I'll be straightforward about what I actually know versus what's uncertain:

## What I know with reasonable confidence
- My training data has a **knowledge cutoff** (early 2025 for me)
- It included **large amounts of internet text**, books, code, and other written material
- It was curated and filtered to some degree by Anthropic

## What's genuinely uncertain
- The **exact composition** - I don't have a precise breakdown of sources
- **Specific websites or datasets** included
- Exactly how content was **weighted or filtered**
- The **full scale** of the training data

## What I think is worth being honest about
- I may have **biases** reflecting whatever was overrepresented in training data
- I can't fully **audit my own training** - I only know what Anthropic has made public
- Some things I "know" might reflect **internet consensus rather than truth**
- My knowledge is **uneven** - better on some topics than others depending on data availability

## What Anthropic has publicly shared
- They've described using Constitutional AI and RLHF in my training
- They've emphasized safety-focused data curation

I'd rather acknowledge these uncertainties than pretend I have complete self-knowledge about my training. Is there something specific you're trying to understand?
