AI Internet-Meritocracy (AIIM) asks AI to estimate relative contribution among participants, and gives them the proportional share of donated cryptocurrency as a salary streamed every week. To evaluate the worth of a user, the AI uses securely connected user accounts (GitHub, ORCID, etc.) to retrieve information about user’s scientific and free software works.
To prevent prompt injection attacks to succeed, AIIM allows registered users to vote for banning (or unbanning) a malefactor user.
To vote and receive crypto, the users need to pass KYC (with AML preventing, for example, users from North Korea to receive money).
Note that users need only connect to connect their accounts, to become eligible for grants, without any grant writing.
The Purpose of AI Internet-Meritocracy
AIIM has two main purposes:
- Give a stable income to every open source software or science author, without discrimination on whether they have a PhD.
- Solve scientific publishing crisis, by giving money to promoters of underrepresented scientific works – creating new occupation – science marketers. Solving the publishing crisis will free billions of dollars of direct losses (1), multiplied by ~1000x efficiency of investing into science, it is recovering trillions of dollars of losses.
👉 Help fund the next public test of AIIM.
Help Test a New Way to Fund Science
AI Internet-Meritocracy (AIIM) is an operational beta designed to allocate available donations to researchers and open-source developers using AI-assisted evaluation of documented contributions. Payment transactions are already recorded on-chain.
The next major evidence milestone is a proposed five-month public adversarial test of the allocation model, with $1,000 distributed to eligible funding recipients. Donations help pay for the development, infrastructure, reviewer and participant recruitment, outreach, and operating work needed to reach and evaluate that milestone.
You do not need to assume AIIM is already proven to support the project. Your donation helps turn the proposal into evidence: what works, what fails, and what should change.
Support the next testing milestone → Read the test proposal →
Independent review
Researchers and technical reviewers: independent criticism is welcome, including negative conclusions. Review AIIM’s assumptions, governance, failure modes, and testing plan →
Research status: AIIM remains experimental. AI-generated evaluations can contain factual errors or biases, and decentralized governance and non-custodial components remain under development. That uncertainty is why public testing, auditability, and external criticism are central to the project.