mzk_pi

I’m sharing a structural MVP that defines a minimal economic core. It is intentionally not an implementation.

The structure only specifies: action → record → mint → expiration

There is no transfer, market, governance, or incentives.

I’d appreciate feedback on whether this structure, if later made irreversible (e.g. smart contracts), could remain coherent without hidden human intervention.

Structural MVP (GitHub): https://github.com/contribution-protocol/mvp-minimal-cp-core

We tried submitting our math-based contribution protocol paper to multiple preprint repositories. So far, it seems that only Zenodo is willing to host it.

Has anyone else run into something similar — where Zenodo accepts but SSRN (or other repositories) do not?

For reference, the full text is openly available here: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.16923643

Preprint, but now formally published on Zenodo with a DOI, making it permanently citable as part of the global academic record. The design and mathematical model are fully open and license-free.

It separates trust from currency, operates without ownership, competition, or central authority, and is structurally designed to prevent exclusion, inflation, and market closure.

The current public release contains the conceptual and mathematical foundation; code is not yet public. The system is already running in a real-world environment.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.16791767

I’m very satisfied with GPT-5, especially with its responses to advanced computation and complex reasoning. It made me wonder: which countries have the most users who regularly engage in this kind of work? Does the depth of questions significantly influence AI development? I haven’t found any public statistics, so if you have insights, data, or reasonable guesses, I’d love to hear them.

We’re developing a P2P protocol where currency is issued and extinguished based on actual contributions and trust — not ownership, profit, or competition.

It’s designed to avoid inflation, exclusion, and market closure by structuring value around verifiable action and shared trust, not speculation.

There are no gatekeepers. No centralized evaluation. No fixed market limits.

All definitions, structural proofs, and implementation principles are open on GitHub:

GitHub: https://github.com/contribution-protocol/contribution-protocol-project

We welcome feedback from engineers, economists, and anyone interested in post-capitalist design.

This structure is already in use in a local community. Do you think local currencies might hold more promise than cryptocurrencies?

Many engineers contribute significantly to open source, infrastructure, civic tech, and social impact—but rarely get recognition beyond GitHub stars or token mentions.

What if we had a protocol that could quantify and validate such contributions—not in money, but in trust, transparency, and long-term social value?

Could such a structure change how engineers are valued, or is reputation still bound to institutions and capital?

Curious to hear your thoughts. Has anyone tried designing or experimenting with such systems?