Leapfrog 2030 architecture
fix(architecture): add dated Correction callouts to 13 of 28 architecture/ articles, verified against canonical origin/main — repeated Apache-2.0-for-core-OSes license error (3 articles), fictional os-orchestration-graph design (already shipped differently), doctrine document citing a source that doesn't contain it (internally contradictory 52-vs-54 claim count), fabricated marketplace pricing, wrong Tier A model size contradicting sibling article, 4-tier pairing model repeating the how-to/ systemic defect; 11 verified clean, 4 already self-corrected
@@ -42,7 +42,7 @@ Each shift is a single architectural decision with downstream consequences. Each ## What the thesis is not The thesis is not anti-cloud. PointSav uses commercial cloud providers extensively. It is not anti-AI. PointSav embeds language models throughout the architecture. It is not a rejection of open source. PointSav's core operating systems are intended for release under Apache 2.0. The thesis is not anti-cloud. PointSav uses commercial cloud providers extensively. It is not anti-AI. PointSav embeds language models throughout the architecture. It is not a rejection of open source. PointSav's core operating systems are intended for release under Apache 2.0. (Correction, 2026-08-02, verified against canonical `origin/main`: this is wrong — the real, ratified `LICENSE-MATRIX.md` puts `os-console`/`os-totebox` under AGPL-3.0-or-later and `os-workplace` under FSL-1.1-ALv2; no `os-*` product is Apache 2.0. Same finding on the sibling article `pointsav-overview.md`. Flagged, not resolved.) The thesis is structural: the asset the customer owns is the running instance, not a subscription seat.