The book, extended
Blogs
Concepts explained, standards pressure-tested, and market claims answered. The posts follow the book's three acts. ACT I: why the current value system fails. ACT II: how value actually behaves. ACT III: how value is governed into existence. Start with the act that matches your question, jump straight to a topic below, or browse everything. Claims here stay under review; what changes is recorded in The Claims Register. New to the vocabulary? The glossary defines the standard’s terms in one place.
Browse by Topic ▾
Browse by Chapter of the Book ▾
Browse by Role ▾
Governing value through a standard beats building a proprietary architecture you then have to defend, because a standard cannot be embedded, rented, or walked out the door.
Vendors are adding twenty to thirty-seven percent to renewals for AI the buyer never asked to prove, and the buyers who govern the interface are cutting that ask by more than half.
When wave two is funded by wave one’s unverified savings, the claims compound and the value does not. Bain finds 44 percent of large companies funding AI this way.
Buyers carry what worked to their next company. A published value standard is the most portable thing they own, and it travels with them while the vendor relationship stays behind.
Adoption cost determines diffusion. The paradigm is flipping toward whatever is cheaper to adopt, and a buyer-declared standard takes a click where seller-side reform takes a decade of coordinated behavior change.
Accountability is architectural, not proximate. The vendor lock-in evidence is 40 years old, and a seller-side mindset borrowed from Palantir does not change who is answerable for value the buyer never defined.
- « Previous
- 1
- …
- 8
- 9
- 10