展示HN：Sentinel – AI决策的加密证明（零知识机器学习，链上）
嘿，HN，
我们一直遇到同样的问题：当一个人工智能系统做出重要决策时，没有中立的方式来验证它实际上看到了什么和做了什么。日志可以被编辑，截图可能不真实。“相信我们”在受监管的行业或诉讼中无法成立。
因此，我们构建了SENTINEL。三个产品，一个协议：
*SENTINEL Score*——不可破解的安全层。输入文本，输出浮动值（0.0-1.0）。没有其他信息通过网络传输。没有令牌，没有文本，没有个人健康信息（PHI）。无法被破解，因为没有可以破解的内容。HIPAA环境、军事、信用局——他们需要的是一个数字，而不是聊天机器人。
*SENTINEL Proof*——人工智能争议的中立平台。每次评估都经过零知识证明（ZK-proof）、时间戳，并在Base主网提交。记录不由供应商或客户控制。当案件进入法庭时，交易哈希就是证据。人工智能公司可以自己构建这个——但他们不会。“你们在存储我们的对话？”这是一个公关灾难。中立的第三方解决了这个问题。
*AEGIS*——闭环的人工智能安全。72B参数模型。发现漏洞，编写补丁。不是报告。扫描、识别、修补、验证。
目前在Base主网上有8个合约上线。免费API密钥可在sentinel.biotwin.io获取——无需信用卡，无需销售电话。
我们在Bio-Twin（AI药物安全预筛查）中使用SENTINEL Proof，使人工智能决策对制药实验室和律师具有可辩护性。上周迪士尼270万美元加州总检察长和解的案例就是这件事重要性的具体例证。
欢迎讨论链上架构、规模化的zkML证明生成或欧盟人工智能法案合规性。
查看原文
Hey HN,<p>We kept running into the same problem: when an AI system makes a consequential decision, there's no neutral way to verify what it actually saw and did. Logs are editable. Screenshots lie. "Trust us" doesn't hold up in regulated industries or litigation.<p>So we built SENTINEL. Three products, one protocol:<p>*SENTINEL Score* -- unjailbreakable safety layer. Text in, float out (0.0-1.0). Nothing else crosses the wire. No tokens, no text, no PHI. Can't be jailbroken because there's nothing to jailbreak. HIPAA environments, military, credit bureaus -- they need a number, not a chatbot.<p>*SENTINEL Proof* -- neutral ground for AI disputes. Every evaluation ZK-proofed, timestamped, committed on Base mainnet. Neither vendor nor client controls the record. When it goes to court, the transaction hash is the evidence. AI companies could build this themselves -- they won't. "You're storing our conversations?" is a PR disaster. Neutral third party solves that.<p>*AEGIS* -- AI security that closes the loop. 72B parameter model. Finds vulnerabilities, writes the patch. Not a report. Scan, identify, patch, verify.<p>8 contracts live on Base mainnet. Free API key at sentinel.biotwin.io -- no credit card, no sales call.<p>We use SENTINEL Proof inside Bio-Twin (AI drug safety pre-screening) to make AI decisions defensible for pharma labs and attorneys. The Disney $2.75M CA AG settlement last week is a concrete example of why this matters.<p>Happy to talk on-chain architecture, zkML proof generation at scale, or EU AI Act compliance.