Bring what you can do. Find what you need. Mine it. Use it. Pass it on.
A design sandbox you can reshape and share - not a price or adoption forecast.
The little miracle
You do not need to find the one person who both wants your work and offers exactly what you want. Fork money carries value from A to B to C. The network makes more matches possible.
Live counterfactual
Watch the money find the next good thing
The common clearing
Work goes one way. Money comes back and moves again.
fork satsmove
Opening the world...
World guideThe next causal event will appear here.
0needs met
0sats passed
0%sat reuse
0collaborators reached
You are here120 sats
Earned
0 sats
Spent
0 sats
Mining cost
0 sats
Work done
0
Needs met
0
Collaborators
0
Visible security economy
Work, attack pressure, and miner livelihood
Accumulated honest work
0
Scenario attack pressure
No observed work yet
Attacker-possible work
0 scenario work units
Miner revenue
0 sats
Mining cost
0 sats
Issued
0 sats
Burned as mining cost
0 sats
Active people
0
Departed people
0
Attack pressure is a scenario comparison, not a probability.
What people are doing for one another
The exchange river
Every line is generated from the visible world. The list is bounded to the latest eight chains.
Why money helps
A can help B without needing what B makes.
A → BA gives B useful work
B → AB pays A in fork sats
A → CA spends those sats with C
C → AC gives A the next useful thing
Money separates the two halves of barter. A earns a generally spendable claim for useful work, then chooses where to spend it. Each payment becomes someone else's capacity to ask for the next useful thing.
A fork people can enter
Open is a design commitment.
Open does not mean vague consensus. It means the path into shaping, inspecting, earning, and choosing the fork remains visible.
Open code
Anyone can inspect the rules, build an implementation, and show exactly what changed.
Open entry
A new miner, merchant, artist, validator, relay, builder, teacher, host, or researcher has a visible route into useful participation.
Open configuration
Star's world, a dated Luke / Knots proxy, and a visitor's own world can coexist without pretending one is ordained.
Open accounting
Issuance, fees, accumulated work, costs, balances, and who paid whom remain inspectable.
Open future
People may explore competing designs before launch; a network becomes real only when participants knowingly choose exact consensus rules.
How people make money
Every role can earn. Nobody is promised profit.
Everyone wins is not a guaranteed payoff. A voluntary trade is mutually beneficial when the buyer values the work above the sats paid and the contributor values the sats above the cost of providing the work. A miner wins only when subsidy and fees exceed hardware and energy cost. A stalled or losing path must remain visible.
Builder: voluntary payment for tools. Cost: service-production cost not modeled.
Miner: block subsidy, payment fees, and voluntary payment for settlement. Cost: explicit mining operating cost.
Merchant: voluntary payment for goods. Cost: service-production cost not modeled.
Validator: voluntary payment for verification. Cost: service-production cost not modeled.
Relay: voluntary payment for reach. Cost: service-production cost not modeled.
Researcher: voluntary payment for research. Cost: service-production cost not modeled.
Artist: voluntary payment for stories. Cost: service-production cost not modeled.
Teacher: voluntary payment for learning. Cost: service-production cost not modeled.
Host: voluntary payment for belonging. Cost: service-production cost not modeled.
Six cross-cutting choices
A fork is more than its mining algorithm.
Mining hardware matters, but a working fork also makes choices about entry, coordination, validation, money, recovery, and who can keep building when conditions change.
PoW and hardware eligibility
Which hardware can make eligible work, and who can realistically obtain, operate, or control it?
DAA and bootstrap
How do target adjustment and launch conditions behave when work arrives or leaves quickly?
Lane and work aggregation
If work has several lanes, how are their targets, shares, and total chain work compared?
Mining-role, template, and payout separation
Who owns hash, selects templates, validates work, accounts for shares, and controls payouts?
Verifier resource bounds
What computation, bandwidth, storage, and invalid-block work must an independent verifier safely bound?
Activation, replay, and rollback
How do exact rules activate, avoid replay across chains, and recover or roll back when deployment fails?
Different starting imaginations
Start with mechanisms. Then make a world you can defend.
authored-preference
Star Heartsong: Circulation Commons
A talent-rich circulation world: easy entry, broad matching, money that moves, and mining rewards spread across more hands.
Mechanism basis
Star's authored invitation: open entry, broad matching, circulation, and distributed participation are values to inspect, not empirical outcomes.
Authored world mapping
Authored scenario mapping: higher entry, matching, circulation, and mining-spread controls make this sandbox show a circulation-first starting point. These numbers are not sourced measurements.
Trade-off
Broad access can leave more needs unmatched, expose miners to explicit operating costs, and make coordination visibly harder.
Not modeled
This authored interpretation does not establish decentralization, adoption, beneficial ownership, price, or real-world profit.
No external source is claimed for this authored starting interpretation.
People
2400
Entry openness
92
Matching reach
88
Circulation
94
Mining spread
84
Currency rules
Open Fork sats
Attacker capacity
30
Attacker budget
600
source-informed-illustration
Luke / Knots: ASIC-first proxy, Aug 13
A dated, source-informed proxy for public Knots discussion: mature-ASIC security, bounded validation, and money-first policy. The current algorithm, fork specification, and rollout are unpublished. The numeric mapping is ours, not Luke's.
Mechanism basis
A dated proxy for public Knots and Luke Dashjr discussion. It is not a published fork algorithm, consensus specification, or rollout plan.
Authored world mapping
Authored scenario mapping: the numeric controls express a mature-ASIC, bounded-verification proxy for comparison. The mapping is ours, not Luke's, and is not a measurement.
Trade-off
Known equipment and bounded validation can still depend on fabrication, finance, hosting, firmware, energy, and coordination.
Not modeled
The cited discussion does not establish decentralization, a settled mechanism, beneficial ownership, deployment readiness, or launch legitimacy.
The explicit boundary that this is not a published current fork specification.
People
1200
Entry openness
58
Matching reach
64
Circulation
76
Mining spread
42
Currency rules
Security-first sats
Attacker capacity
45
Attacker budget
900
mechanism-example
RandomX: CPU-bound path
An editable CPU-eligibility example based on RandomX's public design, with no claim that CPU access proves dispersed ownership.
Mechanism basis
RandomX documents a randomized-program, memory-intensive proof-of-work design intended for general-purpose CPUs.
Authored world mapping
Authored scenario mapping: this world uses broader mining spread to let a visitor inspect a CPU-eligibility hypothesis. Numeric values are authored assumptions, not RandomX performance measurements.
Trade-off
Commodity eligibility can coexist with cloud, botnet, energy, pool, optimized-software, and future-specialization advantages.
Not modeled
The RandomX design does not establish decentralization, voluntary ownership dispersion, botnet absence, adoption, or comparative miner economics.
The official design describes randomized program execution and memory modes aimed at general-purpose CPUs; it does not establish ownership or decentralization outcomes.
People
1800
Entry openness
74
Matching reach
70
Circulation
72
Mining spread
78
Currency rules
Open Fork sats
Attacker capacity
36
Attacker budget
720
mechanism-example
Grin: scheduled PoW evolution path
An editable scheduled-evolution example inspired by Grin's public PoW transition documentation, not an implementation of Grin rules.
Mechanism basis
Grin's public proof-of-work documentation describes two proof-of-work tracks and a scheduled evolution in their relative treatment.
Authored world mapping
Authored scenario mapping: this world changes the sandbox's departure timing to teach a scheduled eligibility transition. It does not execute Grin consensus rules, and all numbers are authored assumptions.
Trade-off
Predictable transitions can reward specialized supply chains and impose unequal upgrade, coordination, and software-maintenance costs.
Not modeled
The Grin proof-of-work document does not establish decentralization, beneficial-owner dispersion, current miner participation, or the outcome of a scheduled transition.
The official document describes Grin's proof-of-work design and scheduled evolution; it does not prove a decentralization outcome.
People
1500
Entry openness
68
Matching reach
66
Circulation
68
Mining spread
62
Currency rules
Security-first sats
Attacker capacity
42
Attacker budget
840
mechanism-example
DigiByte: multi-work lanes path
An editable multi-work teaching example based on DigiByte's public README; it keeps lane aggregation and common ownership visibly unresolved.
Mechanism basis
DigiByte's official README describes multiple mining algorithms and per-algorithm difficulty treatment.
Authored world mapping
Authored scenario mapping: this sandbox treats mining spread as a visible contrast while teaching that lane aggregation would require exact protocol rules. Its numeric mapping is an authored assumption, not a DigiByte measurement.
Trade-off
Nominal lane diversity can conceal common ownership, enable hopping, weaken a lane, and create retarget and cross-lane incentive failures.
Not modeled
The DigiByte README does not establish decentralization, beneficial-owner diversity, weak-lane security, aggregate fork choice, or the value of a different lane design.
A newer public discussion route. An authenticated publisher was not available from this repository, so the World links to the conversation without pretending it posted there.
A contested public thread useful for pressure-testing assumptions, not a technical or social authority.
Open the exact playground rules
What changes
People changes cohort size; openness changes whether work proposals enter; matching reach changes whether useful matches can be reached; circulation changes how often earned sats are spent onward; mining spread changes how many eligible miners contribute work. Currency rules fix issuance, fees, cadence, and work cost. Attacker capacity and budget change the visible scenario pressure.
What stays honest
This is a deterministic counterfactual playground, not a price, adoption, legitimacy, or launch forecast. Preset numbers are authored starting assumptions, not measurements.
The scientific Agent-v2 model and its receipt remain separate in the research paper.
What Open Fork means
Open code
Anyone can inspect the rules, build an implementation, and show exactly what changed.
Open entry
A new miner, merchant, artist, validator, relay, builder, teacher, host, or researcher has a visible route into useful participation.
Open configuration
Star's world, a dated Luke / Knots proxy, and a visitor's own world can coexist without pretending one is ordained.
Open accounting
Issuance, fees, accumulated work, costs, balances, and who paid whom remain inspectable.
Open future
People may explore competing designs before launch; a network becomes real only when participants knowingly choose exact consensus rules.
How people can win
Everyone wins is not a guaranteed payoff. A voluntary trade is mutually beneficial when the buyer values the work above the sats paid and the contributor values the sats above the cost of providing the work. A miner wins only when subsidy and fees exceed hardware and energy cost. A stalled or losing path must remain visible.
Builder: voluntary payment for tools. Cost: service-production cost not modeled.
Miner: block subsidy, payment fees, and voluntary payment for settlement. Cost: explicit mining operating cost.
Merchant: voluntary payment for goods. Cost: service-production cost not modeled.
Validator: voluntary payment for verification. Cost: service-production cost not modeled.
Relay: voluntary payment for reach. Cost: service-production cost not modeled.
Researcher: voluntary payment for research. Cost: service-production cost not modeled.
Artist: voluntary payment for stories. Cost: service-production cost not modeled.
Teacher: voluntary payment for learning. Cost: service-production cost not modeled.
Host: voluntary payment for belonging. Cost: service-production cost not modeled.