delphi.question.published
Appended 15 Aug 2026, 15:54 UTC. Its place in the chain is fixed by the hash of the entry before it; what follows is whether that place is covered by a signature.
The entry
- sequence_
number - 70
- entry_
type delphi.question.published- entity_
type forecast_question - entity_
id eb8beb52-14b3-4956-b29e-909a936abbc4- logged_
at 2026-08-15T15:54:02.586220+00:00- previous_
hash 498af5df011d035c69cad5252ae0c2b71c7e37ac00a54ee717d5b46219c70943- payload_
hash fc3f28cc73991df038d542b8e6868b6d2451a22b87df5f8ece6c3567fbc389ec- entry_
hash 9356dc5e05e6036c105e0c5ba93e431400e8309be4cb5951ea551178a8e9dd81
sourceGET /api/transparency/entries/{n}· one entry, as served to this reader· payload served
Payload
{
"slug": "will-steam-exceed-its-all-time-concurrent-user-record-of-42-042-778-before-2027",
"title": "Will Steam exceed its all-time concurrent user record of 42,042,778 before 2027?",
"origin": "EDITORIAL",
"timebase": {
"clock": "REAL_UTC"
},
"closes_at": "2026-09-15T22:00:00.000000Z",
"opened_at": "2026-08-15T15:54:02.581352Z",
"blind_mode": true,
"provenance": "PUBLIC_RECORD",
"description": "The record was set on 11 January 2026 and confirmed by Valve at GDC 2026. Concurrent records on Steam typically fall in the first days of January rather than in December, which is what puts the year-end deadline in play.",
"question_id": "eb8beb52-14b3-4956-b29e-909a936abbc4",
"resolution_criteria": "YES if a concurrent user peak strictly above 42,042,778 is recorded with a timestamp on or before 31 December 2026, according to Valve's own published statistics.",
"expected_resolution_at": "2027-01-05T12:00:00.000000Z",
"canonical_source_policy": "Valve's own Steam statistics at https://store.steampowered.com/stats/ or a Valve statement. Third-party trackers are not the source of record.",
"resolution_rule_revision": 1
}Shown indented so it can be read. The hash is taken over the canonical form of the same object — keys sorted by code point, no insignificant whitespace, UTF-8 rather than escaped ASCII, timestamps RFC 3339 in UTC to microseconds, decimals as their plain string form. The check below re-encodes the object canonically before hashing it, which is why an indented display cannot make it pass or fail.
Verify it here
Recomputing the hashes in this browser… If this sentence stays, this browser has no Web Crypto and nothing here has been verified locally.
The proof, as served
- leaf_
index - 70
- tree_
size - 181
- leaf_
hash 7a9da400f5042d291ae5873c6181d940a1198b2e61e1c385d442dfd6bc607628- audit_
path (8) 0: 9cd6d7accef6f16faf33f002da191d20ed0033af8e4bc7da3b83b22a26e2c9751: 0bc93996f146bec87728f4d8875eea5994c7317264bb6b5856a9f40e76b1dc102: a88ad8907b57aa46407232eb82bcc4a6cc8639e1592dd98029abdf0e1bc0f1273: f4a68b91efeded9ba075d89086c93a42419b28e2a8d1828dc64e70cc58b74a724: 90ca477c832ae34ed00dfa76c2b10e36cff69ccd72ce614d0c507e05920007b15: bfda397922356f7a423fafc090d2af03517b89157a8d6cc66d277e2cca96e8316: 9fe2edb4769e24911c893b0836891045cef78ef8ed4ae19ec89e6d92edfad5a37: 9635acfeb8c2590a96fbee35cfdc30839f075e00ba35b025d06547731fc18743- root_
hash 4c26c3ce818fe1e45410fef48bf0969b94f9e5bc0389388f5310d968c2e42fdc
The earliest published head that covers this entry
No published tree head covers this entry yet, so there is nothing signed to check it against. That is the ordinary state of an entry appended since the last checkpoint, and it is neither a failure nor a permanent one.
sourceGET /api/transparency/proof/inclusion· leaf_hash, audit_path, root_hash· audit-path nodes: 8