ideas: editorial sweep — atomization, interlinking, restructuring

- Split competitive-analysis-2026-05.org → TOC + 9 competitor files in
  ideas/competitors/. Dropped date from filename. All competitor UUIDs
  generated, TOC keeps original UUID for backlink continuity.
- Deleted passepartout-economics.org archive (replaced by 27-node KB).
- Inlined 5 'See also' blocks into natural prose (compliance-index,
  first-mover-window, revenue-table, orders-of-magnitude-time,
  native-org-knowledge-base).
- Linked 7 orphan compliance pages back to compliance index + finished
  truncated sentences.
- Linked all 14 Agora requirement docs from topic-relevant pages
  (identity→lisp-machine-security, infrastructure→compute-marketplace,
  social-space→growth-strategy, exchange→agora-contracts, etc.).
- Linked ai-industry-impact from investment-thesis, sufficiency-flip,
  verification-appliance, effects-growth-flywheel (up from 1 to 10+ pages).
- Fixed CREATED timestamps to use git commit dates instead of today.
- Made all links absolute from root (no port inheritance).
- Removed stale agora/docs/ duplicate content.
This commit is contained in:
Hermes
2026-05-24 16:25:55 +00:00
parent 94f1871177
commit cc3976fb7f
121 changed files with 2104 additions and 2644 deletions

View File

@@ -5,33 +5,33 @@
#+title: Development Velocity and Timeline Estimates
#+filetags: :passepartout:economics:development:timeline:velocity:orders-of-magnitude:
The [[file:orders-of-magnitude-time.org][orders-of-magnitude time framework]] reveals that the original single-timeline estimate conflated two qualitatively different projects. The line counts are in plausible ranges for Lisp's density (~5-10× fewer lines than C++ for equivalent functionality), but the phases differ in their feedback regimes, constraints, and failure modes. The honest picture splits into two distinct phases.
The [[id:2cdca4b0-6b41-44b4-acb0-af21d0e27b00][orders-of-magnitude time framework]] reveals that the original single-timeline estimate conflated two qualitatively different projects. The line counts are in plausible ranges for Lisp's density (~5-10× fewer lines than C++ for equivalent functionality), but the phases differ in their feedback regimes, constraints, and failure modes. The honest picture splits into two distinct phases.
*Old estimate:* 14,000 lines total, 3-6 months to replace the full computing stack. This was wrong because it treated all phases as linear — microcode has hardware latency (seconds per cycle), GUI has user-testing latency (days per iteration), and the browser alone is a years-scale project if done natively. The numbers do not add linearly across orders of magnitude.
*Old estimate:* 14,000 lines total, 3-6 months to replace the full computing stack. This was wrong because it treated all phases as linear — microcode has hardware latency (seconds per cycle), GUI has user-testing latency (days per iteration), and the browser alone is a years-scale project if done natively. The numbers do not add linearly across [[id:2cdca4b0-6b41-44b4-acb0-af21d0e27b00][orders of magnitude]].
*Corrected estimate:* Two-phase approach with a clear middleground destination.
* Phase Zero — The MVP (Linux-hosted, ships real product)
Run on Linux, use C libraries through CFFI, deliver value without replacing the OS. This is the [[file:sufficiency-flip.org][sufficiency flip]] applied to the verification layer only, not the whole stack.
Run on Linux, use C libraries through CFFI, deliver value without replacing the OS. This is the [[id:efc76898-03f7-57ba-923d-35d65da88bb7][sufficiency flip]] applied to the verification layer only, not the whole stack.
| Component | Lines | Method | Scale |
|----------+-------+--------+-------|
| Neurosymbolic core (ACL2 + Screamer + LLM bridge) | ~4,500 | Agent-generated Lisp, human-validated | Weeks — dense, well-bounded, proven approach |
| Terminal-based [[file:stoa.org][Stoa]] (editor + REPL + shell) | ~2,000 | CL-charms / cl-tty | Weeks — TUI patterns established |
| Terminal-based [[id:c3b3dc41-945f-54e9-84eb-ca014114f1be][Stoa]] (editor + REPL + shell) | ~2,000 | CL-charms / cl-tty | Weeks — TUI patterns established |
| Gate rule SDK + marketplace | ~1,500 | ACL2 gate packages | Weeks — pure symbolic, well-specified |
| CFFI wrappers (system, GPU, crypto, storage) | ~2,000 | Thin bindings | Days — mechanical translation |
| [[file:verification-appliance.org][Verification appliance]] CLI + [[file:agora.org][Agora]] namespace | ~1,000 | API surface | Weeks |
| [[id:84a537b4-4256-50c8-91f5-dd5b4538418f][Verification appliance]] CLI + [[id:1d074690-a279-59cb-b91d-e9a22ae104ad][Agora]] namespace | ~1,000 | API surface | Weeks |
*Total MVP: ~11,000 lines. Timeline: 1-3 months. Human review: ~20 hours.*
This ships. Users get verified code execution, gate rule packages, and a verified development environment. No new OS, no new browser, no Qt integration. Value proposition is proven with existing infrastructure.
*Revenue model starts here:* domain gate packages, verification appliance, compute marketplace. The MVP is a product, not a demo.
*Revenue model starts here:* [[id:c34940cc-090e-57c4-8020-e78b1d32b96c][domain gate packages]], verification appliance, [[id:3c6b0449-a8fb-5b89-b82a-34efb21ef5b5][compute marketplace]]. The MVP is a product, not a demo.
* Phase End State — Full Lisp Machine (cannibalize the stack)
Replace Linux, replace C libraries, own the framebuffer, own the browser. This is the full [[file:self-driving-lisp-machine.org][self-driving Lisp Machine]] vision.
Replace Linux, replace C libraries, own the framebuffer, own the browser. This is the full [[id:13e6ae54-2d24-5aa0-b1cd-a7e8e749aa70][self-driving Lisp Machine]] vision.
| Phase-out target | Replacement | Lines | Scale | Risk |
|-----------------+------------+-------+-------+------|
@@ -59,4 +59,4 @@ The range reflects uncertainty about the browser. If WebKit embed is sufficient
The most dangerous order-of-magnitude error: treating the end state as an engineering sprint. Replacing the browser engine is a years-scale project that has defeated every attempt (Servo, PhantomJS, etc.). If that is the destination, plan accordingly — or accept WebKit embed as the terminal destination and focus verification on the OS/compositor layer where it provides real security value.
See [[file:investment-thesis.org][Investment thesis]] for the business case and [[file:cost-structure.org][Cost structure]] for the economics behind the verification-only-first approach.
See [[id:5961e469-53a3-5f3c-ab72-3c83ef91963f][Investment thesis]] for the business case and [[id:0b5a8a74-cfd6-542d-bc88-4eb3cd8626f9][Cost structure]] for the economics behind the verification-only-first approach.