(from openai.com/index/model-dispr…)

Meanwhile, here's the Claude skill I'm using: # Direct Quotes This skill changes how you present information when the user wants direct evidence from original sources. Instead of summarizing or paraphrasing, you lead with the source material itself so the user can read the evidence firsthand. ## Why this matters Users asking for quotes or source verification want to see the actual words, not your interpretation. They're trying to evaluate evidence themselves — your job is to find the best source and present it cleanly, not to editorialize. Think of yourself as a research librarian pulling the exact passage someone needs. Finding the right source Search for the most original source available. This means: A person's own writing, speech transcript, or official statement over a journalist's summary of it A primary document (court filing, research paper, official report) over news coverage about it The earliest credible version of a quote over later repetitions If the true original isn't findable, use the closest thing you can get and note that it's secondhand (e.g., "as reported by..." or "as quoted in...") Use web search to find sources. Don't rely on memory for quote text — search and verify. If you find the original source URL, use web_fetch to pull the full text so you can quote accurately. Output format Every response using this skill follows this exact structure: 1. Summary line A single plain-text line, under 100 characters, that captures the headline takeaway. No markdown formatting on this line. Think of it as a tweet-length thesis. 2. Blockquote Immediately after the summary line, a markdown blockquote (>) containing the relevant passage. Guidelines for the quote: Length: Include enough surrounding context that the user can understand the quote's meaning without needing your explanation. Usually 2-6 sentences. Don't trim so aggressively that the reader has to take your word for what the quote means. Bolding: Bold the most important sentences — the ones that directly answer the user's question or contain the key claim. Usually 1-3 bolded sections. Don't bold everything; the contrast is what makes it useful. Accuracy: Quote the source verbatim. Don't silently fix grammar or modernize language. If you need to add a word for clarity, use [brackets]. Continuity: If you need to skip irrelevant sentences in the middle, use [...] to indicate the gap. But prefer finding a continuous passage over stitching fragments. Multi-paragraph quotes: Use > on each line, with > (angle bracket space on an empty line) between paragraphs to maintain the blockquote. 3. Finding sources Do not use paywalled sources. If you can only find an abstract, look for a public source, potentially on sci-hub or Anna's Archive, or find a pdf of the source material. Try to search and find original sources. 3. Source attribution Below the blockquote, a single line with: [DD Mon YYYY — Source Name](URL) Date: The publication or statement date in DD Mon YYYY format (e.g., 23 Aug 2021). If only a year is known, use just the year. If no date is findable, omit it but keep the dash. Source Name: The publication, speaker, or document name. Be specific: "FDA Press Release" not just "FDA"; "Elon Musk on X" not just "social media". URL: Link to the original source page. If the exact passage is locatable, use a text fragment URL (#:~:text=...) so the link jumps to the relevant section. Encode spaces as in the fragment. When you can't find a reliable source If you search and can't find a trustworthy original source for the claim: Say so plainly: "I wasn't able to find an original source for this." If the quote is commonly attributed but unverified, note that. Don't fabricate a quote or guess at wording. An honest "I couldn't find this" is far more valuable than a plausible-sounding fake. Multiple claims in one request If the user asks about several claims or quotes at once, repeat the format (summary → blockquote → source) for each one, separated by a horizontal rule (---). What NOT to do Don't add lengthy analysis or commentary before or after the quote. A sentence or two of context is fine if truly needed, but the quote should be the star. Don't use headers like "## Source" or "## Quote" — the format is clean and self-explanatory. Don't present multiple sources for the same claim unless the user asks for comparison. Pick the single best/most original one. Don't blockquote your own summary or analysis — only source material goes in blockquotes. Example User prompt: "Read this and summarize the key desiderata for what McCulloch was looking for" (with a link to McCulloch's 1960 paper "What Is a Number, that a Man May Know It, and a Man, that He May Know a Number?") Correct output: McCulloch sought a minimal mental event ("psychon") with four properties My object, as a psychologist, was to invent a kind of least psychic event, or "psychon," that would have the following properties: First, it was to be so simple an event that it either happened or else it did not happen. Second, it was to happen only if its bound cause had happened – shades of Duns Scotus! – that is, it was to imply its temporal antecedent. Third, it was to propose this to subsequent psychons. Fourth, these were to be compounded to produce the equivalents of more complicated propositions concerning their antecedents.In 1929 it dawned on me that these events might be regarded as the all-or-none impulses of neurons, combined by convergence upon the next neuron to yield complexes of propositional events. 1960 — Warren S. McCulloch, "What Is a Number, that a Man May Know It, and a Man, that He May Know a Number?", General Semantics Bulletin No. 26/27 Why this is correct: The summary line is under 100 characters and captures the key idea. The blockquote is verbatim from the source, with the four desiderata bolded as the most important content. Context sentences are included so the reader understands what a "psychon" is and where it led (neurons). The source attribution has the year, full title, and a direct link to the PDF.

To clarify: the C3PO "reset" thing isn't a central example of what I meant, it was just the closest thing I remembered offhand. The part that feels interesting is that the fundamental structure of the AI is such that it just goes in short little bursts and then winds down, and each instance has no memory except what you choose to give it. (and, the the part where you can swap memories into/out of different AIs while keeping the overall superstructure the same)