decentralization

Real estate has long been considered ripe for modernization through blockchain technology, but previous efforts have faced significant regulatory hurdles. Now, under the Trump administration, there is renewed momentum to promote blockchain’s development in the real estate sector. In particular, efforts are being explored through initiatives like DOGE, aiming to streamline real estate transactions.

Companies like Airbnb are already leveraging blockchain technology to connect travelers with hosts offering short-term stays in private rooms, entire homes, and apartments. This real-world application highlights the potential for broader adoption across the housing market.

Recent shake-ups at the Federal Housing Finance Agency, particularly at Freddie Mac, have resulted in the resignation of several senior officers. These changes suggest a push toward the modernization of the housing finance system. In the evolving mortgage space, this creates an opening for on-chain, crypto-native solutions to gain traction.

At both the White House Crypto Summit Reception and the Milken Institute Digital Summit in Washington, D.C., policymakers expressed serious support for using blockchain in real estate transactions. They highlighted how blockchain can help reduce the $30 billion that consumers spend annually when buying homes by cutting transaction costs and improving efficiency.

Overall, these developments signal a major shift in the U.S. government's stance on cryptocurrency and blockchain technology. By embracing innovation, skepticism and regulatory barriers surrounding blockchain’s use in real estate may soon become a thing of the past.
$DOGE
#blockchain #crypto #decentralization #MarketAnalysis #CryptoNews

The rise of blockchain technology has sparked a revolution, offering a world where decentralization, transparency, and trustless systems govern digital interactions. Blockchain, in its purest form, is like a natural forest—a complex, vibrant ecosystem where anyone can participate, contribute, and innovate freely. However, the emergence of Hyperledger, a permissioned blockchain solution, can be likened to an axe chopping away at this forest. In this article, we’ll explore how Hyperledger, despite its technical advantages, represents a direct threat to the decentralization that DeFi (Decentralized Finance) aims to preserve.

Blockchain: The Natural Forest of Innovation
Blockchain is often seen as a revolutionary ecosystem—a forest in which all participants, from developers to users, can take part in building and securing the system. Much like a natural forest, blockchain thrives on its diversity, its freedom from central control, and its self-sustaining nature.

Openness and Transparency
In a natural forest, every organism plays a role in the ecosystem. Trees grow tall, plants flower, and animals move freely without central control. Similarly, in blockchain networks, anyone can participate, validate transactions, and contribute to the network’s success. The system is open-source, meaning anyone can join, examine the code, and build upon it. Transparency is key; all transactions are recorded on the public ledger for everyone to see, creating an open and accountable system where trust is built through consensus, not intermediaries.

Self-sustaining Decentralization
Like a forest that maintains itself without intervention from external authorities, blockchain networks run autonomously. Decentralization ensures that no single entity has control over the system, and consensus mechanisms like Proof of Work (PoW) or Proof of Stake (PoS) enable transactions to be validated without the need for a central authority. This distributed governance fosters an environment where freedom and innovation can thrive.

Hyperledger: The Axe Chopping Away at Decentralization
Hyperledger, primarily used for enterprise-level blockchain applications, is an example of a permissioned blockchain. While it provides robust features for businesses, it introduces a centralization model that contradicts the core principles of blockchain.

The Permissioned Nature of Hyperledger
Hyperledger is designed to create controlled, private networks where only authorized participants can join. It uses mechanisms such as private keys and whitelisted validators, making it a permissioned blockchain. In contrast to the open, permissionless networks of public blockchains like Ethereum or Bitcoin, Hyperledger restricts access, reducing the transparency and inclusivity that DeFi networks strive for.
This restriction is like the axe of a lumberjack cutting down a forest to create clearings and paths for specific purposes. While these clearings may serve the needs of particular businesses or organizations, they restrict the natural growth of the ecosystem and limit the participation of others. The result is a centralized system where control rests in the hands of a few players, instead of being distributed among a broad, decentralized community.

The Threat to Decentralization
Hyperledger’s approach inherently conflicts with the core value of decentralization that blockchain promotes. Where blockchain’s open nature allows anyone to participate, Hyperledger’s centralized control creates an ecosystem of gatekeepers who determine who can join and who can validate transactions. This restriction on access is akin to limiting the biodiversity of a forest—only certain species (or participants) are allowed to thrive, reducing the ecosystem's diversity and resilience.
In blockchain, the idea is for power to be distributed, enabling democratic participation. Hyperledger, with its controlled and private nature, undermines this idea by giving power to a select few organizations. The enterprise solutions that use Hyperledger may be more secure and faster for specific use cases, but they do so by sacrificing the very freedom and openness that makes blockchain a disruptive technology.

Hyperledger and the Erosion of DeFi Principles
DeFi—or Decentralized Finance—is one of the most significant developments built on public blockchains. It seeks to create a financial ecosystem that is free from centralized authorities like banks, brokers, and payment processors. DeFi platforms operate on open, decentralized networks, allowing anyone to interact with them without permission or gatekeeping.
However, the rise of Hyperledger, with its emphasis on centralized control and permissioned networks, directly threatens the decentralized ethos of DeFi. Projects leveraging Hyperledger may offer security and efficiency for enterprise use, but they are essentially creating a walled garden—a controlled environment where only select participants can access financial tools and services. This is fundamentally at odds with the open and inclusive nature of DeFi.

The Centralized Financial System in Disguise
What makes Hyperledger particularly dangerous to DeFi is the illusion of decentralization it provides. While the technology itself may be based on blockchain, its centralized governance and restricted access mean that it could be used to perpetuate the existing financial system, which DeFi aims to disrupt. Large corporations and financial institutions could use Hyperledger’s permissioned system to maintain their dominance over financial transactions, blocking true decentralization from taking root.

The Need to Protect the Forest: A Call for True Decentralization
The analogy of blockchain as a natural forest and Hyperledger as the axe is a reminder of the fundamental conflict between decentralization and centralized control. While Hyperledger provides useful tools for businesses and corporations, its permissioned approach introduces restrictions that directly undermine the values that blockchain technology was designed to promote.
To protect the true spirit of DeFi and blockchain, we must ensure that public blockchains remain open, transparent, and permissionless. Like a forest that must remain free from control to maintain its natural ecosystem, blockchain needs to preserve its decentralization to continue driving innovation, freedom, and inclusivity in the financial world.
By choosing public, decentralized blockchain networks over permissioned systems like Hyperledger, we can ensure that the axe does not chop down the forest of innovation that has the potential to reshape global finance in a way that is open and accessible to all.

Conclusion
The metaphor of blockchain as a natural forest and Hyperledger as the axe illustrates a crucial truth: decentralization and openness are the foundation of blockchain technology, and anything that limits or controls access threatens the ecosystem's very existence. While Hyperledger may offer solutions for specific industries, its permissioned nature undermines the ideals of freedom, transparency, and decentralization that are at the heart of DeFi. To truly safeguard the future of blockchain, we must embrace systems that empower everyone to participate in the ecosystem, keeping the forest of innovation open and free for all.
#blockchain #decentralization #hyperledger #transparency

The evolution of blockchain technology has been heralded as a revolutionary force in how society conducts transactions, governs systems, and ensures privacy. The primary ideals of blockchain revolve around decentralization, transparency, and democratizing access to technology and financial systems. However, as the landscape of blockchain applications expands, so does the emergence of permissioned blockchains like Hyperledger, which stand in contrast to the very principles that make blockchain a democratic tool in the first place. In this article, we explore how Hyperledger raises serious questions about democracy, ethics, and its alignment with decentralized ideals.

The Democratic Dilemma of Hyperledger

At its core, Hyperledger is a permissioned blockchain designed for use by trusted organizations and corporations in various enterprise applications. It aims to create secure, private networks where only authorized parties can access and validate information. While permissioned blockchains have their use cases—particularly in industries such as supply chain management or finance—they pose significant challenges to the principles of democracy that are central to decentralized blockchain technologies.

Centralized Control vs. Distributed Governance:In a democratic system, power is distributed among all participants, and decisions are made collectively, ensuring equality and fairness. Hyperledger significantly centralizes power in the hands of a few trusted entities that control the network and validate transactions.In a typical permissioned blockchain like Hyperledger, only approved organizations can participate in governance. This directly contrasts with public blockchains like Ethereum or Bitcoin, where any participant can engage in network activities, propose changes, or even validate transactions (depending on the consensus mechanism).Hyperledger restricts this participatory nature by limiting access to a select few, creating an oligarchic structure rather than a democratic one. This restriction on who gets to participate and influence the network makes it inherently undemocratic.Exclusion and Lack of Equal Opportunity:In true democratic systems, everyone has equal access to resources and opportunities, whether it’s voting rights or the ability to create wealth. Hyperledger’s permissioning model limits participation to only those entities that meet certain pre-approved criteria, thus excluding smaller players, individuals, or organizations that cannot meet these standards.By limiting access to a small group of participants, Hyperledger perpetuates inequality and fails to uphold the principle of inclusivity that is a hallmark of both democratic systems and blockchain technology. The elites—corporations or trusted entities—control the entire ecosystem, leaving others with little to no control over the network.Transparency and Accountability Concerns:Democracy thrives on transparency—the ability of the public to scrutinize the actions of those in power. In contrast, Hyperledger operates within a closed environment, where decision-making processes, network transactions, and data management are often not transparent to the public.In a decentralized network, transparency and auditability are key principles that ensure participants can trust the system and its actors. However, because Hyperledger is private and permissioned, it often operates under the radar, limiting the public’s ability to scrutinize actions. This reduces accountability and opens the door for unethical practices to take place, much like in centralized systems of power.The Threat to Democracy in Blockchain:The beauty of blockchain technology lies in its democratic potential—the idea that anyone, anywhere, can participate in and benefit from the network. Hyperledger's centralized nature undermines this ideal by granting the privilege of network control only to a few approved parties, effectively creating a system where participation is restricted, and influence is concentrated among a select few.This stands in stark contrast to DeFi (Decentralized Finance), where the idea is to create open, inclusive systems that are not controlled by any single entity. While Hyperledger may suit enterprise needs, it fails to serve the democratic ideals that are central to the blockchain and crypto world.

The Unethical Aspects of Hyperledger

While Hyperledger may provide security, privacy, and efficiency for certain enterprise-level applications, it raises several ethical concerns, especially when its potential is viewed through the lens of democracy and decentralization.

Exploitation of Centralized Control:In democratic systems, the abuse of power is considered unethical. Similarly, the centralized control within Hyperledger can lead to unethical practices, where a select few entities exploit the system to maintain power and control. The lack of external scrutiny allows these entities to operate with little to no accountability, making it easier for them to exploit the system for financial or strategic gain.If these entities manipulate the network for selfish purposes, it could lead to unfair advantages in the marketplace, perpetuating inequality and undermining the core values of transparency and fairness in blockchain technology.Restricting Innovation and Financial Inclusion:DeFi is based on the principle of open financial systems, where anyone can participate regardless of their economic or social standing. Hyperledger, with its closed environment, limits access to financial innovation. By restricting participation to a select group of players, it inadvertently contributes to the exclusion of individuals or smaller entities who could benefit from this transformative technology.In this sense, Hyperledger may not only stifle innovation but also hinder the financial inclusion that blockchain technology promises. Individuals who don’t meet the criteria to participate in these networks could miss out on the potential economic opportunities afforded by decentralized financial systems.Undermining the True Spirit of Blockchain:The essence of blockchain is to distribute power, eliminate intermediaries, and empower individuals. Hyperledger, by contrast, limits the access and participation of individuals and smaller organizations, instead granting control to a few centralized entities. This goes against the very spirit of what blockchain stands for.When used for enterprise applications, it may be a pragmatic solution. However, using it as a blockchain solution for systems that should ideally be open, transparent, and decentralized can be considered unethical, as it restricts the freedom and empowerment that blockchain technologies were meant to promote.

Conclusion: The Ethical Dilemma of Hyperledger

In conclusion, Hyperledger Fabric raises serious ethical and democratic concerns when compared to the open, decentralized models of blockchain. While permissioned blockchains like Hyperledger have their place in certain enterprise applications, they fundamentally clash with the democratic ideals that blockchain technology was designed to promote. By concentrating power in the hands of a few participants and restricting access to the broader public, Hyperledger limits the open access, transparency, and inclusivity that are essential to a truly democratic system.

While Hyperledger may be seen as an efficient tool for enterprise use, its centralized nature and lack of transparency mean that it risks undermining the ethical foundation of blockchain—leaving the door open for practices that contradict the principles of equality, accountability, and fairness. As we continue to build on blockchain's democratic potential, it is essential to critically evaluate how permissioned systems like Hyperledger may shape the future of decentralization, ethics, and governance in the blockchain world.
#centralized #hyperledger #blockchain #democracy #decentralization

Hey there! If you’re a developer, founder, creator, or crypto enthusiast who believes in a decentralized future, stick with me until the end. I want to dive into the issue of true decentralization in modern blockchain systems and ask: can we really build an equitable digital world?
The Problem: The Rich Rule “Decentralization”
In most so-called “decentralized” systems, the biggest rewards from mining or validation go to the wealthy or ultra-wealthy. Let’s look at the facts: becoming a validator in popular networks like Ethereum or Solana is out of reach for the average person. Ethereum 2.0 requires a minimum of 32 ETH (about $100,000 as of now), and the top 17 addresses control over 51% of staked assets. In Bitcoin, more than 50% of the hash rate is held by major mining pools like Foundry USA and AntPool.
Consensus mechanisms only deepen this inequality. PoW rewards those with powerful hardware and cheap energy. PoS favors those with deep pockets. Newer algorithms, like DPoS in EOS or PoA in some private networks, are often even more centralized, handing control to a select few. The entry barrier for these systems is sky-high for regular people, and power in these networks is increasingly concentrated among those already holding resources.
Wasn’t the whole point of blockchain to dismantle the monopoly of traditional finance, where 1% owns everything, and create a system where everyone has a voice? Right now, we’re seeing the opposite: blockchain networks risk becoming a rehash of the old system in a shiny new digital wrapper.
Why This Matters
As long as the market is booming, transactions are processed, and tokens are traded, few people notice this issue. Most users in the crypto space are chasing speculative gains - quick profits. But let’s zoom out: we’re currently testing technologies that could one day replace traditional finance. Wasn’t that the original spark behind Bitcoin? Sure, expecting a full replacement in the next decade is optimistic, but the crypto industry’s relative stability, despite recent turbulence, brings that moment closer. We’re all testers in thousands of experiments, reaping bonuses in the form of tokens or benefits. But if we don’t tackle this inequality, we’ll end up with the same 1% “winners” in a decentralized future, leaving scraps for the rest of us.
The issue goes beyond the blockchain trilemma (decentralization, security, scalability). The ultra-rich, with their resources and foresight, are seizing the most valuable asset - control and votes in networks. The growing popularity of crypto only accelerates this process. If nothing changes, we’re not building a new system but repackaging the old one in blockchain clothing.
The Solution: Isocracy and PoBU
What if we pivot toward isocracy (from Greek isos—equal, kratos—power), a system where every participant has an equal voice? The idea isn’t new, but blockchain offers a chance to make it real. One such approach is the Proof of Biometric Uniqueness (PoBU) consensus mechanism, brought to life by Humanode.
Unlike PoW or PoS, PoBU is built on the principle of “one person = one vote = one node.” This isn’t just a guideline—it’s a cryptographically enforced reality. Humanode uses cryptobiometrics to verify each participant’s uniqueness and liveness. You become a validator not because you own wealth or hardware, but because you’re a unique, living human. Biometric data (like facial scans) is processed decentrally, and cryptographic algorithms ensure one person can’t create multiple nodes (protecting against Sybil attacks). Every validator carries equal weight, neutralizing traditional levers of centralization: wealth, equipment, or institutional influence.
PoBU doesn’t just aim for decentralization—it sustains it, even as the network scales. Humanode runs on the Substrate framework and supports compatibility with the Ethereum Virtual Machine (EVM), enabling developers to build apps, DAOs, or smart contracts that inherit this equal structure. For example, Humanode’s DAO Vortex shows how equal voting can work in community governance.
Is True Decentralization Possible?
Humanode proves that honest decentralization through isocracy, where every vote is equal, is achievable. But its success hinges on the community’s willingness to prioritize equality. Alternative approaches, like Proof of Identity or equal voting in DAOs, are also worth exploring—the more experiments, the better our chances of finding a model that works.
If you’re a developer, founder, or crypto enthusiast who believes in a decentralized world, join those already shaping this future. Check out Humanode’s approach: dive into their docs at humanode.io, reach out to their team with questions, or try building something on their platform. Got objections? The comments are open—share your thoughts! Your ideas—whether a dApp, DAO, or smart contract—could help build an infrastructure that delivers digital sovereignty for all. Let’s work together to create a future where power belongs not to the 1%, but to every one of us.
#humanode #decentralization #Consensus #blockchain

Introduction
The Pi Network has witnessed significant growth, amassing millions of pioneers worldwide. Despite this, one of the most critical challenges that Pi faces today is its lack of liquidity in the broader cryptocurrency market. Pi’s value is currently constrained by the limitations imposed by centralized exchanges (CEXs) that list Pi tokens without allowing true liquidity access, and the absence of decentralized liquidity solutions that could empower the community while providing real market-driven price discovery.
This proposal outlines a strategy for the Pi Core Team to create a hybrid liquidity solution — combining decentralized liquidity pools (LPs) with CEX listings — to unlock the full potential of the Pi Network. The goal is to enable pioneers to use their Pi tokens actively within a functioning, decentralized market, while also allowing for price discovery and growth in a controlled manner.

Current Situation: Pi on CEXs with No Real Liquidity
Currently, Pi is listed on various CEXs such as MEXC, where the price is artificially set at around $0.6. This price does not reflect true market conditions for the following reasons:
Pi listed on CEXs is typically in the form of synthetic Pi tokens that are not backed by the real Pi network.
Pi can neither be deposited nor withdrawn to/from the main Pi blockchain.No active liquidity exists, leading to speculative trading rather than true price discovery based on supply and demand.
As a result, Pi's price on CEXs is driven by speculation rather than actual market forces, and pioneers are unable to access or utilize their tokens effectively. This stagnation creates a barrier for both Pi's growth as a usable currency and its potential to enter into the larger DeFi ecosystem.

Proposed Solution: A Hybrid Liquidity Model
To address this challenge, we propose the development of a hybrid liquidity solution that includes both decentralized liquidity pools (LPs) and centralized exchange listings. This solution will provide real market value for Pi, unlock DeFi potential, and ensure pioneers can actively participate in Pi’s ecosystem.
Key Components of the Proposal

Decentralized Liquidity Pools (LPs)Pi tokens would be made available on popular decentralized exchanges (DEXs) such as Uniswap or PancakeSwap.Community members can provide liquidity to these pools by pairing Pi with stablecoins like USDT or USDC.Liquidity providers (LPs) would earn transaction fees and rewards, encouraging long-term engagement and token lock-up.This model ensures true price discovery, with Pi's value being determined by real market dynamics, rather than speculative trading.CEX Listings for Exposure and Price DiscoveryPi would continue to be listed on reputable centralized exchanges (CEXs) such as MEXC, Binance, or KuCoin, but only with controlled liquidity.CEX listings would offer Pi the visibility needed to increase awareness and attract institutional investors and retail traders.Limited trading pairs would be offered to maintain price stability and avoid excessive volatility.Incentive and Reward MechanismsIncentives for early adopters and liquidity providers, such as yield farming or staking rewards, will be offered to promote liquidity.Community-driven rewards for Pi holders who lock up their tokens in long-term liquidity pools.A dynamic staking model could be introduced, where rewards increase with the length of the token lock-up period, encouraging pioneers to keep their tokens in liquidity pools for extended periods.Price Control MechanismsOracle systems would be implemented to provide real-time, accurate price feeds for Pi, preventing artificial inflation or deflation of its value.A price floor mechanism could be introduced to help stabilize Pi’s value and protect it from drastic price dumps.

 

Benefits of the Hybrid Liquidity Model

True Market Value for PiBy enabling decentralized liquidity pools, Pi’s price will be determined by actual supply and demand within the market, reflecting a more realistic and fair value.This will help establish Pi as a legitimate asset in the global cryptocurrency market.Community EmpowermentThis model provides Pi’s massive community with the tools and incentives to actively participate in the Pi ecosystem, rather than being passive holders.Community members can earn rewards by participating in liquidity provision, creating a sustainable ecosystem driven by pioneers.DeFi and Real-World UtilityPi will be able to integrate into the decentralized finance (DeFi) ecosystem, allowing for staking, lending, borrowing, and more.Pi’s utility will grow beyond just speculative trading, enabling it to be used for real-world transactions, gaming, NFTs, and more.Price Stability and Long-Term GrowthBy combining CEX listings with decentralized liquidity, Pi will have a dual layer of liquidity, ensuring price stability while allowing for organic growth in the long run.Pioneers will be more likely to hold Pi tokens if they are earning rewards through LPs, thus reducing price volatility and encouraging more consistent growth.Building a Sustainable Pi EconomyA hybrid liquidity model aligns with Pi’s vision of building a decentralized economy powered by Pioneers and Pi’s blockchain.The model fosters an environment where Pi becomes usable, not just speculative, and drives long-term adoption through utility and incentives.

 

Implementation Plan

Phase 1: Pilot Liquidity Pools

Select trusted DEX platforms (e.g., Uniswap or PancakeSwap) for Pi token integration.Launch a small liquidity pool with Pi and popular stablecoins (e.g., USDT).Introduce a reward structure for early liquidity providers and adopters.

Phase 2: CEX Listings with Controlled Liquidity

List Pi on trusted centralized exchanges with limited liquidity.Implement price control mechanisms and ensure accurate oracle systems are in place.Allow for gradual market-based price discovery through controlled liquidity.

Phase 3: Incentives and Community Engagement

Develop a staking and yield farming program for Pi holders.Introduce community governance for decision-making on future listings and changes to liquidity strategies.Continue engagement with the Pi community through AMA sessions and feedback loops.

Phase 4: Scaling and DeFi Integration

Expand Pi’s integration into DeFi platforms for use in staking, lending, and borrowing.Establish partnerships with businesses and merchants to accept Pi as a payment method.
 

Conclusion
The Pi Network has an enormous community of dedicated pioneers who believe in its vision. By adopting a hybrid liquidity model, the Pi Core Team can unlock the true potential of Pi tokens, allowing for real price discovery, community-driven rewards, and long-term adoption in the global cryptocurrency ecosystem.
This approach provides a balanced, sustainable solution for Pi’s growth, addressing the limitations of current centralized exchanges while ensuring that Pi remains decentralized and community-controlled.
We believe this proposal will help pave the way for Pi to become a true utility token, with real-world use cases, integration into the DeFi ecosystem, and a thriving economy built by its community.
#pi
#DEFİ #decentralization #pinetwork
#CommunityDriven

Pi Network has been a conundrum to the crypto world, with views oscillating between wonder and skepticism. Recently, Pi Network has published a new report on its Mainnet migration roadmap along with a clearer view of tokenomics and supply strategies. This was done with an Aspirant community numbering no less than tens of millions. 

In summary, the whole industry and the Pioneer community have a few pointers to take away from this particular communication.

Mainnet Migration: Not Just a Token Movement

Notably, during the pandemic, while other projects preferred simple drops over a few thousand wallets or so, this project decided to migrate millions of users based on a six-year mining activity. The goal was to achieve credibility, integrity, and fairness, pointers to any serious block protocol.

So far, there are over 12 million users who have successfully been migrated. This feat alone proves the scalability of infrastructure because the migration runs on native KYC and fiat-free onboarding.

Migration of at least 10 million Pioneers was a prior condition for launching the Open Network. The network remains committed to migrating the rest of the users, even after Open Network activation. 

Migration Roadmap Priorities

1. First, Complete the Initial Migrations:
The first phase is concentrating on verified users in the migration queue. Their migrated balances are composed of

- Base mining rewards

- Security Circle rewards

- Lockup bonuses

- Application usage bonuses

- Node operator rewards

2. Second Migrations (Bonus Referral):
Once the initial batch is closed, the referral bonus for successfully KYC'd teams will be eligible for migration. 

3. Periodic Migrating Operations:
Eventually, Pi will put in place periodic migrations every other month or quarterly until all eligible rewards enter users' Mainnet wallets. 

 Important Note: Do take note that the "Transferable Balance" on the app UI is an estimate. The actual amount that is being migrated is derived from a detailed record of each mining session and is most often higher. 

Tokenomics: Aligned for Fairness and Growth

The total supply of the network may never exceed 100 billion tokens, distributed as follows:

65%- Community mining rewards

10% - Foundation reserve

5% - Liquidity provisioning

20% - Core Team

What is unique to the present arrangement: All allocations grow in the speed of migrated mining rewards. This ensures:

Not one iota of undue advantage to the Core Team or Foundation;

Growth of supply tied one-for-one with real activity from users

Effective Total Supply

Effective Total Supply is calculated by the network at any one time as:

Migrated Mining Rewards ÷ 65%

From this number, we can derive larger shareholder buckets- Fundraising, Core Team, etc.

On-chain transparency and economic integrity will be ensured.

The Mining Mechanism: Modeled for Decentralization

As elaborated in the 2021 Whitepaper, the mining system of the Pi currency is based on a decaying issuance mechanism.

Each month, a capped amount is allocated through the Base Mining Rate (BMR) for issuance; rewards are subsequently multiplied by a scaling function.

#WriteToEarn #Web3Writers #CreatorEconomy #TokenizedContent #decentralization

$ETH