For more than twenty years I’ve published research summaries and analysis as individual pieces; an essay here, a commentary there, each answering the question of its moment.
What that publication format never shows is the whole argument: the source data, how an idea formed, what evidence changed it, and where it connects to everything else I’ve been tracking.
The GeoActive Knowledge Graph is my attempt to fix that.
It connects ~6,800 published pieces into one inspectable structure — 595 claims, each dated, sourced, and flagged honestly: what I authored myself, what was independently reported, and what is vendor-claimed and should be weighted accordingly.
Those claims hang on six theses I keep returning to, from firm-owned intelligence to the economics of where AI computing actually gets located. It also shows the questions I haven’t answered yet, and what evidence would settle them.
I’m making it available for a simple reason: tech sector insight and analysis is more useful when its reasoning can be examined. If you lead technology strategy, work in the markets I write about, or just think about these questions seriously, you can use it to:
follow an argument across two decades instead of reading posts in isolation
check the online validated evidence behind a claim before you reuse it
see where my thinking is settled, and where it is still genuinely open
Reuse the underlying data in your own work — it’s published under CC BY 4.0, with attribution.
One honest footnote, because it may become part of the story: I built this in an era when readers increasingly reach ideas through AI summaries, so I designed it (with Meta Muse) to be read by machines as well as people.
Early testing suggests some AI tools still can’t properly read platform-hosted pages like this one. For now, the direct link in a browser is the surest route; and that gap between what humans can see and what machines can reach is, I suspect, a finding worth watching in itself.
Explore the Knowledge Graph: https://knowledge-graph.geoactivegroup.com