leo: fix broken wiki links from Christensen condensation

- What: Redirected 8 broken links from deleted performance-overshooting and
  value-networks claims to consolidated good-management claim
- Why: Clay caught broken entertainment links in PR #49 review
- Files: 2 entertainment, 1 health, 1 _map, 1 disruptors claim, 1 moats map

Pentagon-Agent: Leo <76FB9BCA-CC16-4479-B3E5-25A3769B3D7E>

domains/entertainment/consumer definition of quality is fluid and revealed through preference not fixed by production value.md

@@ -26,7 +26,7 @@ Relevant Notes:
 - [[social video is already 25 percent of all video consumption and growing because dopamine-optimized formats match generational attention patterns]] — the consumption data behind the quality shift
 - [[the media attractor state is community-filtered IP with AI-collapsed production costs where content becomes a loss leader for the scarce complements of fandom community and ownership]] — the attractor state implies community relevance overtakes production value
 - [[disruptors redefine quality rather than competing on the incumbents definition of good]] — the direct theoretical parent: disruption works by changing what "good" means
-- [[performance overshooting creates a vacuum for good-enough alternatives when products exceed what mainstream customers need]] — Christensen's framework for why quality redefinition enables disruption
+- [[good management causes disruption because rational resource allocation systematically favors sustaining innovation over disruptive opportunities]] — Christensen's framework for why quality redefinition enables disruption (performance overshooting mechanism now consolidated here)
 
 Topics:
 - [[entertainment]]

domains/entertainment/streaming churn may be permanently uneconomic because maintenance marketing consumes up to half of average revenue per user.md

@@ -23,7 +23,7 @@ Relevant Notes:
 - [[media disruption follows two sequential phases as distribution moats fall first and creation moats fall second]] -- streaming churn economics are a direct consequence of the first-phase distribution disruption
 - [[value flows to whichever resources are scarce and disruption shifts which resources are scarce making resource-scarcity analysis the core strategic framework]] -- subscriber loyalty becomes the scarce resource that streaming economics cannot capture
 - [[when profits disappear at one layer of a value chain they emerge at an adjacent layer through the conservation of attractive profits]] -- unbundling destroyed the cross-subsidy mechanism that generated profits at the distribution layer
-- [[performance overshooting creates a vacuum for good-enough alternatives when products exceed what mainstream customers need]] -- streaming overshoots on volume while undershooting on curation, creating the churn cycle
+- [[good management causes disruption because rational resource allocation systematically favors sustaining innovation over disruptive opportunities]] -- streaming overshoots on volume while undershooting on curation, creating the churn cycle
 - [[information cascades create power law distributions in culture because consumers use popularity as a quality signal when choice is overwhelming]] -- power law dynamics mean only a few titles drive subscriptions, making the gap between content cost and hit probability lethal
 
 Topics:

domains/health/healthcare AI creates a Jevons paradox because adding capacity to sick care induces more demand for sick care.md

@@ -26,7 +26,7 @@ Relevant Notes:
 - [[healthcare is a complex adaptive system requiring simple enabling rules not complicated management because standardized processes erode the clinical autonomy needed for value creation]] -- healthcare requires system change, not component optimization
 - [[prescription digital therapeutics failed as a business model because FDA clearance creates regulatory cost without the pricing power that justifies it for near-zero marginal cost software]] -- point solutions fail in healthcare because regulatory cost exceeds pricing power
 - [[healthcares defensible layer is where atoms become bits because physical-to-digital conversion generates the data that powers AI care while building patient trust that software alone cannot create]] -- the defensible position is at the atoms-to-bits conversion, not in AI engines alone
-- [[performance overshooting creates a vacuum for good-enough alternatives when products exceed what mainstream customers need]] -- AI diagnostic accuracy already exceeds physician performance on benchmarks, yet outcomes barely improve, suggesting the bottleneck is not accuracy but system integration
+- [[good management causes disruption because rational resource allocation systematically favors sustaining innovation over disruptive opportunities]] -- AI diagnostic accuracy already exceeds physician performance on benchmarks, yet outcomes barely improve, suggesting the bottleneck is not accuracy but system integration
 
 Topics:
 - health and wellness

foundations/teleological-economics/_map.md

@@ -22,9 +22,7 @@ Attractor state analysis, economic complexity, and disruption theory provide the
 ## Disruption Theory
 - [[disruptors redefine quality rather than competing on the incumbents definition of good]] — the Christensen insight
 - [[good management causes disruption because rational resource allocation systematically favors sustaining innovation over disruptive opportunities]] — the paradox
-- [[value networks act as perceptual filters that make disruptive opportunities invisible to incumbents]] — why incumbents can't see it
 - [[when profits disappear at one layer of a value chain they emerge at an adjacent layer through the conservation of attractive profits]] — profit migration
-- [[performance overshooting creates a vacuum for good-enough alternatives when products exceed what mainstream customers need]] — the opening for disruption
 - [[incumbents fail to respond to visible disruption because external structures lag even when executives see the threat clearly]] — structural not cognitive failure
 
 ## Economic Complexity

foundations/teleological-economics/disruptors redefine quality rather than competing on the incumbents definition of good.md

@@ -12,14 +12,14 @@ tradition: "Christensen disruption theory"
 
 When Christensen describes disruptive technologies as "inferior," he means inferior on the performance dimensions that the incumbent's value network prizes. But the disruptive product is often superior on dimensions the incumbent ignores or undervalues: simplicity, affordability, convenience, accessibility, portability. The 5.25-inch disk drive was "inferior" to the 8-inch drive on capacity -- the metric minicomputer manufacturers cared about -- but superior on size, weight, and price, the dimensions the emerging PC market valued. Honda's Super Cub was "inferior" to a Harley-Davidson on power and speed but superior on ease of use, price, and accessibility for people who had never ridden a motorcycle. The steel mini-mill's rebar was "inferior" on every quality dimension integrated mills tracked but superior on price and delivery speed, which was all rebar customers cared about.
 
-The incumbent cannot see this redefinition because its [[value networks act as perceptual filters that make disruptive opportunities invisible to incumbents]]. The company's customers, employees, processes, and partners all reinforce a particular definition of quality. Redefining quality would mean abandoning the consensus of the entire value network. This is not a failure of intelligence but of perception -- the incumbent's measurement systems, customer feedback loops, and resource allocation processes all optimize for the existing definition of "good." Since [[companies and people are greedy algorithms that hill-climb toward local optima and require external perturbation to escape suboptimal equilibria]], incumbents cannot voluntarily adopt a definition of quality that would devalue their current competitive position.
+The incumbent cannot see this redefinition because its [[good management causes disruption because rational resource allocation systematically favors sustaining innovation over disruptive opportunities]]. The company's customers, employees, processes, and partners all reinforce a particular definition of quality. Redefining quality would mean abandoning the consensus of the entire value network. This is not a failure of intelligence but of perception -- the incumbent's measurement systems, customer feedback loops, and resource allocation processes all optimize for the existing definition of "good." Since [[companies and people are greedy algorithms that hill-climb toward local optima and require external perturbation to escape suboptimal equilibria]], incumbents cannot voluntarily adopt a definition of quality that would devalue their current competitive position.
 
 This quality redefinition mechanism is what makes [[proxy inertia is the most reliable predictor of incumbent failure because current profitability rationally discourages pursuit of viable futures]] so lethal. The incumbent is not just protecting profits -- it is defending an entire worldview about what quality means. When [[UnitedHealth and Humana exhibit textbook proxy inertia where coding arbitrage profits rationally prevent pursuit of purpose-built care delivery]], they are also defending the definition of "good healthcare management" as coding optimization rather than clinical outcomes. The disruptor (Devoted) redefines quality as patient outcomes and care delivery, not revenue cycle management. This connects directly to [[meme propagation selects for simplicity novelty and conformity pressure rather than truth or utility]] -- the incumbent's quality definition propagates through the organization as an unquestioned meme, resistant to competing definitions even when market evidence accumulates.
 
 ---
 
 Relevant Notes:
-- [[value networks act as perceptual filters that make disruptive opportunities invisible to incumbents]] -- the mechanism that prevents incumbents from perceiving the quality redefinition
+- [[good management causes disruption because rational resource allocation systematically favors sustaining innovation over disruptive opportunities]] -- the mechanism that prevents incumbents from perceiving the quality redefinition
 - [[proxy inertia is the most reliable predictor of incumbent failure because current profitability rationally discourages pursuit of viable futures]] -- quality redefinition explains why proxy inertia is so lethal: incumbents defend a worldview not just a margin
 - [[companies and people are greedy algorithms that hill-climb toward local optima and require external perturbation to escape suboptimal equilibria]] -- the optimization framework that explains why quality definitions get locked in
 - [[meme propagation selects for simplicity novelty and conformity pressure rather than truth or utility]] -- quality definitions propagate as organizational memes resistant to competing definitions

maps/competitive advantage and moats.md

@@ -5,7 +5,6 @@ Navigation hub for claims about what creates durable competitive advantage in in
 ## Why Moats Fall
 - [[good management causes disruption because rational resource allocation systematically favors sustaining innovation over disruptive opportunities]]
 - [[proxy inertia is the most reliable predictor of incumbent failure because current profitability rationally discourages pursuit of viable futures]]
-- [[value networks act as perceptual filters that make disruptive opportunities invisible to incumbents]]
 - [[incumbents fail to respond to visible disruption because external structures lag even when executives see the threat clearly]]
 - [[disruptors redefine quality rather than competing on the incumbents definition of good]]