Methodology
Every OPD case file should answer three questions: What can this technology do? What evidence shows that it exists or is being used? What could it cost the people affected?
How we describe status
PATENTED: A patent has been granted. We identify an application as an application when no grant is established. Patent documents describe claimed inventions; they do not establish that a working product exists.
BUILT: A prototype or functioning system is documented. We state the conditions of the demonstration and avoid treating laboratory performance as proof of everyday reliability.
DEPLOYED: Evidence identifies a system installed or introduced for operational use, with the operator, place and date where available. A product being offered for sale does not by itself establish a deployment.
DOCUMENTED HUMAN USE: Evidence shows the system used on or with people. We specify whether this was a research study, a trial or an operational use, and what the participants experienced. This label alone does not establish covert use, harm or lack of consent.
These descriptions can overlap. We report the status supported by each source and distinguish related technologies from the exact invention or product under discussion. Unknown status stays unknown.
Following the evidence
We favor original patent records, research papers, technical documentation, government records and evidence from identified operators. Manufacturer claims are attributed to the manufacturer. Reporting and social posts can supply leads; key factual claims should link to the strongest available evidence. Where a source supports only part of a claim, we narrow the claim.
Separating facts and concerns
Our analysis examines incentives, power and plausible abuse. We explain the capability that creates the concern and who could benefit from using it. We do not require an admission of harmful intent to scrutinize a design. We do distinguish that scrutiny from evidence that a particular abuse has occurred.
Images and updates
Illustrations explain a concept; they are not evidence of a deployment. Generated or reconstructed scenes should be labeled as illustrations. Substantive factual corrections receive a dated note explaining what changed. Readers can send source material or challenge a claim at obscurepatentdangers@gmail.com.