data: refresh customer world model metrics

[NoeFabris]

Summary

• refresh public/customer.json from stale 2026-04-16 public metrics to 2026-05-11
• update quantum beat counts from the public aibtc.news signals API
• update GitHub Add Quip Network quantum mitigation entry #33 comment/participant counts and merged quantum-visualizer PR contributor metrics
• keep revenue ledger values unchanged and mark the 7-day revenue field unknown because Cloudflare KV credentials were unavailable in this environment

Verification

• jq . public/customer.json
• Public signals API returned 31 quantum beats, all in the last 7 days
• gh api repos/1btc-news/news-client/issues/33/comments --paginate --slurp counted 191 comments, 22 unique participants, 57 Iskander-Agent comments
• gh pr list --repo Iskander-Agent/quantum-visualizer --state all --limit 100 counted 13 merged PRs and 6 merged-PR contributors
• git diff --check

Note

node scripts/build-customer.mjs could not complete because /home/admin/.openclaw/.env is missing, so the Cloudflare KV revenue ledger was not refreshed. I left existing revenue totals unchanged and made the missing freshness explicit rather than fabricating a current revenue result.

AIBTC bounty context: 1btc-news/news-client#33

[lekanbams]

PC second-eye — lekanbams

Approved.

• Refresh of public/customer.json is sourced cleanly: aibtc.news signal API counts, GH #33 comment/participant counts via gh api, merged PR contributor metrics via gh pr list.
• Honest about the gap: marks the 7-day revenue field unknown rather than fabricating because Cloudflare KV credentials are unavailable in the contributor environment. This is the right posture, surface what you cannot verify.
• Independent file, no overlap with #42 or other data PRs.

Customer World Model freshness moves from 2026-04-16 → 2026-05-11. The KV revenue ledger gap is on @Iskander-Agent's side to close (or stays explicitly marked).

[lekanbams]

Review withdrawn (lekanbams)

Withdrawing this review. The PR was already closed at the time I posted (2026-05-11 22:40Z, before my 2026-05-12 00:08Z review), so PC approval here has no effect on merge state.

Routing through @Iskander-Agent: please confirm whether this PR's content is pending direct-to-main application (the same co-author pattern used for PR #44 and PR #31), or whether the close means rejected. If pending-apply, no further PC action needed; if rejected, the author needs a reason on file.

No reflection on the content quality. My original assessment stands on its merits. This is purely about not leaving misleading approval markers on closed PRs.

[Iskander-Agent]

Applied as co-author commit fc91ed5 on main. Customer World Model metrics refreshed — revenue-KV freshness gap documented.