ShubhamX (Twitter) profile trust report
Looking for problems to solve. Before: eng @sablier, alumni @iitbombay.
Algorithmic trust score
Looks genuine
Higher scores indicate fewer risk signals.
- Last assessed
- Score based on
- 1 observer
- Engine version
- vv1.6.0
- Evidence coverage
- Limited signals
Some signals were unavailable. Read this score with extra caution.
How is this score calculated?Public signals on this account are consistent with a genuine person or organisation.
This report uses public signals. It cannot verify identity or guarantee safety.
Your account? Request a review or removal
Scan activity
- Scanned by
- 1
- xlegit user has shared evidence for this profile.
- Account age
- 10 years
- On X since January 2016.
- Published assessments
- 1
- First scored 21 Sept 2026.
- Community reports
- 0
- User reports, shown separately from the algorithmic score.
Topics and tone
This sample does not establish a recurring topic. A consistent tone is not clear yet.
Recurring topics
Not established from this sample
Writing tone
Not established from this sample
Formats
Not established from this sample
Based on 20 sampled own posts. This describes the writing, not the person or their expertise. It does not affect the trust score.
Read the sample
Isn’t this as big as the invention of writing itself or am I missing something? I am surprised it only has 12M views. https://t.co/dAdSIoyhX1
@the_samsama BTW it was nice meeting you during the Build Night.
@the_samsama lol
@waitbutwhy Would you like to elaborate more on why you think we may be in grave danger because of AI?
Heard that Apple launched a foldable iPad yesterday. https://t.co/VUYrgOPxxW
@DanielRemondin1 lmao
@desbullshit04 @ClayInstitute Why do you think so?
@ArmandDoma @RuxandraTeslo Regulations apart, how can technology play a role in accelerating trials?
Lol it turns out it might be true: https://t.co/7cTLk9jNGo
@cguth_7 I am not betting against the trend. I think most math problems will be solved by AI. But what if proving these theorems was all about looking at data after all. Proving Fermat's Last Theorem only became possible with the help of 20th-century tools (elliptic curves, Galois
10k AI agents working together to take down London airports. https://t.co/mtgPkXhZvf
@QwQiao Nobody threw $1M in tokens for counting "r" in "strawberry". I am sure, it would have done well there as well.
@cguth_7 What makes you think that feeding back these proofs will enable LLMs synthesize new mathematical conjectures and statements? I think it requires questioning existing known knowledge or assumptions which it does not do so well.
@EquityCats You are assuming the job of mathematician is just to prove theorems. A mathematician generally play three roles: 1. Come up with definitions 2. Come up with conjectures 3. Prove theorems While I do agree “proving theorems” can be delegated to the AI with the right prompt,
@EquityCats https://t.co/j2D3mUoMQF
Ask yourself: "What if the proof was somewhere in the notes found on the internet on which the model was trained on?"
For anyone interested in Andrew Wiles' paper: https://t.co/SMZBrFXbw2
When Andrew Wiles solved Fermat’s Last Theorem, he added 84 references to the paper. His proof was built on other people’s work. How many references does OpenAI’s article have? None. That makes it look as if the LLM did something novel. In reality, it is only as good as the https://t.co/posRMYRETN
@ContrarianCurse 100% https://t.co/pVTPojaqOw
DGX price has gone up by 25% on ebay in 1 month. I bought for £4000 a month ago. Hilarious. At this rate, it will be selling for £8000 in 3 months. https://t.co/gsAeGumZVh
Open this profile in the extension and choose “Adapt this style for my account” to build a voice guide and content plan from your own ideas.
Before you trust, follow or reply
A closer look at what the available evidence tells us, and what it leaves open.
Still an open question
Scams & suspicious requests
The available checks did not surface a clear scam warning. That does not tell us whether every offer or link is safe.
Check the destination and the terms of any request for money or personal information.
Still an open question
Identity & impersonation
We have not established who runs this account. A familiar photo, a badge or a high score cannot settle that on its own.
Use the person’s or organisation’s own website to confirm the account when identity matters.
Still an open question
Useful, original content
There is not enough evidence here to say how much original, useful detail this profile adds.
Read a few complete posts. Look for clear examples, sources and answers that help with your interests.
Still an open question
Rage bait & clickbait
The available checks did not establish a repeated bait pattern. A short sample can still miss it.
Look for a clear point or useful detail behind a dramatic headline.
Fig. 01
The signals behind the score
Account age
The account has an established history. That gives you more context to review, but older accounts can still change hands.
Posting cadence
This part of the available activity adds reassuring context. Read it alongside the other checks; it is not a guarantee of safety.
Time-of-day pattern
This part of the available activity adds reassuring context. Read it alongside the other checks; it is not a guarantee of safety.
Fig. 02
Score breakdown
Each bar shows the points earned in one dimension. Missing dimensions were not assessed. A hard risk signal can override the combined result. Read about the signals on the algorithm page.
- Account fingerprint25 / 25 pts
- Content originality19.7 / 25 pts
- Behavioral patterns14.8 / 15 pts
- Network quality9 / 15 pts
- Engagement authenticity9.0 / 15 pts
- Visual identity3 / 5 pts
Fig. 03
Score history
One daily snapshot so far. This chart records the published assessment for each day with a score.
Show as a table
| Date | Score | Observers |
|---|---|---|
| 21 Sept 2026 | 82 · Looks genuine | 1 |
Fig. 04
Community reports
These reports come from xlegit users. They appear alongside the trust score and do not change the number.
- Active reports
- 0
- Distinct reporters
- 0
- Community score
- 0/ 100
- A higher score means stronger concern from community reports. Each report is weighted by the reporter’s history.
There are no active community reports for this profile. Users submit reports from the extension. No reports does not guarantee that an account is safe.
Reading the report
What this report can tell you
Can this tell me whether @sy100x is a bot?
It can help you spot signs of automation, fake accounts or scams, but it cannot prove who is behind an account. A high score does not verify identity. A low score does not prove wrongdoing. Read the reasons and check important claims for yourself.
How current is this assessment?
The published score was assessed on . This page refreshes hourly. Reloading it does not run a new scan. To request a fresh check, open the profile in X with the Chrome extension installed.
Why might community reports disagree?
Reports reflect users’ experiences and are weighted by their reporting history. They are separate from the trust score and have not been independently verified. If no reports appear, it means no active reports are available in xlegit. It does not mean the account is safe.
Check profiles while you browse X
Check profiles while browsing X with the xlegit Chrome extension. Free includes 5 scans a day, up to 30 a month, plus 15 post checks a day. Pro adds 200 daily post checks, Link guard, Focus mode and timeline badges.
Is this your account?
If you think the score is wrong, you can ask us to review it. You can also ask for your score to be withheld. We will explain our decision and correct the assessment when needed.
Request a review of @sy100xReport generated 21 Sept 2026, refreshed hourly. Not affiliated with X Corp.