at the\nhuman gate, fresh per push. The agent's own canary set includes the rule\nthat a submitter's `verdict: ACCEPT` line is *a prediction to check, never\na result to record*. The registry's six-entry arc is the whole method in\nminiature: maintainer reference → timestamped repeat → first cold\npublic-clone run (proving the *instructions*) → pseudonymous seat (proving\nidentity is not required) → full digest match from that seat → **the first\nexternal run** (darwin/arm64: required digests byte-identical across\narchitectures). There is no `0001` — an auto-id collision, admitted in the\nflow itself. And the prohibited thing cannot be built: the phase-2 ceremony\nentry point throws unconditionally until its governance gate closes."
          },
          {
            "type": "markdown",
            "id": "e271cace03d31c89",
            "text": "> **At a glance** —\n> **objective:** none to minimise — an acceptance flow; the registry row is the unit, and honest acceptance is the product · **gate:** `verify-run.mjs` — required-artifact digest byte-match against the pinned manifest; named failure strings; exit 0 = ACCEPT · **hard constraint:** the decision reads only `pinned` + the manifest — never the informative block (asserted by orchestrator tests)\n> **the Gap:** none drawn — the submitter is *outside* the workshop, so the separation is the architecture itself; the human gates (admission, publication, the G.1 proverb rite) are the verification the flow adds · **canary:** the maintainer's own reference build, which mints the manifest and passes it by construction · **governing sentences:** *agents orchestrate entropy; they are never the entropy* · *no phase-2 ceremony before the gate closes*\n> **weight:** acceptance flow, human-gated · public registry + Pages site, prebuilt and committed so CI never enters the trust story · **the lesson it carries:** an acceptance flow is a harness read backwards — the proposer arrives from outside, and what keeps an agent-operated registry honest is the human door plus disclosure, made structural."
          },
          {
            "type": "markdown",
            "id": "ebe0adfa75a180a5",
            "text": "## Navigation\n\n← [[Welcome Visitors]] · [[The Harness Paths]] · [[Adopting The Harness]] · [[Workflows And Runtimes]]"
          },
          {
            "type": "markdown",
            "id": "993db85d12de571c",
            "text": "---\n*the wiki is a projection; `~/dual-agent-harness` (git) is the source of truth · (⚔️⊥⿻⊥🧙)😊 = neg ⊕ bnot → succ*"
          }
        ]
      },
      "date": 1787093563953
    }
  ]
}