Files
hermes-brain/ideas/time-estimates.org
2026-05-24 03:00:35 +00:00

63 lines
5.5 KiB
Org Mode
Raw Blame History

This file contains ambiguous Unicode characters
This file contains Unicode characters that might be confused with other characters. If you think that this is intentional, you can safely ignore this warning. Use the Escape button to reveal them.
:PROPERTIES:
:ID: dc2e4f22-1c4c-5d4a-a151-f96e5d3b0d70
:CREATED: [2026-05-23 Sat]
:END:
#+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.
*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.
*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.
| 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 |
| 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 |
*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.
* 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.
| Phase-out target | Replacement | Lines | Scale | Risk |
|-----------------+------------+-------+-------+------|
| Linux kernel (scheduler, IPC, drivers) | Microcode on Tenstorrent | ~6,000 | Months — hardware-limited cycles | Verification delay; hardware bugs |
| MMU / process isolation | GC + ACL2-verified single address space | ~2,000 | Weeks — architecture already defined | Legacy app compatibility |
| Display server (X11/Wayland) | Lisp framebuffer compositor | ~4,000 | Months — visual debugging is slow | UX gaps at the edges |
| Browser (WebKit embed) | WebKit via Lisp FFI with verified wrappers | ~3,000 | Months — sandboxing the embed | Web platform surface is unbounded |
| Native browser | Full Lisp DOM + render engine | ~30,000+ | Years — browser engines are OS-scale | This is the hardest piece. Consider staying on WebKit |
| Core libraries (libc, SSL, crypto, etc.) | Incremental verified replacements | ~10,000+ | Years — can chip away post-ship | Every replacement must match SOTA perf |
| Qt / terminal / native UI toolkit | Stoa toolkit (verified compositor + widgets) | ~8,000 | Monthsyears | UX parity with modern toolkits is the highest risk |
*Ballpark end state: 25,000-60,000 lines. Timeline: 2-5 years.*
The range reflects uncertainty about the browser. If WebKit embed is sufficient (Phase Zero's terminal UX graduates to a managed WebView), the end state is closer to 25K. If you need a full native browser with verified DOM, ACL2-rendered layout, and a compositor that matches macOS fluidity — that is a years-scale project on its own.
* Orders-of-Magnitude Risk Map
| Decision | At stake | True scale | Mistake if treated as |
|---------+---------+-----------+----------------------|
| Does the verification marketplace work? | Company thesis | Months (Phase Zero) | Solved in days |
| Can we ship without replacing Linux? | Time-to-market | Weeks to implement | Years of kernel work before product |
| Is WebKit embed enough for Stoa? | 60% of total timeline | Months vs years | Native browser as default path |
| Does the sufficiency flip cover each domain? | Revenue model | Weeks per domain | One-shot, all or nothing |
| Can Lisp match SOTA browser UX? | Full vision | Generations (or never) | Engineering problem, not a research question |
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.