Professor Giovanni Dosi Theories, Podcast, # 8

 Just as Tuesdays podcast covered Professor Langlois’ theories and our application of those to oil and gas. Today is Professor Giovanni Dosi’s ideas under the microscope. And if I hadn’t mentioned it before this AI tool is good at compiling vast quantities of information and making it easy to digest. 189 documents produced 141 blog posts and summarized in the Preliminary Specification on our wiki. 

Professor Dosi has specialized in innovation and the foundational document we used to prepare a large percentage of our features of the Preliminary Specification was “Sources, Procedures and Microeconomic Effects of Innovation.”

Pod up

Professor Richard N. Langlois Theories, Podcast # 7.

 The value of this podcast is quite satisfactory. I don’t believe there are any errors in the content and the work the AI completed is directly in line with what I’m thinking when discussing the Preliminary Specification. This podcast is the compilation of the 221 text files I created to publish the 195 blog posts on our blog and wiki of Professor Richard N. Langlois’ work. 

In a 20 minute summary they’ve captured the substance of his research and our application of that to oil & gas. 

Pod up

Stagnant Industry Landscape

Before diving into today’s topic, I must highlight a persistent issue. Since at least 2015, People, Ideas & Objects has consistently urged producers to achieve financial sustainability through profitable production methods. Unfortunately, the industry’s entrenched culture shows an inability to embrace fundamental change and a lack of understanding of these principles. Operations consistently revert to increasing drilling activity while cutting costs—an approach already optimized to its limit, incapable of delivering true commercial viability. Concepts like competition and profitability remain absent, misunderstood, or actively resisted.

This mindset creates confusion among producers’ officers and directors when discussing competitive returns in North American markets or generating genuine profits. Given that investors have issued calls for action and the Preliminary Specification outlines the necessary steps, a critical question arises: How would additional investment in the industry today meaningfully alter its trajectory? Would it merely revive the early 2000s, with CEOs touting “well built balance sheets?” This outcome seems almost certain. But what further guarantees exist? After decades of questionable conduct by officers and directors, can we reasonably expect a transformation in their approach?

To claim that initiative and innovation would decline is an overstatement, as these qualities are already scarce. If investors resume funding producers, the prospect of future innovation would likely diminish further. When officers and directors dismiss or undermine efforts to introduce dynamic, accountable, and profitable operations, what hope is there for meaningful reform in any discipline? The market’s response to attempts to improve the industry remains uncertain, but challenging the status quo carries significant professional risk. Insulated by investor capital, producers would then be shielded from the consequences of their admitted missteps—such as “putting cash in the ground,” “building balance sheets,” or simply “muddling through.”

Software Development Approach

Our development methodology has often diverged from mainstream trends, drawing scrutiny over the years. As end-user and mission-critical tools gain traction, some overlook the critical elements missing from these alternatives. Today, I’ll explain why People, Ideas & Objects prioritizes an unimpeachable data set, precise applications, and significant cost and time savings in software development. 

We are relational database developers—a choice some may view as outdated, but its significance is profound. Databases do more than store data; they ensure its integrity. Oracle’s database, for instance, enforces strict design and architecture rules, rejecting any data that doesn’t comply and requiring all expected data to maintain integrity. This rigorous process, defined by our user community’s data model and process selections, is costly and complex but essential. If data isn’t 100% secure, reliable, and unimpeachable, it’s worthless. This discipline forces developers and users to think critically about system design, implementation, and use.

Many tools bypass this rigor, offering quicker but less reliable solutions. For example, Palantir aggregates structured, unstructured, and semi-structured data from sources like relational databases and spreadsheets, using an object-relational model. This approach, once heralded in the 1990s with Java’s rise, proved flawed when it introduced “Null” errors in key database attributes, compromising integrity. While Palantir mitigates these issues with proprietary logic and sophisticated ontologies for user analysis, it’s not designed for ERP, accounting, or audit purposes, nor for industry-wide process management like our Preliminary Specification. Though an unfair comparison, Palantir underscores our focus on data integrity.

Palantir excels in analysis, not ERP or industry-wide process management. Its AI-driven insights may not address the industry’s core issues or opportunities, leaving end-users to interpret its outputs.

Application Precision

In an industry-wide ERP system like the Preliminary Specification, “garbage in, garbage out” takes on exponential significance. Data integrity is a cornerstone. Missing this once-in-a-century opportunity to build a robust IT foundation for the next 25 years would be a grave mistake. As industry data grows increasingly valuable, cutting corners is not an option. Our user community and developers must leverage their expertise to capture these requirements and accommodate growing data volumes and types. Rebuilding the industry on a foundation of reserves preservation, performance, and profitability is a transformative opportunity we must seize.

Our user community sets us apart, leveraging the proven quality of user-led ERP development. We’ve empowered them with exclusive Intellectual Property licenses to create derivative works, ensuring our developers take direction solely from them. Independent and budget-autonomous, the user community sells their IP to People, Ideas & Objects, making it accessible for all members of our user community. Ensuring they are not “blind, sleepwalking agents of whomever will feed them.”

Lowest Time and Cost

While our approach increases development costs due to its quality focus and broad scope—covering producers from startups to Exxon—it’s less than what each producer would spend on individual systems or manual processes. By applying Professor Paul Romer’s non-rival cost theory, we incur costs once for the entire North American producer population, distributing them via our Profitable Production Rights. These fund the Preliminary Specification development and long-term support for our Cloud Administration & Accounting for Oil & Gas software and services, making our per-producer costs the industry’s lowest.

Time is critical. The Preliminary Specification should already be operational, delayed only by the resistance of officers and directors. The industry faces two urgent issues: monthly losses of at least $20 billion and a potential decline in North America’s oil and gas deliverability. These time pressures seem to conflict with our quality goals, but any failure will stem from insufficient industry engagement with our user community, not our approach.

Industry must prioritize meaningful interaction with our user community. Relying on outdated tactics like issuing SLAs to hold vendors accountable is counterproductive and wastes time and resources the industry can ill afford. Collaboration is essential—we’re all in this together.

Artificial Intelligence in Oil & Gas Development

We believe that Artificial Intelligence (AI) will significantly enhance the quality of our products in software development. Our paper, "AI, IP and Hyper Specialization, highlighted how AI mastered games like Go and Chess, not only defeating human champions but also innovating within those fixed environments. We see similar potential in software development, given its increasingly well defined and fixed domain.

However, it's crucial to recognize AI's current limitations. While powerful for code development, its application to dynamic business models like the Preliminary Specification, which is highly influenced by creative changes, remains years away. Therefore, while we will leverage AI to assist user community members and developers, this will be done with a clear understanding of its weaknesses, the demanding needs of the oil and gas industry, and our stringent quality requirements.

Deployment of our user communities distinct competitive advantages remain irreplaceable. These advantages include the application of artificial intelligence, automation, adaptability, conflict and contradiction as analytical tools, creativity, collaboration, decision-making, deployment, and integration of task, knowledge and explicit knowledge, design, financing, ideas, innovation, integration, issue, identification and resolution, judgment, leadership, negotiating, and compromising, planning, performance, quality, reasoning, research, resiliency, spontaneity, thinking, vision and wisdom.

Intellectual Property and AI in Oil & Gas

In a future where individuals can easily build their own Preliminary Specifications, Intellectual Property (IP) will play a critical role in organizing and preventing redundant and duplicative work. Our paper, "AI, IP and Hyperspecialization," emphasizes IP's ability to streamline innovation through licensing and agreements. This ensures that efforts are directed towards developing new solutions for the oil and gas industry's complex challenges, rather than repeating existing work.

It's important to clarify that AI does not capture intellectual property; it flows to its user who has the right to create derivative works. Oil and gas producers must therefore ensure their chosen vendors are the rightful owners of the underlying software IP to guarantee legal use of the software.

We've also argued for increased organizational performance through hyper-specialization and the division of labor, a principle that has driven economic value since 1776. Today, the software an organization uses either enables or constrains this process. We believe that with the right approach to AI and IP, hyper-specialization can be managed with precision, allowing tasks to be distributed and processed efficiently—addressing the chaotic nature of speed and complexity that often impedes modern organizations. And will no doubt accelerate with the velocity of tomorrow's business pace. 

A Call for Change in Oil & Gas

The oil and gas industry stands at a pivotal moment, with a unique opportunity to transform its culture. The focus must shift to reserves preservation, performance, and profitability, leaving behind the inefficiencies and decline of past decades. We're potentially witnessing the beginning of a precipitous decline in oil and gas production deliverability, a trend exacerbated by the inherent steep decline curves of shale that are, quite frankly, a rolling log gathering terrifying momentum. 

The weight of this crisis is compounded by the stark realization that our reliance on what amounts to 25,000 man-hours equivalent labor per barrel of oil was, in large part, a self-inflicted wound. This profound misjudgment now rests heavily on the officers and directors of producer firms. Indeed, this era could very well be remembered as one of the most reckless and destructive acts in civilized history. For those of us who have done the calculation. At 25,000 man hours / barrel of oil equivalent. The total 8 hour equivalent labor each and every one of the 8 billion people on the planet benefits from oil & gas is 66 times their labor output. Since producer officers and directors were willing to sacrifice North America's output so willingly. And we should anticipate in the future the need to allocate supply. I suggest we begin by cutting oil & gas consumption in all its forms to those who had the fiduciary responsibility, the authority and the resources to avoid this, knew the risks, were advised in the most aggressive manner (their investors actions,) had solutions offered yet did nothing. The producers, officers and directors who ensured they have Directors and Officers Liability Insurance secured. 

Before any effective changes can be made, the industry must organize itself for the significant challenges ahead. We cannot afford to cling to outdated methods or leadership. Even more critically, the industry needs to regain the trust and belief of investors, who abandoned it a decade ago after years of deception. That exodus should have been a four-alarm fire, yet the past decade has seen no action, leading to evaporated faith, trust and hope. Our first and most crucial step must be to immediately clean house.

Creating the Preliminary Specification will be a multi-year effort, but it’s critical for aligning and organizing our approach. Fortunately, the foundational work for the Preliminary Specification is complete, enabling us to focus on implementation without being hindered by intellectual property issues related to People, Ideas & Objects.

North American companies are at the forefront of the fourth Industrial Revolution, with investments in emerging industries and firms disintermediating those that previously disintermediated the market. However, the oil and gas sector, as a primary industry, remains focused on protecting its revenues to maintain the status quo resisting any and all challenges. This defensive stance has led to trillions of dollars in lost value, with shale’s wealth squandered and our advanced economy jeopardized due to declining energy availability.

Given the intense competition in other industries and the inability of North American producers to keep pace, it’s no surprise that producer officers and directors have conceded on their production deliverability. It’s time for change. 

Post Script

The All In Podcast, released every Friday, is a must-listen for its cutting-edge discussions driven by the four self-made hosts. In the June 20, 2025 episode, they touch on software companies like People, Ideas & Objects and their relevance to the “S&P 493”—the S&P 500 excluding the MAG 7 stocks.

They argue that a complete “rip and replace” approach to rebuilding software is the only viable path forward, emphasizing a comprehensive, “soup to nuts” scope. Companies in the S&P 493 that undertake this full software rebuild are expected to outperform those that don’t.

This segment is discussed between 01:03:00 and 01:16:00 in the episode.

 Listen here:

Accounting Voucher, Material Balance Report, Podcast # 6

I’m coming to the realization People, Ideas & Objects have content for several years of podcasts. The Accounting Voucher Module and the Material Balance Report are being introduced today.

Pod up

Producers Business Model Has Failed

Today's blog post reveals that oil and gas producer officers and directors have implicitly admitted to misrepresenting facts in mid-2019, leading to an estimated $1.81 trillion in natural gas revenue losses since then. People, Ideas & Objects (PIO) presented the Preliminary Specification as a solution to address the underlying natural gas overproduction, but our proposal was met with misrepresentation, belittlement, and outright falsehoods regarding its methods.

At the time, we raised concerns about the personal liability of officers and directors, suggesting their insurance coverage could be jeopardized if they were found to have known or should have known of methods to mitigate future losses. We put them on notice of this personal risk and offered the Preliminary Specification as a means to indemnify themselves. Ironically, the "common sense" approach of the Preliminary Specification is now being recognized by the industry.

Producer Inaction and Missteps

For decades, oil and gas producers have consistently offered excuses instead of taking decisive action, evading accountability when their claims proved false. When a consensus does emerge, it often appears as a synchronized echo of rationalizations, betraying a lack of genuine intent. Their repeated miscalculations, now being exposed, have proven costly – even more so than the chronic untruths they fed investors leading up to their exit in 2015. 

Today we’re treated to an outright capitulation of their responsibility, authority and care with the looming decline in oil & gas deliverability. A decline as obvious as day comes after night. Or the logical conclusion if an industry leadership were too lazy to generate profits. Destruction that they authored and did nothing about despite their investors frustrations and the Preliminary Specifications availability. Since this is the case they should be shown the door, immediately. 

People, Ideas & Objects has faced relentless criticism and humiliation for advocating producer profitability through the Preliminary Specification. As recently as 2019, our solution was dismissed as unworkable, with producers asserting that "shutting in production incurs significant costs and damages formations." Our July 4, 2019 white paper, "Profitable, North American Energy Independence — Through the Commercialization of Shale," triggered a concerted campaign to discredit us.

Nine months later, the COVID-19 pandemic forced a 25% global oil production shut-in due to collapsing demand. Refineries rejected feedstock, compelling producers to comply. Yet, the officers' and directors' narrative of "can't shut-in" persisted. Our 2023–2024 analysis revealed $4.7 trillion in natural gas revenue losses this century, with 2024 shale gas fetching the lowest inflation-adjusted prices ever – despite being the costliest in history. One must ask which business model is truly unworkable, and if profits, as producers have long claimed, are indeed unnecessary. (Note: Natural gas losses are attributed to a breakdown in pricing, with gas prices diverging from their traditional 6:1 oil heating value ratio to as high as 50:1 in early 2024.)

Instead, and in unison, officers and directors pivoted, declaring shale uncommercial and clean energy their new frontier – without shareholder approval and by diverting oil and gas revenues. Their questionable business acumen was exposed, and they backtracked when these actions were deemed unlawful, suddenly hailing shale as the industry’s savior once more. Which industry will they try next: retail, electric vehicles, or even space? They have recently declared "peak shale" due to the devastation they've wrought on the capacities and capabilities of the service industry. Their leadership has demonstrably failed.

Their adaptability is questionable. In late 2023, People, Ideas & Objects highlighted producers selling LNG at Henry Hub prices (~$2.50), while others bought, processed, and sold it offshore for up to $50.00. Realizing their lack of fiduciary care, a frenzied rush ensued, with producers signing deals for unbuilt, unapproved LNG facilities, which ultimately prompted President Biden to halt new export approvals. This pattern of reactive, ill-considered business transactions underscores the critical need for a cultural and operational overhaul, as offered by the Preliminary Specification, to ensure dynamic, innovative, accountable, and profitable oil and gas operations.

This issue has been framed to provide readers with an updated perspective. Our documentation on the LNG issue began with a series of 54 blog posts starting October 11, 2023, with one entitled “This One’s Nuclear.” This series addresses the producers' common refrains about profits being unnecessary, focusing on "cash flow," "building balance sheets," or "putting cash in the ground," as well as their well-known chorus regarding their inability to shut-in production.

Things People, Ideas & Objects Have Noticed

Our collaboration with producers reached an impasse, forcing People, Ideas & Objects to fundamentally change our strategy. We now operate differently, leveraging our distinct strengths: our user community, Intellectual Property, and research. We've declared that our user community is, in fact, our customer, enabling us to reduce our software delivery timelines by years. We also brought to light the officer and director insurance issues producers have been exposed to. These 40 blog posts, beginning with "Watch the Directors on the Boards" on October 15, 2018, can be aggregated here:

We therefore put officers and directors on notice: their (in)actions were exposing them to personal risk of shareholder lawsuits. They demonstrated that they could act swiftly when properly motivated by immediately increasing their insurance coverage by 75%. However, this may have only provided a false sense of security. If it can be shown they knew—or should have known—about the financial losses under their watch, insurers could drop their coverage, leaving them personally exposed to any shareholder or debtor litigation.

While the outcome of any litigation is unknown, the striking lack of executive turnover across North American producers is telling. Are they now trapped, unable to leave without the company’s financial protection? People, Ideas & Objects offer a way out. Our "Issue Mitigated, Nothing Litigated" proposal is a standing offer to remove their personal risk. By using industry dollars to build the "Preliminary Specification," officers and directors can undertake their best efforts to resolve the underlying problem, demonstrate responsible action, and in turn secure their safe exit.

A Modern Day Stick in the Spokes

I was perplexed to find the following information appearing on my account in Perplexity: and comments such as these, which seem to suggest it's "common sense" and "always has been" to shut in higher-cost production, are wholly disingenuous. I am pleased that this is now the prevailing thinking, and it reflects, at a minimum, the market's acceptance of the Preliminary Specification rather than any genuine change in the officers' and directors' thinking.

The assertion that this is not a willful statement by officers and directors is based on a reflection of the insurance issue. The statement more or less admits their past positions were wrong and that it was common sense to do as the Preliminary Specification prescribes. Why then were the lies told in 2019 regarding our business model being unworkable? Why the claims that the reservoir would be damaged if such a strategy was attempted? It was “collusion” to do as we prescribed. Yet nothing has been done to mitigate these business losses since that time?

According to our calculations, $1.813 trillion of the overall $4.7 trillion in natural gas revenue losses have been realized from July 2019 to December 2024 due to chronic and systemic overproduction. This loss is attributable to the willful misconduct, negligence, and misrepresentations by officers and directors. They knew, were aware, is now considered common sense, and yet continued with their claims about "Trump this or OPEC that," not praying hard enough for a cold winter, or waiting for the market to rebalance. My two favorite excuses were that they "remain profitable in a period of declining prices from $100, 90, 80…$35" and that they are "innovative." Would an innovative industry sit on its thumb for this period of time watching this level of devastation? The only innovation I’ve witnessed is the ability to continue profitably in a declining price environment – an innovation in historical accounting? Bernie Madoff would be proud of them. 

Conclusion

Investors declared producers' business model failed in 2015, losing faith in officers and directors and their capacity to address the issues. While investors still own the producers, they no longer invest further, seeking to extract their investments through dividends. The loss of investor trust is unquestionably the most consequential act an organization can face. And for a decade, nothing has been done about it other than to continue with inappropriate behavior. I have to ask which is worse: the investors' loss of faith, or the decade-long lack of action. Flip a coin, I say.

One of the arguments investors did follow through on was upgrading their ERP systems to tier 1 vendors. SAP was unanimously chosen, specifically to avoid People, Ideas & Objects With Oracle Cloud ERP. Of those that did implement the solution, it is unknown if accountability has improved. We know the performance, reporting and integrity of the firm have not.

Shale is possibly the greatest endowment of wealth ever granted. Yet, in the hands of these officers and directors, it has been all but destroyed. They are culturally fixated on their past industry experiences, and that industry culture, developed over the past four decades, which has eroded the industry's competitiveness to what I would estimate is a 30-40% commercial level. Each North American producer's financial statements are cookie-cutter replicas of each other. The only differentiation is the volume produced. They possess massive capital assets with little to negative working capital and eroded shareholder equity when considering a pro-forma adjustment of at least 65% of property, plant, and equipment should move to the income statement in the current period. Therefore, a producer's financial performance is incapable of dealing with logarithmic levels of debt leverage. "The value is in the reserves," they'll say, not realizing that their inability to produce them profitably renders them of no value or less.

When officers and directors are directly responsible for this level of damage and destruction, it is disqualifying. What's worse is they've had the means at their disposal to earn all the money they could ever have possibly needed if they had even tried for five minutes to earn a profit. They were given the chance to do so by their investors and the means through the Preliminary Specification. Their opportunity was as great as the destruction they chose to author instead. When People, Ideas & Objects asserts we’re rebuilding the industry and producers through our arbitrage strategy, it now seems like the only rational choice.

Proof that the business model inherent in the Preliminary Specification is workable has been evident to those who've read it. People, Ideas & Objects' pursuit of this oil & gas issue has been appropriate. It was always designed as a replacement due to the scale of this issue and the difficulty of dealing with the persistence of a corporate culture. A time to choose arrived long ago, and it was obstructed by the vested interests of the now failed business model. We need access to oil & gas revenues to fund the development and long-term support of our software and services. Our Profitable Production Rights are the method we've chosen, and we are now turning to officers and directors to fund us on that basis.

For officers and directors to mitigate the personal risk they may find themselves in, the choice for them is to decide on a new direction and to fund that. This can be done by adopting and implementing two strategies of People, Ideas & Objects. Providing evidence of their best efforts to remedy the issues alleviates their risks. By implementing our “Issue Mitigated, Nothing Litigated” and “Arbitrage Strategy,” they can quickly relieve themselves of their obligations to fulfill their fiduciary duties. I am not a lawyer, and this is not legal advice and should not be considered as such. It is based on my limited understanding, which is heavily influenced by my conflict of interest.

Podcast # 5, Our Response to an RFP

I’m pleased with the two podcasts being published this week. Our podcast today is based on the wiki page of our RFP Response. I’m getting better at prepping these however there are still some minor issues that aren’t too bad. To verify any questions you may have please refer to the text of the wiki entry. 

Pod up

AI, The Fourth Industrial Revolution, Part V

Who Do You Trust 

People, Ideas & Objects Preliminary Specification provides producers with the most profitable means of oil & gas operations. Our user communities and their service providers operate with the same commitment. We’re including the use of Artificial Intelligence throughout the Preliminary Specifications development and application as a given. To ensure that oil & gas’ culture is transformed to a dynamic, innovative, accountable and profitable one. 

A critical concern arises with the integration of ERP systems and AI. We’ve grown accustomed to accepting data from current systems, largely because alternatives are scarce. But will this trust extend to AI-driven directives that involve risk, such as relocating for a job without human oversight? Would you comply?

Trust is central to our user community’s value and permanence, exemplified in the Material Balance Report. This report automates the management of production, allocation, distribution, disposition, and reporting of oil and gas products—from IoT origins to financial statements. Without a meticulously designed and implemented system, confidence in its accuracy would falter. If users sensed gaps or lacked someone to address issues, trust would erode.

Our user community earns and sustains trust through hands-on development, implementation, and operation of the Preliminary Specification. Without this human element, systems will always face skepticism. AI now writes sophisticated code, having mastered games like chess and Go due to their defined scope. Programming languages, though more complex, are approaching similar mastery. However, assuming AI can fully develop ERP systems, which model intricate business processes, risks costly failures and unsuccessful shortcuts.

Our user community’s role is vital for long-term trust in ERP data and systems. They will leverage AI to boost productivity and enhance work quality, while their service provider teams deliver hyper-specialized, IP-driven administrative and accounting services designed for producers industry-wide.

This isn’t about protecting our territory—it’s about trust. Over-relying on AI for the Preliminary Specification’s development could reveal AI’s limitations, potentially delaying delivery or even failing. Restarting with new AI tools or reverting to human-driven development would incur further, significant opportunity costs for oil and gas. Our user community’s human-centric approach, augmented by AI, ensures trust and delivers results without gambling on unproven technology.

Power is Nothing Without Control 

Our user community serves as the throttle and brake for the development, implementation, and AI integration in People, Ideas & Objects’ Preliminary Specification and its Cloud Administration & Accounting for Oil & Gas software and services. They gauge market readiness and AI adoption, ensuring trust governs its use. Without this human oversight, who decides when people must follow AI’s commands? Trust in AI will be earned and sustained through the user community’s daily interactions. We've identified many of  our user communities' competitive advantages as uniquely human and therefore irreplaceable. Human qualities like collaboration, creativity, decision-making, tacit knowledge deployment, design, ideas, innovation, issue identification and resolution, judgment, leadership, negotiation, planning, quality, vision, and wisdom are uniquely essential. Coupled with their service provider teams, these attributes empower oil and gas producers to achieve the most profitable operations.

As discussed in Dr. Jin Hyung Lee’s insights on Stanford University’s FYI Podcast, and AI in neuroscience allows researchers to see the “forest” while AI handles the “trees,” analyzing vast datasets to test hypotheses and boost productivity. Similarly, our user community can leverage AI to enhance their work, provided they maintain a holistic perspective.

I’ve long argued that AI is the killer app for Intellectual Property (IP). For our user community and their service provider teams, whose work is IP-driven, AI thrives on this foundation, simplifying tasks by referencing owned or licensed IP instead of complex engineering prompts.

Intellectual Property in People, Ideas & Objects is managed as follows. I own all of the Intellectual Property of the Preliminary Specification and its derivative works such as the podcasts. I license our user community the exclusive right to prepare derivative works in the development of the Preliminary Specification and its software. Service providers are provided with an End User License Agreement. People, Ideas & Objects pays the user community members to acquire their IP from them and in turn the entire Preliminary Specification and its derivative works remains available to all the user community members to prepare further derivative works. I then use this IP to assess the producers Profitable Production Rights for access to our Cloud Administration & Accounting for Oil & Gas software and service. 

By empowering our user community to control AI’s application and IP’s evolution, we ensure oil and gas operations are dynamic, innovative, accountable, and profitable, with trust at the core of this transformation.

What Else is Going On

Beyond Artificial Intelligence’s transformative impact on North American oil and gas, other seismic shifts demand attention. The Internet is evolving from a platform of data and information to an Internet of value, where ownership, rights, agreements, and Intellectual Property are traded virtually. People, Ideas & Objects’ Preliminary Specification, with its Resource, Financial, and Petroleum Lease Marketplace modules and Marketplace Interface, creates virtual forums for these exchanges in oil and gas.

A looming challenge threatens the unprepared: the accelerating pace and complexity of business, soon compounded by surging transaction volumes. Producers, already struggling, face chaos without adaptive leadership. Officers and directors, focused on personal gain, have long abdicated responsibility, feigning ignorance of systemic issues. Their inaction is a cultural failure.

Global trade dynamics are shifting. President Trump’s policies may level the playing field, countering foreign competitive advantages and halting the erosion of U.S. cultural and economic strengths. At 75 years into its 250-year global economic dominance, the U.S. leverages unparalleled cultural advantages—its Constitution, freedom, and entrepreneurial spirit—entering the Fourth Industrial Revolution with unmatched potential. Competition will only sharpen these strengths.

On the demand side, officers and directors should pivot to their preferred clean energy ventures, this time as startups without oil and gas revenues. New leadership, attuned to oil and gas’s challenges and opportunities, is needed. For 50 years, profitability has been essential, yet current leadership shows no grasp of its necessity or mechanics. Without unified action, we risk squandering our 250-year window. The Preliminary Specification offers the path to a dynamic, profitable industry.

Podcast # 4, Preamble

 Another podcast to finish out the week. Still have a few glitches here and there but overall it’s better than before. The two that jump out are the $4.1 trillion in shale gas losses are attributed to overproductions effects on natural gas prices. Falling from their heating value based price of 6:1. To a price as low as 50:1 in 2024. 

The second is in answer to the question at the end about what is needed to start the rebuilding process. And before anyone else states the obvious, it’s money. The money the producer officers and directors sit on for whatever reason. 

Pod Up

AI, The Fourth Industrial Revolution, Part IV

User Community Implementation in the Fourth Industrial Revolution

Entrepreneur and investor Naval Ravikant asserts that “ideas are the new oil,” underscoring the critical value of intellectual capital in today’s economy. People, Ideas & Objects licenses the Intellectual Property (IP) of the Preliminary Specification to our user community, empowering them to build upon a robust platform of ideas tailored for the oil and gas market. Our user community stands on the shoulders of giants—not just the Preliminary Specification, but also Oracle’s development and user communities, fellow user community members, Artificial Intelligence, academia, and beyond. This positions them to thrive in the Fourth Industrial Revolution.

Ideas have consequences, sparking both support and resistance. Navigating the commercial landscape of ideas is complex, but the rewards reflect this challenge. Our user community’s exclusive license to the Preliminary Specification’s IP is designed to clarify their role and mitigate risks, ensuring they can deliver value effectively.

User Community Structure and Benefits:

• Exclusive IP Access: User community members are licensed to access and create derivative works from People, Ideas & Objects’ IP, with exclusive rights to do so.

• Focused Development: Our software developers rely solely on user community input, ensuring alignment with industry needs and ignoring external distractions.

• Producer Collaboration: Producers seeking new or updated features in the Preliminary Specification can directly engage user community members to address their needs.

• Service Provider Ownership: Each user community member is licensed to operate a service provider, owning an exclusive domain for software processes and related services delivered by their team.

• Budgetary Control: User community members maintain authority over their projects’ budgets and deliverables, ensuring accountability and focus.

• Proven Success: User-driven ERP development has consistently delivered high-quality software. By empowering our user community, we ensure North American oil & gas producers achieve the most profitable operations.

This structure harnesses the power of ideas, AI, and collaborative innovation, positioning our user community to lead oil and gas into a dynamic, innovative, accountable and profitable future.

And There’s More

The oil and gas industry in North America is in a dire state, unnecessarily so. Properly applied Information Technology, as outlined in People, Ideas & Objects’ Preliminary Specification, could transform the industry, yet officers and directors remain paralyzed, clinging to an unarticulated vision they hope will dazzle investors. Decades of complacency and “muddle through” have led to repeated failures—clean energy, shale, and now consolidation. Waiting for a miraculous turnaround is futile.

The Fourth Industrial Revolution offers unprecedented opportunities, even for “old” industries like oil and gas. New business models, driven by AI and innovation are reshaping industries like automotive and space. Yet, oil and gas leadership, blinded by vested interests, fails to seize these possibilities.

Our user community is tasked with dismantling this desolate industry and rebuilding it based on the Preliminary Specification’s vision—a cornerstone of North America’s economic and political strength in this revolutionary era. The alternative—catching a falling knife or stopping a rolling log—is the beginning of a dangerous, futile slog back to “muddle through.” The Preliminary Specification offers a bold, fresh start, challenging yet essential for a dynamic, profitable future.

Economic Impacts of Industrial Revolutions

Historical data shows each Industrial Revolution—steam, electricity, IT—marked a leap in economic growth through specialization and division of labor, building on prior advancements. The Fourth Industrial Revolution, driven by AI, promises even greater transformation. While economic statistics may understate benefits due to efficiency-driven price reductions, the standard of living soars for those leveraging advanced technologies. In the past, this distinguished Western economies from others. Today, inaction by North American leadership risks ceding ground to rising competitors like China and Vietnam. Japan’s decline from 17.8% of the global economy in 1995 to 4.2% today exemplifies the cost of bureaucratic stagnation, echoing General Shinseki’s warning: adapt or be left behind.

Specific Economic Impacts of Industrial Revolutions 

What common economic patterns do we see across each of these revolutions? How did they balance productivity gains with social challenges? Or was that left to market forces such as serendipity, spontaneous order and creative destruction? How might these apply to our user community?

Each of these revolutions drove massive productivity gains but disrupted labor markets, requiring adaptation (e.g., unions, education). New industries created wealth but also concentrated it, sparking tensions. Globalization expanded with each wave, amplifying economic interdependence. These are unquestionably the outcomes and benefits that we see today. Will these continue, and is consolidation by producers anticipating any prospective benefits? 

Will comatose elephants even hear the entrepreneurial opportunities? Or will they find the pace of change leaves them challenged in their opportunities? How much latitude do their organizations provide? Can governments be trusted to do what’s right? Culture is maybe the most appropriate question needing to be answered. Can today’s producer, constrained by its culture prosper? 

One issue they’ve refused to deal with is specialization and the division of labor. In our May 2004 Preliminary Research Report we identified organizations are defined and supported, but also constrained by the ERP software they use. Since then officers and directors have used this knowledge as a cultural force they depend upon to support their never changing, self interested bureaucracy. A cornerstone of their unaccountability. And we defined it further in a recent paper “Hyper Specialization in Today’s AI & IP Enabled Workforce.”

Nonetheless further specialization of any company at this point is counter productive. Standing on the shoulders of giants before them, producers' low transaction volume created through a hyper specialized environment does not generate the benefit of a further division of labor in even the largest of companies. The benefits of any further division of labor are diluted through the low volumes of work each task requires. People, Ideas & Objects use of the broader industry distribution of work is necessary to gain any benefit from hyper specialization and the division of labor. 

The Internet offers orders of magnitude greater speed and effectiveness in terms of organizational structure and performance over the bureaucratic standard hierarchy. Use of it is the basis of competitiveness in today’s market as much as AI will soon provide a base level of competitiveness. Oil & gas has opted out of the capital markets competitive challenges when they‘ve continued to pursue “muddle through” since their investors left in 2015. Inaction is their purpose. This is cultural in nature and will therefore persist. Taking the officers and directors consolidation, “muddle through” approach will continue their legacy. Believing ownership and operation of unproductive capital assets provide them with control. 

In prior Industrial Revolutions capital formation was a formidable barrier to entry. That may be the least common trait of today’s revolution. Business model innovation mixed with active execution and dynamic, outsized results are the characteristics of success. What I always envisioned People, Ideas & Objects to be. I am however satisfied it’s not my lack of performance in this regard. When investors have been unable to motivate any action from officers and directors for over a decade. We now see where the difficulties are and what needs to be done. A comprehensive industry rebuild in the vision of the Preliminary Specification. If however this continues officers and directors will have been able to declare a vacuous win. 

It’s not only People, Ideas & Objects that have no support. No vendor or service industry company expects producers will initiate any action. After sitting on primary industry revenues and doing nothing for so long. Producers expectations are that investors will be the ones to start the ball rolling in both oil & gas and elsewhere. Yet for producers to even express an interest in any activity is itself counter cultural and considered bad manners. 

Comatose elephants are not what oil & gas needs at this time. Fast moving, nimble, innovative and profitable ones are. Our Preliminary Specification is designed to deal with all North American producer types and sizes. Small and startup companies included. Turning overhead variable and dependent on profitable operations gives these producers the ability to either pay the overhead incurred from the free cash flow generated or not incur any overhead if operations were shut in. Additionally they can leverage their scientific expertise in a market where demand for engineers and geologists will only increase. Creating a permanent secondary revenue stream and supporting the producer's cost of maintaining their engineering and geological capacities and capabilities. 

Podcast # 3 - Seven Organizational Constructs

 People, Ideas & Objects Preliminary Specification has seven organizational constructs which work to establish a culture of reserves preservation, performance and profitability. 

Pod up.