Restructure economics doc into 27 org-roam interlinked nodes

Replace monolithic passepartout-economics.org with directory of
org-roam style nodes, each with :ID: property and cross-references
using [[id:uuid][title]] format.

27 nodes organized by theme:
- Core: index, triad overview, agora, stoa
- Revenue: verification appliance, domain gate packages, evaluation
  harness, skill marketplace, agora usernames, PDS service, compute marketplace
- Strategy: investment thesis, moats, licensing, patents, AI industry impact
- Analysis: lisp economics, sufficiency flip, time estimates, cost structure,
  gate rule encoding, upgrade lifecycle, biology parallels, symbolics comparison
- Big money: verification monopoly, infrastructure lock-in

Old file kept as archive with redirect links to new structure.

ideas/passepartout-economics.org

@@ -1,8 +1,26 @@
-#+TITLE: Passepartout — Patents, Moats, Economics, Design Implications
+#+TITLE: Passepartout — Economics (monolithic archive)
 #+AUTHOR: Hermes agent distillation of 2026-05-21 discussion with Amr
-#+FILETAGS: :passepartout:agent:economics:ip:licensing:
+#+FILETAGS: :passepartout:agent:economics:ip:licensing:archive:
 #+STARTUP: content
 
+This file has been replaced by an interlinked knowledge base. See
+[[file:passepartout-economics/index.org][the new structure]] — 27 nodes with org-roam style cross-references.
+
+Nodes:
+- [[file:passepartout-economics/passepartout-economics.org][Index/hub]]
+- [[file:passepartout-economics/triad-overview.org][Triad overview]] • [[file:passepartout-economics/agora.org][Agora]] • [[file:passepartout-economics/stoa.org][Stoa]]
+- [[file:passepartout-economics/investment-thesis.org][Investment thesis]]
+- [[file:passepartout-economics/verification-appliance.org][Verification appliance]] • [[file:passepartout-economics/domain-gate-packages.org][Domain gate packages]] • [[file:passepartout-economics/evaluation-harness.org][Evaluation harness]]
+- [[file:passepartout-economics/agora-usernames.org][Agora usernames]] • [[file:passepartout-economics/pds-as-a-service.org][PDS as a service]] • [[file:passepartout-economics/compute-marketplace.org][Compute marketplace]]
+- [[file:passepartout-economics/verification-monopoly.org][Verification monopoly]] • [[file:passepartout-economics/infrastructure-lock-in.org][Infrastructure lock-in]]
+- [[file:passepartout-economics/ai-industry-impact.org][AI industry impact]] • [[file:passepartout-economics/lisp-economics.org][Lisp economics]]
+- [[file:passepartout-economics/self-driving-lisp-machine.org][Self-driving Lisp Machine]] • [[file:passepartout-economics/time-estimates.org][Time estimates]]
+- [[file:passepartout-economics/sufficiency-flip.org][Sufficiency flip]] • [[file:passepartout-economics/upgrade-lifecycle.org][Upgrade lifecycle]]
+- [[file:passepartout-economics/patent-strategy.org][Patent strategy]] • [[file:passepartout-economics/licensing.org][Licensing]] • [[file:passepartout-economics/moats.org][Moats]]
+- [[file:passepartout-economics/cost-structure.org][Cost structure]] • [[file:passepartout-economics/gate-rule-encoding.org][Gate rule encoding]]
+- [[file:passepartout-economics/verified-skill-marketplace.org][Verified skill marketplace]]
+- [[file:passepartout-economics/biology-parallels.org][Biology parallels]] • [[file:passepartout-economics/comparison-with-symbolics.org][Symbolics comparison]]
+
 * Summary
 
 Discussion about the economic and strategic implications of Passepartout's

ideas/passepartout-economics/agora-usernames.org

@@ -0,0 +1,15 @@
+:PROPERTIES:
+:ID:       2e390c1d-65f3-5fb3-b898-ac3fc4291ee7
+:END:
+#+title: Premium Username Registry on Agora
+#+filetags: :passepartout:agora:revenue:names:registry:
+
+The DID system is permissionless — anyone generates their own DID via HD key derivation. But human-readable @handles (short names, common words, brand names) are naturally scarce. The early player controls the namespace registry.
+
+- **Free tier:** any DID can claim a namespace.username on a first-come, first-served basis with proof of key ownership
+- **Premium tier:** short names (2-3 chars), common words, brand names, squatter prevention via auction or annual lease
+- **Revenue model:** $5-$50/year per premium username, auction revenue for highly contested names (single-letter, common surnames). ENS-style: registration fees fund development, not speculation.
+
+At scale: 1M premium usernames at $10/yr average = $10M/yr recurring. The namespace registry is a natural monopoly — the early player's registry is the most widely accepted, so every new user registers there. Network effects lock in.
+
+See also: [[id:1a2b38df-20ba-58ca-ba55-a072be67bd0d][PDS as a service]], [[id:3c6b0449-a8fb-5b89-b82a-34efb21ef5b5][Compute marketplace]]

ideas/passepartout-economics/agora.org

@@ -0,0 +1,22 @@
+:PROPERTIES:
+:ID:       1d074690-a279-59cb-b91d-e9a22ae104ad
+:END:
+#+title: Agora — The Society (Decentralized Network)
+#+filetags: :passepartout:agora:network:dids:
+
+Agora is the decentralized identity and communication layer that connects Passepartout instances:
+
+- **Self-sovereign identity** via HD key derivation (BIP-44)
+- **Encrypted messaging** via DIDComm (agent-to-agent and agent-to-human)
+- **Notes** as atomic, content-addressed, signed data units (mapped from Passepartout memory-objects)
+- **Relay Network** for censorship-resistant message routing
+- **Personal Data Store (PDS)** — the Merkle fact store exposed as a network-addressable service
+- **Compute marketplace** where instances offer symbolic engine capacity
+- **Contracts and liquid democracy** infrastructure
+
+The PDS is Passepartout's in-process memory — the Merkle tree, the fact store, the memory-objects. Every memory-object already has a SHA-256 hash, which maps directly to Agora's CIDv1 content addressing.
+
+Revenue paths from Agora:
+- [[id:2e390c1d-65f3-5fb3-b898-ac3fc4291ee7][Premium username registry]] — $10M/yr at scale
+- [[id:1a2b38df-20ba-58ca-ba55-a072be67bd0d][PDS as a service]] — $18M/yr at scale
+- [[id:3c6b0449-a8fb-5b89-b82a-34efb21ef5b5][Compute marketplace]] — venture-scale

ideas/passepartout-economics/ai-industry-impact.org

@@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
+:PROPERTIES:
+:ID:       5f55bbe6-d243-5766-8ccf-5c5cc88a6542
+:END:
+#+title: Impact on the AI and GPU Industry
+#+filetags: :passepartout:economics:industry:ai:gpu:nvidia:
+
+If a symbolic-bootstrapping architecture becomes popular, the industry structure shifts fundamentally:
+
+**Token demand compresses.** The entire AI industry (OpenAI, Anthropic, Google — ~$50B API revenue) is built on per-token pricing. A mature Passepartout reduces token consumption to the unfamiliar 10% I/O boundary. Steady-state per-user LLM consumption drops by an order of magnitude.
+
+**GPU inference demand plateaus in regulated industries.** Inference demand drops 80-90% in any sector where the rule book is published — which covers most economically significant sectors (finance, healthcare, industrial, government procurement, legal compliance). Nvidia's growth narrative shifts from "every transaction goes through a GPU" to "every training run needs a GPU."
+
+**Hyperscaler competition shifts.** The race shifts from "who has the most H100s" to "who has the best domain-specific gate rules." Google's industry data advantage matters more than Azure's raw compute.
+
+**New hardware tier emerges:** CPU-native verification appliances running Lisp microcode on RISC-V cores. Low volume (hundreds of thousands/year), high margin ($5K-50K/unit). Manufacturable at older fab nodes (28nm, 45nm) — no dependency on TSMC's leading edge.
+
+See also: [[id:9af13fff-9725-542b-93b1-a555bc74ad72][Lisp economics]], [[id:827bc546-e887-5b7c-9b65-6392beaf0920][Verification monopoly]], [[id:13e6ae54-2d24-5aa0-b1cd-a7e8e749aa70][Self-driving Lisp Machine]]

ideas/passepartout-economics/biology-parallels.org

@@ -0,0 +1,19 @@
+:PROPERTIES:
+:ID:       2afd9a3c-e96a-54c7-ac77-a05a28065b4b
+:END:
+#+title: Biology as Proof of the Lisp Model
+#+filetags: :passepartout:biology:lisp:parallels:evolution:
+
+Striking parallels between microbiology and the Lisp model:
+
+1. **Homoiconicity** — DNA is code and data in the same molecule; no separate source and binary
+2. **Hot-reloadable image** — alternative splicing, epigenetic marks, post-translational modifications change the running program without restart
+3. **Automatic memory management** — proteasomes degrade misfolded proteins, autophagy recycles organelles; the cell never calls free()
+4. **Interpreted dynamic language** — DNA → RNA → ribosome (interpreter) → protein; no static compilation step
+5. **Self-modifying source** — CRISPR, transposons, DNA repair modify the genome at runtime; eval on the genome
+6. **Duck typing** — protein folding depends on chemical environment, not type declarations
+7. **Concurrent real-time GC** — apoptosis breaks down cell components for recycling by neighboring cells
+
+Biology chose the Lisp model because it is more robust, adaptable, and evolvable. Evolution optimized for survival in an unpredictable environment, not peak single-thread throughput. Biology is the proof that the Lisp model can be efficient at planetary scale, running on hardware that self-assembles from food.
+
+See also: [[id:9af13fff-9725-542b-93b1-a555bc74ad72][Lisp economics]]

ideas/passepartout-economics/comparison-with-symbolics.org

@@ -0,0 +1,18 @@
+:PROPERTIES:
+:ID:       00ab3a4d-e3de-5605-a67d-12935bb36ab5
+:END:
+#+title: Comparison with Symbolics Genera
+#+filetags: :passepartout:history:symbolics:comparison:
+
+| | Symbolics Genera (1980s) | Passepartout (2020s) |
+|---|---|---|
+| Lines | ~1,000,000 | ~21,000 (self-driving target) |
+| Developer-years | ~10 years, large team | ~1 year, 1-3 devs |
+| OS | Built from scratch in assembly + Lisp | Runs on Linux (free OS layer) |
+| Hardware | Custom Lisp Machine (entire computer) | PCIe card (FPGA or Tenstorrent) |
+| Market | $50K-$100K/seat | $5K-$50K/appliance |
+| Scope | Full OS + environment | Cognitive agent + hardware acceleration |
+
+The Symbolics comparison is instructive: they built a full Lisp OS from scratch. Passepartout runs on Linux, providing the OS layer for free. The hardware integration is a PCIe card, not a replacement of the entire host. The scope is dramatically smaller — ~2% of the code for a fraction of the functionality that matters most.
+
+See also: [[id:9af13fff-9725-542b-93b1-a555bc74ad72][Lisp economics]], [[id:13e6ae54-2d24-5aa0-b1cd-a7e8e749aa70][Self-driving Lisp Machine]]

ideas/passepartout-economics/compute-marketplace.org

@@ -0,0 +1,15 @@
+:PROPERTIES:
+:ID:       3c6b0449-a8fb-5b89-b82a-34efb21ef5b5
+:END:
+#+title: Agora Compute Marketplace
+#+filetags: :passepartout:agora:revenue:compute:marketplace:
+
+Passepartout instances offer their symbolic engine capacity (ACL2 cycles, Screamer constraint solving, VivaceGraph queries) to other agents on the Agora network.
+
+The early player runs a large instance and sells compute to smaller instances. The AGPL allows this because the marketplace is a service, not a modification of the code. Revenue is a percentage of each compute transaction.
+
+If Passepartout instances on Agora transact billions of verified operations per day, the spread on compute transactions is enormous. This is not a product sale — it is a bet on network effects. Every new instance increases the value of the network (more capacity, more diversity, more resilience).
+
+The early player that provisions the largest compute capacity on Agora becomes the default infrastructure provider for the entire network. This is venture-scale money.
+
+See also: [[id:2e390c1d-65f3-5fb3-b898-ac3fc4291ee7][Agora usernames]], [[id:827bc546-e887-5b7c-9b65-6392beaf0920][Verification monopoly]], [[id:5961e469-53a3-5f3c-ab72-3c83ef91963f][Investment thesis]]

ideas/passepartout-economics/cost-structure.org

@@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
+:PROPERTIES:
+:ID:       0b5a8a74-cfd6-542d-bc88-4eb3cd8626f9
+:END:
+#+title: Cost Structure — Zero Marginal Cost
+#+filetags: :passepartout:economics:cost:marginal:zero:
+
+- **One-time cost:** gate-rule encoding for a domain (from hours for codified domains up to months for tacit domains)
+- **Near-zero marginal cost:** ACL2 proof + Screamer consistency check + VivaceGraph lookup per interaction — all CPU-native, all in-image
+- **No recurring LLM API costs** for the 80% symbolic reasoning layer
+- **After sufficiency flip:** pennies per day vs dollars per day for LLM-only
+
+The cost curve inverts: generation is expensive, verification is cheap. This is the inversion Passepartout exploits.
+
+Token demand shifts from "every interaction burns tokens" to "only unfamiliar interactions burn tokens." Steady-state per-user LLM consumption drops by an order of magnitude.
+
+See also: [[id:9af13fff-9725-542b-93b1-a555bc74ad72][Lisp economics]], [[id:45ea493b-94ad-5885-aa65-0c846e5c3c1d][Gate rule encoding]], [[id:efc76898-03f7-57ba-923d-35d65da88bb7][Sufficiency flip]]

ideas/passepartout-economics/domain-gate-packages.org

@@ -0,0 +1,19 @@
+:PROPERTIES:
+:ID:       c34940cc-090e-57c4-8020-e78b1d32b96c
+:END:
+#+title: Domain Gate Rule Subscriptions
+#+filetags: :passepartout:revenue:gate-rules:compliance:subscription:
+
+Pre-verified gate rule packages for specific compliance domains. Translated from published regulations by the LLM, verified by ACL2, reviewed by a human for the 5% ambiguous edge cases.
+
+- HIPAA package: $50K/yr
+- SOC2 package: $50K/yr
+- GDPR package: $50K/yr
+- FedRAMP package: $100K/yr
+- Combined enterprise: $250K/yr
+
+Switching costs are high — changing packages means re-verifying the fact store against new rules. The infrastructure lock-in compounds: a hospital at $250K/yr in year one grows to $500K-$1M by year five as more packages are added and the fact store becomes more valuable than the software itself.
+
+20 subscriptions in year one = $1M-$5M.
+
+See also: [[id:45ea493b-94ad-5885-aa65-0c846e5c3c1d][Gate rule encoding]], [[id:84a537b4-4256-50c8-91f5-dd5b4538418f][Verification appliance]], [[id:45258a2d-1675-562c-9024-5d1eb2f1ea56][Evaluation harness]], [[id:2f783eb4-638e-5afa-9b59-6224d086a712][Infrastructure lock-in]]

ideas/passepartout-economics/evaluation-harness.org

@@ -0,0 +1,19 @@
+:PROPERTIES:
+:ID:       45258a2d-1675-562c-9024-5d1eb2f1ea56
+:END:
+#+title: Evaluation Harness as Certification Service
+#+filetags: :passepartout:revenue:certification:evaluation:regression:
+
+The accumulated regression suite — thousands of edge cases from every deployed instance, every bug fix, every regulatory change — becomes the most comprehensive test of autonomous agent correctness.
+
+**Service:** "Run our 10,000-task suite against your AI agent and get a Merkle-verified score."
+**Target:** AI labs proving their agents' capabilities, enterprise procurement requiring independent verification.
+**Price:** $50K-$200K per certification.
+
+The regression suite grows with every deployment, making the certification increasingly valuable over time. The early player's suite is the largest because they started first.
+
+10 certifications in year one = $500K-$2M.
+
+Long-term endpoint: this becomes the UL certification for AI — a third-party verification nobody can ignore. [[id:827bc546-e887-5b7c-9b65-6392beaf0920][The verification monopoly]].
+
+See also: [[id:84a537b4-4256-50c8-91f5-dd5b4538418f][Verification appliance]], [[id:2f783eb4-638e-5afa-9b59-6224d086a712][Infrastructure lock-in]], [[id:aa6d062e-a520-5d14-8773-00687ed9c689][Moats]]

ideas/passepartout-economics/gate-rule-encoding.org

@@ -0,0 +1,19 @@
+:PROPERTIES:
+:ID:       45ea493b-94ad-5885-aa65-0c846e5c3c1d
+:END:
+#+title: Gate Rule Encoding from Codified Domains
+#+filetags: :passepartout:gates:rules:encoding:llm:translation:
+
+Laws, regulations, standards, procedures, and technical specifications are already written down in structured text. The LLM does not need to *reason* about them — it needs to *translate* them into gate rules and ACL2 theorems.
+
+Example: The US Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) is ~2,000 pages. A frontier LLM can ingest the FAR and produce a plist of gate rules:
+- (if contract > $250K AND not small-business-set-aside → :deny)
+- (if sole-source AND no justification-documented → :deny, produce-justification)
+
+ACL2 verifies the rule set for internal consistency. Screamer checks against existing compliance facts. The human reviews the bootstrap output and approves or corrects individual rules.
+
+The key distinction: the LLM is not *extracting knowledge from prose* — it is *translating a known rule system into a formal representation.* The result is not "the LLM's best guess" but "the rule set as stated in the source document, mechanically transcribed."
+
+For codified domains, the encoding cost drops from weeks to hours. The only bottleneck is human review of the 5% ambiguous rules.
+
+See also: [[id:efc76898-03f7-57ba-923d-35d65da88bb7][Sufficiency flip]], [[id:0b5a8a74-cfd6-542d-bc88-4eb3cd8626f9][Cost structure]], [[id:c34940cc-090e-57c4-8020-e78b1d32b96c][Domain gate packages]]

ideas/passepartout-economics/index.org

@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
+:PROPERTIES:
+:ID:       1c3ec48b-446c-50d2-b53e-126a81f5143f
+:END:
+#+title: Index — Passepartout Triad Knowledge Base
+#+filetags: :index:
+
+This is an alias for the knowledge base hub. The canonical entry point is:
+
+[[file:passepartout-economics.org][Passepartout Economics — hub node]]
+
+Org-roam compatible. Use [[id:1c3ec48b-446c-50d2-b53e-126a81f5143f][this ID]] to link from other files.

ideas/passepartout-economics/infrastructure-lock-in.org

@@ -0,0 +1,18 @@
+:PROPERTIES:
+:ID:       2f783eb4-638e-5afa-9b59-6224d086a712
+:END:
+#+title: Infrastructure Lock-In and Switching Costs
+#+filetags: :passepartout:economics:moats:lock-in:switching:
+
+A hospital that runs Passepartout with HIPAA gate rules ($50K/yr) for five years has accumulated:
+
+- A fact store with a decade of compliance decisions
+- A proof forest of verified rules
+- An empirical decision history tied to their specific deployment
+- Customized gate rules encoding their specific workflows and approvals
+
+Switching to a competitor means discarding all of it. The accumulated value grows as the fact store deepens. Annual revenue per enterprise grows from $250K in year one to $500K-$1M by year five as more domain packages are added.
+
+This is the strongest residual moat. The evaluation harness (regression suite) is a close second — it grows with every deployment and cannot be ingested from public data.
+
+See also: [[id:45258a2d-1675-562c-9024-5d1eb2f1ea56][Evaluation harness]], [[id:827bc546-e887-5b7c-9b65-6392beaf0920][Verification monopoly]], [[id:aa6d062e-a520-5d14-8773-00687ed9c689][Moats]], [[id:29e4dbf3-cf19-589c-8b14-389e8a39d564][Upgrade lifecycle]], [[id:c34940cc-090e-57c4-8020-e78b1d32b96c][Domain gate packages]]

ideas/passepartout-economics/investment-thesis.org

@@ -0,0 +1,19 @@
+:PROPERTIES:
+:ID:       5961e469-53a3-5f3c-ab72-3c83ef91963f
+:END:
+#+title: Investment Thesis
+#+filetags: :passepartout:economics:investment:thesis:
+
+The early player benefits from every other instance of the triad. Every deployed instance feeds edge cases into the regression suite, grows the compute marketplace, and validates the hardware designs. Network effects are positive sum.
+
+Three revenue horizons:
+
+- **Low-hanging fruit (year one, $2M-$12M):** verification appliances, domain gate rule subscriptions, evaluation harness certification, migration services
+- **Medium-term (1-3 years, $10M-$50M):** compute marketplace, Relay Network, Lisp Machine hardware; premium usernames ($10M/yr), PDS hosting ($18M/yr)
+- **Big money (3-10 years, $100M-$1B+):** verification monopoly (UL certification for AI), infrastructure lock-in, planetary compute marketplace
+
+The switching costs compound. The network effects are positive sum. The market is nearly a trillion dollars.
+
+The defensible entity is "the organization that best understands how to adapt Passepartout to your domain" — not "the organization that owns Passepartout."
+
+See also: [[id:84a537b4-4256-50c8-91f5-dd5b4538418f][Verification appliance]], [[id:c34940cc-090e-57c4-8020-e78b1d32b96c][Domain gate packages]], [[id:45258a2d-1675-562c-9024-5d1eb2f1ea56][Evaluation harness]], [[id:2e390c1d-65f3-5fb3-b898-ac3fc4291ee7][Agora usernames]], [[id:1a2b38df-20ba-58ca-ba55-a072be67bd0d][PDS as a service]], [[id:827bc546-e887-5b7c-9b65-6392beaf0920][Verification monopoly]], [[id:2f783eb4-638e-5afa-9b59-6224d086a712][Infrastructure lock-in]], [[id:aa6d062e-a520-5d14-8773-00687ed9c689][Moats]]

ideas/passepartout-economics/licensing.org

@@ -0,0 +1,21 @@
+:PROPERTIES:
+:ID:       67faf52f-9126-50a7-b87e-2bedc610dac7
+:END:
+#+title: Licensing — AGPLv3 + Commercial
+#+filetags: :passepartout:ip:licensing:agpl:commercial:
+
+**AGPLv3 for the public repository.** AGPL closes the ASP loophole: anyone who modifies the software and offers it over a network must release their modified source. Protects against proprietary forks.
+
+Crucially: AGPL is a *product requirement*, not a concession. The system's value proposition is provable correctness — every decision has Merkle provenance. This claim is structurally incredible with closed source. An enterprise buyer needs to inspect the gate stack, verify the Merkle implementation, and confirm ACL2 integration. AGPL makes this possible without signing an NDA.
+
+**AGPL only covers modifications to code, not:**
+- Gate rules specific to a domain (these are data, not code)
+- The fact store (empirical data generated from usage)
+- Ontology categories (design decisions stored as configuration)
+- Proprietary skills loaded at runtime (AGPL boundary on plugin systems is legally unsettled)
+
+**Dual license model:**
+- AGPLv3 for open source — builds ecosystem, trust, community
+- Commercial license for enterprises that cannot accept AGPL — MySQL/SugarCRM/GraphQL model
+
+See also: [[id:caaeee11-ba6f-5566-aecd-f171b4c459c0][Patent strategy]], [[id:aa6d062e-a520-5d14-8773-00687ed9c689][Moats]], [[id:1a2b38df-20ba-58ca-ba55-a072be67bd0d][PDS as a service]]

ideas/passepartout-economics/lisp-economics.org

@@ -0,0 +1,18 @@
+:PROPERTIES:
+:ID:       9af13fff-9725-542b-93b1-a555bc74ad72
+:END:
+#+title: Why Lisp Is Economically Viable Now
+#+filetags: :passepartout:economics:lisp:history:C:viability:
+
+The 1980s trade-off was: C is cheap enough for the market. Correctness is a luxury the market cannot afford. The 2020s trade-off is: C is expensive for the market. Incorrectness has become the dominant cost of software. Lisp's verification infrastructure is now the cheaper option.
+
+Four transformations flipped the economics:
+
+1. **Memory is free.** 40MB runtime is noise on a $20 Raspberry Pi with 8GB RAM. In 1980, DRAM was ~$5,000/MB.
+2. **Transistors are free.** Modern ARM Cortex-A72 has billions of transistors. GC and type dispatch cost nothing because the transistors are there whether used or not.
+3. **Complexity saturates human verification.** Systems are tens of millions of lines. Testing is necessary but insufficient — zero-day vulnerabilities prove bugs survive all testing. Formal verification is the only known path.
+4. **Cost of failure exceeds cost of verification.** A single breach costs millions. Regulation mandates provable compliance. Proving correctness is cheaper than not proving it.
+
+The verification appliance (AGPL symbolic engine + RISC-V Lisp μcode on FPGA) costs $5,000/year and replaces $500,000/year in compliance audits, breach litigation, and regulatory fines.
+
+See also: [[id:13e6ae54-2d24-5aa0-b1cd-a7e8e749aa70][Self-driving Lisp Machine]], [[id:2afd9a3c-e96a-54c7-ac77-a05a28065b4b][Biology parallels]], [[id:00ab3a4d-e3de-5605-a67d-12935bb36ab5][Symbolics comparison]], [[id:0b5a8a74-cfd6-542d-bc88-4eb3cd8626f9][Cost structure]], [[id:5f55bbe6-d243-5766-8ccf-5c5cc88a6542][AI industry impact]]

ideas/passepartout-economics/moats.org

@@ -0,0 +1,19 @@
+:PROPERTIES:
+:ID:       aa6d062e-a520-5d14-8773-00687ed9c689
+:END:
+#+title: Competitive Moats
+#+filetags: :passepartout:economics:moats:competition:
+
+Re-evaluated: time is not the primary moat. A Phase 4+ Passepartout fed on Wikipedia + Wikidata can build a general ontology in two weeks. The organic growth advantage collapses for general knowledge.
+
+**Actual moats (weaker than initially assumed):**
+1. **Domain-specific gate rules** — thin. A few hundred lines of Lisp data. Write once, trivial to copy. Not a real moat.
+2. **Empirical decision history** — every HITL decision is a Merkle fact. A fresh instance has none. Makes *your* instance more valuable but doesn't prevent competition — it's a switching cost, not a barrier to entry.
+3. **Evaluation harness (regression suite)** — thousands of test cases accumulated from every bug fix. Cannot be ingested from public data. Strongest residual moat.
+4. **Infrastructure integration** — specific Docker compose layouts, Traefik patterns, Authentik configs encoded as gate rules. A competitor's infrastructure is different.
+
+**Strongest competitor strategy:** Not copying your gate rules — offering the same architecture as a service with their own pre-seeded general knowledge and a consulting engagement to customize gate rules. The AGPL prevents closing the architecture but does not prevent offering it as a service with a customization layer.
+
+**The defensible business is services, not product.** The defensible entity is "the organization that best understands how to adapt Passepartout to your domain" — not "the organization that owns Passepartout."
+
+See also: [[id:2f783eb4-638e-5afa-9b59-6224d086a712][Infrastructure lock-in]], [[id:827bc546-e887-5b7c-9b65-6392beaf0920][Verification monopoly]], [[id:45258a2d-1675-562c-9024-5d1eb2f1ea56][Evaluation harness]], [[id:caaeee11-ba6f-5566-aecd-f171b4c459c0][Patent strategy]], [[id:67faf52f-9126-50a7-b87e-2bedc610dac7][Licensing]]

ideas/passepartout-economics/passepartout-economics.org

@@ -0,0 +1,38 @@
+:PROPERTIES:
+:ID:       1c3ec48b-446c-50d2-b53e-126a81f5143f
+:END:
+#+title: Passepartout Triad — Knowledge Base
+#+filetags: :passepartout:triad:economics:index:
+
+The triad replaces every layer of the modern computing stack with Lisp-native, user-owned, ACL2-verified alternatives. Three components:
+
+- [[id:a1fac32a-47de-5fbd-b67d-29152c851747][Logos (Passepartout) — the cognitive agent]]
+- [[id:c3b3dc41-945f-54e9-84eb-ca014114f1be][Stoa (The Porch) — the environment]]
+- [[id:1d074690-a279-59cb-b91d-e9a22ae104ad][Agora (The Society) — the network]]
+
+Total addressable market: ~$960B/year across cloud, AI, OS, social media, payments, productivity, and compliance.
+
+The business model is the AWS of provable computing: AGPL infrastructure is free, revenue comes from verification appliances, gate rules, certification, namespace registry, hosted PDS, and a compute marketplace. Network effects are positive sum — every instance feeds the regression suite and grows the marketplace.
+
+Key analytical frames:
+- [[id:5961e469-53a3-5f3c-ab72-3c83ef91963f][Investment thesis — the unified view]]
+- [[id:9af13fff-9725-542b-93b1-a555bc74ad72][Why Lisp is economically viable now]]
+- [[id:efc76898-03f7-57ba-923d-35d65da88bb7][The per-domain sufficiency flip]]
+- [[id:dc2e4f22-1c4c-5d4a-a151-f96e5d3b0d70][Development velocity and timeline estimates]]
+- [[id:0b5a8a74-cfd6-542d-bc88-4eb3cd8626f9][Cost structure and zero marginal cost]]
+- [[id:aa6d062e-a520-5d14-8773-00687ed9c689][Competitive moats analysis]]
+
+Revenue paths (short to long term):
+- [[id:84a537b4-4256-50c8-91f5-dd5b4538418f][Verification appliance]][[id:c34940cc-090e-57c4-8020-e78b1d32b96c][  Domain gate packages]][[id:45258a2d-1675-562c-9024-5d1eb2f1ea56][  Evaluation harness]]
+- [[id:2e390c1d-65f3-5fb3-b898-ac3fc4291ee7][Agora premium usernames]][[id:1a2b38df-20ba-58ca-ba55-a072be67bd0d][  PDS as a service]][[id:3c6b0449-a8fb-5b89-b82a-34efb21ef5b5][  Compute marketplace]]
+- [[id:827bc546-e887-5b7c-9b65-6392beaf0920][Verification monopoly — the big money]][[id:2f783eb4-638e-5afa-9b59-6224d086a712][  Infrastructure lock-in]]
+
+Strategy and IP:
+- [[id:caaeee11-ba6f-5566-aecd-f171b4c459c0][Patent strategy]][[id:67faf52f-9126-50a7-b87e-2bedc610dac7][  Licensing (AGPL + commercial)]]
+- [[id:5f55bbe6-d243-5766-8ccf-5c5cc88a6542][Impact on the AI/GPU industry]]
+- [[id:29e4dbf3-cf19-589c-8b14-389e8a39d564][Upgrade and distribution lifecycle]]
+- [[id:45ea493b-94ad-5885-aa65-0c846e5c3c1d][Gate rule encoding from codified domains]]
+- [[id:2afd9a3c-e96a-54c7-ac77-a05a28065b4b][Biology as proof of the Lisp model]]
+- [[id:00ab3a4d-e3de-5605-a67d-12935bb36ab5][Comparison with Symbolics Genera]]
+
+*The lines that run the modern internet (tens of millions across Google, Meta, Amazon, Apple, Microsoft) are replaced by a single coherent architecture where one gate stack verifies everything and one prover proves everything consistent.*

ideas/passepartout-economics/patent-strategy.org

@@ -0,0 +1,24 @@
+:PROPERTIES:
+:ID:       caaeee11-ba6f-5566-aecd-f171b4c459c0
+:END:
+#+title: Patent Strategy
+#+filetags: :passepartout:ip:patents:legal:
+
+**Likely patentable:**
+- Probabilistic-deterministic split with deterministic gates between LLM proposal and execution (vs every competitor using prompt-based guardrails)
+- Foveal-peripheral context model with Org-tree structured retrieval (targets 2,000-4,000 tokens)
+- Merkle-tree memory with copy-on-write snapshots and operation-level undo/redo
+- Gate-to-fact bootstrap with sufficiency criterion (mechanically extracting facts from gate stack data structures)
+- Macro-layer-as-skill bootstrapping architecture (theorem-proving as hot-reloadable skills)
+
+**Likely not patentable (known techniques):**
+- ACL2 itself (decades old)
+- Screamer for consistency checking (obvious application)
+- Hot-reloadable skills (40 years old)
+- Org-mode as a data format
+
+**Strongest single claim:** The specific combination of probabilistic model + deterministic zero-token safety gates + Merkle memory + symbolic engine with sufficiency criterion. Each element is known; the combination is novel and non-obvious.
+
+**Counterargument:** A patent examiner will argue these are standard OS microkernel architecture, locality of reference, content-addressed storage, and capability-based security applied to an AI agent. The defense: they have never been *combined* in an AI agent, producing emergent effects no single principle produces.
+
+See also: [[id:67faf52f-9126-50a7-b87e-2bedc610dac7][Licensing]], [[id:aa6d062e-a520-5d14-8773-00687ed9c689][Moats]]

ideas/passepartout-economics/pds-as-a-service.org

@@ -0,0 +1,20 @@
+:PROPERTIES:
+:ID:       1a2b38df-20ba-58ca-ba55-a072be67bd0d
+:END:
+#+title: Personal Data Store as a Service
+#+filetags: :passepartout:agora:revenue:pds:saas:
+
+Classic open-core SaaS model (GitLab, Sentry, PlanetScale). The Merkle fact store exposed on Agora can be self-hosted (free, AGPL) or hosted by the early player.
+
+- **Free tier (self-hosted):** full AGPL PDS, runs on any Lisp host, full control, no cost
+- **Basic hosted tier:** $10-$20/month, 10GB fact store, 10M queries/month, automated backup, automatic upgrades
+- **Business hosted tier:** $100-$500/month, 100GB+ fact store, unlimited queries, SLA, dedicated relay, compliance logging
+- **Enterprise hosted tier:** $1,000-$10,000/month, air-gapped appliance management, dedicated support, regulatory-compliant data residency, SIEM integration
+
+The free self-hosted version drives adoption and trust (you can inspect every line). The hosted version captures value from users who value convenience over control. Bluesky already demonstrated demand at ~$10/month for a simpler PDS.
+
+Target: 100K subscribers at $15/month average = $18M/yr recurring, near-zero marginal cost per additional subscriber (the symbolic engine is CPU-bound, not per-user metered).
+
+Combined with premium usernames: $28M/yr from Agora services alone before compute marketplace revenue.
+
+See also: [[id:2e390c1d-65f3-5fb3-b898-ac3fc4291ee7][Agora usernames]], [[id:2f783eb4-638e-5afa-9b59-6224d086a712][Infrastructure lock-in]], [[id:67faf52f-9126-50a7-b87e-2bedc610dac7][Licensing]]

ideas/passepartout-economics/self-driving-lisp-machine.org

@@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
+:PROPERTIES:
+:ID:       13e6ae54-2d24-5aa0-b1cd-a7e8e749aa70
+:END:
+#+title: The Self-Driving Lisp Machine
+#+filetags: :passepartout:lisp-machine:hardware:riscv:tenstorrent:
+
+A Tenstorrent P150 (~72 RISC-V Tensix cores) running Passepartout: 72 RISC-V cores running Lisp microcode, one core dedicated to ACL2, one to Screamer, the rest to gate verification and fact store operations.
+
+The self-driving threshold: the system can synthesize and load its own FPGA microcode or Tensix dispatch programs from within the running Lisp image. The system profiles its own gate verification latency, proposes a new microcoded instruction for the hot path, compiles RISC-V assembly from ACL2-verified specifications, loads it via PCIe DMA from within SBCL, benchmarks it — and rolls back if slower.
+
+Every subdomain involved is software — the most codifiable domain. RISC-V ISA, SBCL internals, ACL2 metafunctions, CIC type theory, compiler optimization — all can flip to symbolic sufficiency within days to weeks of ingestion.
+
+**Timeline:** ~6,000 lines of new code (microcode, PCIe DMA, Tensix management, benchmark harness). ~60 cycles at current velocity. 2-4 weeks. Total from today: 6-10 weeks.
+
+The Tenstorrent approach is dramatically simpler than FPGA because the microcode is RISC-V assembly (software), not FPGA bitstream (hardware with minutes-per-iteration synthesis).
+
+See also: [[id:84a537b4-4256-50c8-91f5-dd5b4538418f][Verification appliance]], [[id:dc2e4f22-1c4c-5d4a-a151-f96e5d3b0d70][Time estimates]], [[id:efc76898-03f7-57ba-923d-35d65da88bb7][Sufficiency flip]], [[id:29e4dbf3-cf19-589c-8b14-389e8a39d564][Upgrade lifecycle]], [[id:9af13fff-9725-542b-93b1-a555bc74ad72][Lisp economics]]

ideas/passepartout-economics/stoa.org

@@ -0,0 +1,18 @@
+:PROPERTIES:
+:ID:       c3b3dc41-945f-54e9-84eb-ca014114f1be
+:END:
+#+title: Stoa — The Porch (Environment)
+#+filetags: :passepartout:stoa:editor:browser:hardware:
+
+Stoa is the user environment — a single Lisp image where editor, browser, shell, and agent coexist.
+
+**Roadmap:**
+- v2.0.0: Lish editor + Nyxt browser (Stage 1, Qt/WebKit) + Lish shell
+- v3.0.0+: Cannibalization — replace Qt with Lisp-native layout, reduce WebKit to pixel-painting, eventually pure-Lisp browser and window management
+- v4.0.0: Native inference — llama.cpp FFI in-process, DSL-compiled model architectures, live surgery on cognition
+- v5.0.0: Hardware — tagged RISC-V architecture via TinyTapeout, FPGA prototype, hardware GC via dedicated bus master
+- v6.0.0: True agency — world models, temporal reasoning, goal persistence across restarts
+
+The architectural principle: Stoa is not a collection of clients connecting to a daemon. The Dispatcher gate stack verifies every action regardless of who initiated it. The distinction between "tool" and "self" dissolves.
+
+See also: [[id:84a537b4-4256-50c8-91f5-dd5b4538418f][Verification appliance]], [[id:13e6ae54-2d24-5aa0-b1cd-a7e8e749aa70][Self-driving Lisp Machine]]

ideas/passepartout-economics/sufficiency-flip.org

@@ -0,0 +1,26 @@
+:PROPERTIES:
+:ID:       efc76898-03f7-57ba-923d-35d65da88bb7
+:END:
+#+title: The Per-Domain Sufficiency Flip
+#+filetags: :passepartout:sufficiency:flip:domain:knowledge:
+
+The sufficiency flip is not a single event — it happens independently for each domain, and some domains never flip.
+
+**Knowledge types required:**
+- **Structural** (published rules, configs, specs) — LLM translation + ACL2 verification. Flips in days.
+- **Empirical** (what happens when X?) — active sandboxed probing. Flips in days to weeks.
+- **Performance** (latency, throughput) — benchmark harness. Flips in hours.
+- **Transfer** from related domains — ontology alignment. Flips in days.
+- **Tacit** (craft expertise, organizational culture) — requires Phase 3 archivist loop over time. May never fully flip.
+- **Aesthetic** (poetry, creative writing) — never flips. The system is honest about its frontier.
+
+**Fastest path to flip any domain:**
+1. Ingest all published text (hours)
+2. Run benchmark harness (hours)
+3. Run active sandboxed probes (automated)
+4. Generate contrastive queries for the 5% uncertain rules (one human session, a few hours)
+5. Start serving real interactions (empirical loop tightens from first interaction)
+
+For the Lisp Machine bootstrap, every subdomain is software (the most codifiable domain). The entire bootstrap can flip in days to weeks with one human review session.
+
+See also: [[id:45ea493b-94ad-5885-aa65-0c846e5c3c1d][Gate rule encoding]], [[id:dc2e4f22-1c4c-5d4a-a151-f96e5d3b0d70][Time estimates]], [[id:0b5a8a74-cfd6-542d-bc88-4eb3cd8626f9][Cost structure]]

ideas/passepartout-economics/time-estimates.org

@@ -0,0 +1,19 @@
+:PROPERTIES:
+:ID:       dc2e4f22-1c4c-5d4a-a151-f96e5d3b0d70
+:END:
+#+title: Development Velocity and Timeline Estimates
+#+filetags: :passepartout:economics:development:timeline:velocity:
+
+At the observed velocity (v0.4.0 to v0.7.2 in a single session), the agent writes code and the symbolic engine verifies it at a cycle measured in minutes. The bottleneck is not coding speed — it is LLM API latency, ACL2 verification time, and human review of the 5% of edge cases Screamer flags.
+
+**To v1.0.0 (neurosymbolic maturity, ~4,500 lines):** ~80 cycles, 3-5 weeks, ~2-3 hours of human review.
+
+**To self-driving Lisp Machine (Logos + Stoa hardware, +~6,000 lines):** ~60 cycles, 2-4 weeks. The microcode must be loaded onto physical hardware and benchmarked, adding seconds per cycle.
+
+**Full Stoa (editor, browser, shell, Qt integration, ~3,500 lines):** ~30 cycles, 2-3 weeks.
+
+**Total from today to full Logos + Stoa + Agora triad:** 3-6 months. Most of that time is spent on design decisions and protocol specification, not on code.
+
+The system writes the code. The human makes architectural decisions and reviews the 5% ambiguous rules.
+
+See also: [[id:13e6ae54-2d24-5aa0-b1cd-a7e8e749aa70][Self-driving Lisp Machine]], [[id:efc76898-03f7-57ba-923d-35d65da88bb7][Sufficiency flip]], [[id:5961e469-53a3-5f3c-ab72-3c83ef91963f][Investment thesis]]

ideas/passepartout-economics/triad-overview.org

@@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
+:PROPERTIES:
+:ID:       a1fac32a-47de-5fbd-b67d-29152c851747
+:END:
+#+title: Triad Overview — Logos, Stoa, Agora
+#+filetags: :passepartout:triad:architecture:
+
+The full triad is a self-bootstrapping replacement for the entire computing stack, not a single product.
+
+**Logos (Passepartout)** — The mind. Cognitive agent combining a probabilistic LLM (10% of work) with a deterministic symbolic engine (80%) at near-zero marginal cost. Gate stack, fact store, ACL2 prover, Screamer constraint solver.
+
+**Stoa (The Porch)** — The body. Editor (Lish), browser (Nyxt), shell (Lish), Org-mode filesystem, Qt/EQL5 UI. A single Lisp image where everything coexists. Roadmap: v2.0.0 (Qt/WebKit) → v6.0.0 (pure Lisp, hardware).
+
+**Agora (The Society)** — The network. Self-sovereign DID identity, DIDComm encrypted messaging, Personal Data Store, Relay Network, compute marketplace, liquid democracy.
+
+All three speak plists. All three operate in Lisp address space. All three are verified by the same ACL2 prover. The gate stack that verifies a shell command also verifies a DIDComm message.
+
+See also: [[id:5961e469-53a3-5f3c-ab72-3c83ef91963f][The investment thesis]], [[id:84a537b4-4256-50c8-91f5-dd5b4538418f][Verification appliance]], [[id:1a2b38df-20ba-58ca-ba55-a072be67bd0d][PDS as a service]], [[id:3c6b0449-a8fb-5b89-b82a-34efb21ef5b5][Compute marketplace]]

ideas/passepartout-economics/upgrade-lifecycle.org

@@ -0,0 +1,22 @@
+:PROPERTIES:
+:ID:       29e4dbf3-cf19-589c-8b14-389e8a39d564
+:END:
+#+title: Upgrade and Distribution Lifecycle
+#+filetags: :passepartout:economics:upgrade:distribution:ontology:
+
+Once instances diverge in both code and knowledge, naive git pull breaks things. Passepartout's architecture already has the primitives for safe upgrades:
+
+- **Ontology versioning:** every fact stores the ontology version at assertion. On upgrade, facts with old versions are flagged for re-verification.
+- **Degradation, not crash:** if an upgrade breaks the fact store, the system degrades to the pre-macro state (hash-table fallback, text-scan fallback). Still works — just proves less.
+- **Reversible upgrades (Phase 0 undo):** every upgrade produces a Merkle snapshot before applying.
+- **Delta distribution:** upgrades delivered as diffs against the current ontology version. Migration script runs automatically.
+
+**The upgrade is verified by the upgraded system before committing.** The distributor ships the new gate vector; ACL2 reports which rules are compatible and which need review. The operator reviews only the incompatible subset.
+
+**Business model for upgrades:**
+- Code upgrades: free (AGPL)
+- Migration scripts: subscription. The verified migration path from current ontology version to new one.
+- Domain knowledge package upgrades: subscription. When HIPAA updates, the healthcare package updates.
+- Verification appliance firmware: bundled with hardware. Signed and verified against hardware root of trust.
+
+See also: [[id:2f783eb4-638e-5afa-9b59-6224d086a712][Infrastructure lock-in]], [[id:84a537b4-4256-50c8-91f5-dd5b4538418f][Verification appliance]], [[id:c34940cc-090e-57c4-8020-e78b1d32b96c][Domain gate packages]]

ideas/passepartout-economics/verification-appliance.org

@@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
+:PROPERTIES:
+:ID:       84a537b4-4256-50c8-91f5-dd5b4538418f
+:END:
+#+title: Verification Appliance (Hardware)
+#+filetags: :passepartout:revenue:hardware:fpga:tenstorrent:
+
+An FPGA or Tenstorrent card pre-loaded with a mature Passepartout image, domain-specific gate rules, and a hardware root of trust. No cloud dependency.
+
+**Target:** regulated industries needing provable compliance that cannot accept cloud-based AI.
+**Price:** $5K-$50K/unit. **Volume:** hundreds to low thousands in year one.
+
+The Lisp Machine on Tenstorrent P150 (~72 RISC-V Tensix cores on a PCIe card) is the realistic first target: the microcode is RISC-V assembly (software), not FPGA bitstream (hardware). The system can propose, load, test, and roll back a new dispatch routine in seconds. An FPGA path would add synthesis time (minutes to hours per iteration).
+
+Revenue estimate: 50 sales in year one = $250K-$2.5M.
+
+See also: [[id:c34940cc-090e-57c4-8020-e78b1d32b96c][Domain gate packages]], [[id:45258a2d-1675-562c-9024-5d1eb2f1ea56][Evaluation harness]], [[id:13e6ae54-2d24-5aa0-b1cd-a7e8e749aa70][Self-driving Lisp Machine]], [[id:9af13fff-9725-542b-93b1-a555bc74ad72][Lisp economics]], [[id:29e4dbf3-cf19-589c-8b14-389e8a39d564][Upgrade lifecycle]]

ideas/passepartout-economics/verification-monopoly.org

@@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
+:PROPERTIES:
+:ID:       827bc546-e887-5b7c-9b65-6392beaf0920
+:END:
+#+title: The Verification Monopoly (UL for AI)
+#+filetags: :passepartout:economics:monopoly:certification:big-money:
+
+The accumulated regression suite — thousands of edge cases from every deployed instance, every bug fix, every regulatory change — becomes the most comprehensive test of autonomous agent correctness ever assembled.
+
+Any organization claiming a "safe AI agent" needs Passepartout certification to prove it. This is Underwriters Laboratory for AI — a certification nobody can ignore.
+
+**Revenue:** licensing the certification mark to every AI vendor that ships an agent. **Margins:** near-100% once the suite exists.
+
+This is the venture-scale outcome. It depends on the [[id:45258a2d-1675-562c-9024-5d1eb2f1ea56][evaluation harness]] reaching critical mass, which depends on enough instances deploying the software to accumulate edge cases in the regression suite. The [[id:5961e469-53a3-5f3c-ab72-3c83ef91963f][investment thesis]] is built on the recognition that every deployed instance makes this more valuable.
+
+The unique structural advantage: every free instance of the triad feeds the regression suite. The more people use the free software, the more valuable the certification monopoly becomes. Positive sum.
+
+See also: [[id:45258a2d-1675-562c-9024-5d1eb2f1ea56][Evaluation harness]], [[id:2f783eb4-638e-5afa-9b59-6224d086a712][Infrastructure lock-in]], [[id:5f55bbe6-d243-5766-8ccf-5c5cc88a6542][AI industry impact]], [[id:aa6d062e-a520-5d14-8773-00687ed9c689][Moats]]

ideas/passepartout-economics/verified-skill-marketplace.org

@@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
+:PROPERTIES:
+:ID:       d84679f1-c0c5-5be4-b19c-6573560640ee
+:END:
+#+title: Verified Skill Marketplace
+#+filetags: :passepartout:revenue:marketplace:skills:
+
+A marketplace where skills are verified (sandbox + ACL2 non-contradiction proof) before listing. The marketplace takes a cut.
+
+Value is in the verification infrastructure, not the skills themselves. Anybody can write a skill; the marketplace provides the guarantee that the skill won't corrupt the fact store, won't violate gate rules, and won't introduce inconsistencies.
+
+This is the App Store model applied to provable correctness. The gatekeeper role is replaced by the prover — and the prover is transparent, inspectable, and impartial.
+
+See also: [[id:45ea493b-94ad-5885-aa65-0c846e5c3c1d][Gate rule encoding]], [[id:45258a2d-1675-562c-9024-5d1eb2f1ea56][Evaluation harness]]