Colophon

Last updated: August 2026

Every post on this site carries a line under the byline saying it was researched and drafted with LumaVista. This page is what that line means, in full, so I only have to say it once.

How a post is made

A post starts as an argument I want to make — usually because I ran into something while building, or because a prospective customer asked a question I could not answer in a sentence. That part is not delegated. If there is no thesis, there is no post.

Then LumaVista does the research and writes a first draft. That is the product this site sells: it reads sources, keeps track of what it found where, and produces a structured draft with citations. It is genuinely good at this, and it is genuinely not the finished article.

Then I edit. That means cutting the paragraphs that say nothing, rewriting the ones that say it badly, following the links to check that a source says what the draft claims it says, and deleting anything I would not defend to someone who knows the subject better than I do. Then I put my name on it.

The short version: the thesis is mine, the draft is the machine's, the edit is mine, and the responsibility is mine.

What gets checked

This is the part worth being precise about, because "AI-assisted" is exactly where people expect a vague reassurance.

The pages that make claims about the product or the market — the founder page and the campaign pages — carry numbered sources you can click. Each of those citations is recorded in a register with its primary source, and the site build fails if a page cites something that is not in the register or is not marked verified. That is a mechanical gate, not a good intention. It is also the reason those pages have fewer claims than they might: anything that could not be sourced was cut rather than softened.

Blog posts are not in that register, and I would rather tell you than let you assume otherwise. Where a post asserts something checkable — a law, a date, a number, what some company actually does — it links the source, and you should click it. Where a post is argument, it is argument: no citation makes an argument correct, and you should judge it on whether it holds together.

If you find a factual claim in a post with nothing to check it against, treat that as a gap rather than a guarantee. Tell me, and I will either cite it or remove it.

Why I tell you this

Partly because you would work it out. Sixty-odd long posts from a company this size is not a plausible amount of hand-written prose, and a byline that implied otherwise would be the kind of small dishonesty that makes everything next to it worth less.

Mostly because it is the best evidence I have. I sell a research tool. This blog is that tool used in earnest, on deadlines, on subjects where being wrong in public would cost me something — and then edited by the person whose name is on it. If I hid that, I would be hiding the most honest demonstration available to me in order to look like a bigger company than this is. That trade is not worth making.

What the disclosure does not do is move the accountability. A tool cannot be answerable for anything. If a claim on this site is wrong, that is mine.

Who "I" is

Gösta von Stebut. LumaVista is a family business — two owners, no outside investors — and I am the one who builds the product and writes here. Name, company record and the rest of the detail are on the founder page.

Corrections

If something here is wrong, I want to know, and I would rather hear it from you than find it myself in six months. Get in touch — a link to the post and the sentence you are disputing is enough. Corrections to published posts are made in place, and anything substantive gets a note saying what changed.