Gitcoin and Giveth distribute money unfairly and inefficiently because of inherent problems with quadratic funding, while AIIM uses a different allocation model intended to reduce reliance on donor popularity and proposal writing. Its comparative fairness and efficiency require empirical testing.
AIIM (AI Internet-Meritocracy) is an experimental funding app that uses AI-assisted allocation. This article compares its design with Gitcoin, Giveth, and Manifund.
AIIM differs from Gitcoin, Giveth, and Manifund in the following aspects:
- No need to manually create a description of each grant and review them manually
- No project rejections
- No need for verifying conforming to the rules for each grant.
- It takes into account even smallest projects of a user (that if they are many, may form a majority of the user’s income).
- No long pause before paying. We can pay every week or even more often.
- No users not donating due to being confused over the topic (like: ordered semicategory actions) of a grant.
- No dependencies on the “commercial business” of somebody advertising their grants in different media, but equal funding opportunities for everybody: rich and poor.
Help Turn AIIM’s Beta into Evidence
AIIM remains experimental. The next proposed milestone is a five-month public adversarial test, with $1,000 planned for distribution to eligible funding recipients. Donations support the work required to run and evaluate that test.
Fund the public test → Test proposal → Independent review →
AI-generated evaluations can contain factual errors or biases; decentralized governance and non-custodial components remain under development. Public testing, auditability, and external criticism remain part of the project.
One thought on “AIIM vs Gitcoin, Giveth, and Manifund: Different Funding Models”