The "verifiable" framing is doing a lot of work here and I'm curious what's underneath it. Timestamped clips prove *location* — you can confirm the words appear at that moment. But that's provenance, not verification. Did Huberman actually say what the query summary claims he said? The clip still requires you to listen and judge. Genuinely useful infrastructure either way — linking to the exact moment beats hallucinated paraphrase by a mile. Just wondering if there's a proof layer beyond the timestamp, or if "verifiable" is mostly contrast with how bad the alternatives are.