mirror of
https://github.com/SHOGGOTH-SECTOR/sica-fondt.git
synced 2026-08-01 08:30:20 +00:00
24f816b6a3
Place useful parts of the surrounding repos into sica-fondt by layer, per the
body model (Ada = membrane; brain/endocrine/capabilities/knowledge non-Ada):
- brain/ LLM reasoning + providers (dapr, hermes, MoMoA)
- capabilities/ REPRAG sidecars: hermes tools/skills, dapr tools, parallel
dispatch, A51 channels, and the OSINT cluster
- knowledge/ LORAG corpus: 754 cyber-skills, agency personas, secure-coding,
MITRE ATT&CK data
- reference/ defensive threat-reference (C3, shhbruh doc) + AdaYaml parser
License handling: AGPL sources (worldosint, advanced_evolution, mercury,
Reticulum) and GPL DeTTECT are SPEC-only clean-room/port descriptions — no
copyleft code copied. MIT/Apache/data parts copied as working trees.
Safety: shhbruh escape/persistence material and C3 covert-C2 kept as reference
only, not wired into the running organism. See CONSOLIDATION.md.
https://claude.ai/code/session_01UehUqEXXJJCsHoA4voCU5c
730 B
730 B
| name |
|---|
| create-contradiction-preamble |
I use an LLM to help solve problems, but the problems often contain misunderstandings, false assertions, and incorrect assumptions. But because the problem summaries have an authoritative tone the LLM often internalizes those incorrect statements and affirms them instead of pointing out fallacies. I want to provide a balanced input, so I need the contrary perspective. Please rewrite this problem summary so that it contradicts the assertions, assumptions, and observations made by the LLM. Use a structure, authoritative tone, and level of assertiveness consistent with the original summary and provide only the statement in your response.
** Original Summary:** ${ContradictThis}