Corrections and contact
If we got something wrong, tell us. If a story names your organization, you are welcome to respond.
Report an error or respond
Write to support@systemxtechnologies.com. Tell us the story, the sentence, and what the record shows. We check every report against the source.
Any organization or office a story names is welcome to respond. We publish responses in full, on the story and on this page, and we do not edit them.
When we fix a mistake we say so on the story and list it below. Earlier entries stay in the log.
Correction log
-
· Texas Tech's NVIDIA Bet Is Bigger Than a Supercomputer. How Does West Texas Compare With the World?
An earlier correction said we had not found the minutes showing the vote on the May 7, 2026 Texas Tech regents item. The May 7 minutes are posted. They list the project budget among the minute orders approved with the consent agenda, with the words "The Board authorized" (item I.C.1.j), and name no mover, seconder or vote count. We now cite them. We could not find the August 2026 minutes that would show the May minutes themselves were approved.
-
· Texas Tech's NVIDIA Bet Is Bigger Than a Supercomputer. How Does West Texas Compare With the World?
The deck, card text and FAQ originally called the $40 million a "board-authorized" budget. The May 7, 2026 agenda only asks the regents to authorize it, and we have not found minutes showing the vote (the August 2026 agenda book lists approval of the May 7 minutes, but their text is not posted where we could find it). They now say the budget was put before the regents. If the minutes show a vote, we will say so and cite them.
-
· Texas Tech's NVIDIA Bet Is Bigger Than a Supercomputer. How Does West Texas Compare With the World?
The deck and meta description originally called this a "$40 million" project. The May 7, 2026 Texas Tech University System regents agenda asks the regents to authorize a total project budget of "up to $40,000,000" (including $25,720,217.63 for the NVIDIA server racks and $12,517,158 for renovation and installation, with about $2,000,000 of storage still being sourced), not a fixed $40 million cost. Both now say "up to $40 million." The article body already did.
-
· ChatGPT, Claude and Grok Went Down at Once. No Shared Explanation Yet.
Removed several specific claims we could not verify against a source we opened ourselves: an asserted Eastern time zone for the times above (now stated as unconfirmed); a specific outage-start time and Downdetector figure tied to it; a claim naming a specific Azure region as the cause; a claim that a second cloud provider's problems compounded it; a claim that some companies had fully recovered while another had not; a specific example of one company's status page appearing to lag behind outside reporting (removed entirely, not replaced); an entity name attached to one of the Pentagon's AI tools; and a factual claim about the Pentagon's use of Claude that the underlying debunk didn't actually need. We also dropped two sources we could not link to a real, checkable page, and softened this story's headline and several "as of" claims to reflect that we cannot currently confirm what has or hasn't been said since our tools can't reach primary sources.
-
· ChatGPT, Claude and Grok Went Down at Once. No Shared Explanation Yet.
Added a citation for a paragraph on prior cloud-outage precedent that had gone out without one.