Dinarian888
News • Business • Investing & Finance
💥Comprehensive and updated FLR tokenomics data has been published💥
November 29, 2022
post photo preview

Flare mainnet is approaching the public Token Distribution Event (TDE). This document provides a recap of the token distribution and token economics.

There are two possible versions of the tokenomics, dependent on whether Flare Improvement Proposal 01 (FIP.01) passes:

  1. The original distribution scheme, planned under different market conditions when the purpose of Flare was to provide a smart contract layer for XRP only.
  2. The proposal encapsulated in FIP.01, which factors in new market conditions and the far larger vision of Flare to present developers and users with a simple and coherent stack for decentralized interoperability.

Charts and descriptions are shared for both versions below. To avoid confusion, charts pertaining to the tokenomics after approval of FIP.01 have a green border, and those pertaining to a rejection of FIP.01 have a red border. This document covers each in turn. For more details of the specific differences between the versions, please see the FIP.01 blog article.

 

Headline Figures

Full details and vesting information are in tables further down, but TL;DR, the most important numbers to know are below. The figures are the same for both potential distribution versions.

Total token distribution on day 1:

  • 100 Billion FLR tokens.

Community FLR allocation:

  • 28.5 Billion FLR distributed direct to community members over 36 months.
  • 20 Billion FLR available for community members who bring value onto the Flare network by using Flare’s cross-chain bridges (FAssets & Layer Cake).
  • 9.8 Billion FLR allocated to the Flare Foundation for community & ecosystem initiatives.
  • TOTAL 58.3 Billion FLR.

Team, advisors & backers:

  • 5.7 Billion FLR to be provided to early stage backers, vesting from month 6.
  • 13.5 Billion FLR allocated to existing and future team members, plus advisors. The team is restricted from selling any FLR in the first 6 months, no more than 10% of their holdings in the first 12 months, and no more than 25% (inclusive of the initial 10%) of their holdings within the first 18 months.
  • TOTAL 19.2 Billion FLR.

Flare entities:

  • 12.5 Billion FLR allocated to Flare Networks Limited, which is responsible for native product development on Flare (e.g. Layer Cake bridges).
  • 10 Billion FLR allocated to the Flare VC Fund, which will invest in promising ecosystem projects.
  • TOTAL 22.5 Billion FLR.

Summary:

Chart: The majority of tokens are destined for community ownership, whether by direct token distribution, network incentives or through Flare Foundation ecosystem initiatives. This will not be affected by whether FIP.01 is approved or rejected.

 

Flare is the transactional token for Flare Network

  • Network: Flare
  • Token name: Flare
  • Ticker: FLR
  • Genesis supply: 100 Billion
  • Decimals: 18
  • Genesis date: 14 July 2022
  • Anticipated Token Distribution Event (TDE): By 9 January 2023
 

Flare Token Utility

Flare is a Layer-1 blockchain built to connect everything. It presents a technology stack that will enable:

  • Scalable EVM-based smart contracts.
  • Highly decentralized price feeds.
  • Secure state acquisition from other blockchains.
  • Superior bridging for smart contract and non-smart contract assets.
  • Secured data relay.
  • Horizontal scaling through a fully interoperable multi-chain ecosystem.

 

Flare (FLR) is the network token and will provide support for each of these functions:

  1. Incentivized delegation to the Flare Time Series Oracle (FTSO) to support the provision of reliable decentralized price data.
  2. Collateral within Flare’s bridging applications, FAssets and Layer Cake, by operating as an Agent or Bandwidth Provider, respectively.
  3. Collateral for securing Data Relay.
  4. Collateral within third party decentralized applications built on Flare blockchains (cross-chain or solely native).
  5. Participation within network governance.
  6. Transaction fees in order to prevent spam attacks.

 

Definitions

* Explanations:

  1. Can delegate: Tokens that can be delegated to the Flare Time Series Oracle to earn standard inflationary rewards.
  2. Can earn: Tokens that can be wrapped in order to to receive a share of the public token distribution in the form of delegation incentives. This is only relevant if the governance proposal FIP.01 is passed by the community.
  3. Can vote: Tokens that can be used to participate in governance by voting on Flare Improvement Proposals.

 

Token distribution by exchanges

In both potential distribution outcomes, centralized exchanges have an important role to play in providing FLR tokens safely and efficiently to their customers. Flare has been communicating with the exchanges to assist them with their FLR integration and has requested confirmation that they will be ready to distribute FLR as close to the TDE date as possible.

 

Proposed updated distribution

This will be the token distribution should Flare Improvement Proposal 01 (FIP.01) be successfully passed by community governance. The full details of the changes are available in the FIP.01 blog post. Important highlights are:

  • The 28,524,921,372 FLR public distribution will be split into two parts. The first 15%, which equates to 4,278,738,206 FLR, will be distributed during the Token Distribution Event (TDE) to wallets that held XRP on 12.12.20. The remaining 85% or 24,246,183,166 FLR will then be distributed in 36 monthly amounts directly to token holders who have wrapped their FLR into WFLR. There will be 35 monthly distributions of 2.37% of the total (676,040,637 FLR) and a final distribution of the remaining 2.05% of the total (584,760,871 FLR) in month 36.
  • Annual inflation will be calculated based on circulating supply rather than total supply in order to avoid excess liquidity in the early stages after TDE. Furthermore, instead of inflation running at 10% ongoing, it will be 10% in year 1, 7% in year 2, and then 5% from year 3 onwards.
  • The cross-chain incentive pool payout will be changed to include all cross-chain participants on Flare (i.e. Layer Cake as well as FAssets). The rate of payout will be adjusted from being split equally over 120 monthly payouts to being the lesser of 3% of circulating supply per year or 10% of the remainder of the cross-chain incentive pool. This will provide a better balance of payout as participation grows, while avoiding payouts escalating too high and therefore draining the pool too fast.

 

Vesting detail for proposed distribution update

Charts visualizing the token distribution should FIP.01 be approved by the community

Chart Y1: After the token distribution event (TDE), airdrop recipients are the largest single group of token holders. (Please note that the Flare Foundation and Flare Networks Limited amounts also include the unlocked Backers' tokens because this is before their distribution commences in month 6.)

Chart Y2: Although Flare team members can use their initial token distribution to participate fully in the network and support reliable FTSO data provision, they are restricted from selling any of the tokens they receive in the first six months, and no more than 25% within the first 18 months. (As per chart Y1, the FF & FNL percentages include the unlocked but as yet un-distributed Backers' tokens.)

Chart Y3: 19.8% of the genesis total distribution is not permitted to vote in governance (Flare Foundation & Flare VC Fund).

Chart Y4: Once the 36-month token distribution is complete, there will be 93.9B FLR liquid and circulating.

Chart Y5: After the initial 15% distribution, the majority of entities receive the remainder of their allocation smoothly over 36 months. The slight bumps are due to the delayed distribution of backer tokens commencing in months 6 and 13.

Chart Y6: Due to the restrictions placed on team token sales described in chart Y2, until month 19 there are fewer liquid tokens than there are tokens able to participate in governance and delegate to the FTSO.

Chart Y7: After 36 months, 85% of FLR will be circulating (93.9B of a total 110.1B FLR).

Chart Y8: From token distribution, Flare always has below 50% vote power, with this percentage decreasing further throughout the distribution period. Flare’s vote power is calculated from the sum of unlocked tokens held by Flare Networks Limited plus the Team and Advisors.

 

Legacy distribution

The legacy token distribution will be followed if Flare Improvement Proposal 01 is not passed. The full details of the changes are available in the FIP.01 blog post. Important highlights are:

  • The entire 28,524,921,372 FLR public distribution will be carried out by airdrop over 36 months. During the Token Distribution Event (TDE) the first 15%, which equates to 4,278,738,206 FLR, will be provided by airdrop to wallets that held XRP on 12.12.20. There will then be 35 distributions of 2.37% of the total (676,040,637 FLR) and a final distribution of the remaining 2.05% of the total (584,760,871 FLR) in month 36, all to the same wallets that received the initial TDE distribution.
  • Annual inflation will be calculated as 10% of fully diluted supply per annum, resulting in far greater liquidity in the early stages of Flare’s growth than if FIP.01 is passed.
  • The cross-chain incentive pool will be paid out in 120 equal amounts over 120 months, equating to 166,666,667 FLR per month.

 

Vesting detail for the legacy distribution

Charts visualizing the token distribution should FIP.01 be rejected by the community

Chart N1: At token distribution in month 0, the distribution is the same for both possible versions of the tokenomics. This makes sense as this will happen prior to the FIP.01 governance vote.

Chart N2: Exactly as described in chart Y2, if FIP.01 does not pass, Flare team members are still restricted from selling tokens within the first 18 months.  

Chart N3: The only difference between this version and if FIP.01 passes is whether the public distribution happens purely by airdrop or by airdrop plus delegation incentives. The totals are the same.

Chart N4: Due to higher inflation, the legacy approach means after 36 months there are 26.3B more FLR tokens in circulation. This is 28% higher than if FIP.01 is passed.

Chart N6: Due to the restrictions placed on team token sales described in charts N2 and Y2, until month 19 there are fewer liquid tokens than there are tokens able to participate in governance and delegate to the FTSO.

Chart N7: Note the steeper gradient for inflation and much higher circulating supply throughout. If FIP.01 is rejected, 89% of FLR will be circulating after 36 months (120.2B of a total 134.8B FLR).

Chart N8: Similar to if the governance proposal is passed, Flare vote power starts below 50% and decreases through the distribution period.

 

Summary of public token distribution options

The total amount of tokens allocated to the public distribution is the same regardless of whether FIP.01 is passed or not: 28,524,921,372 FLR.

The first portion of these tokens (15%) will be distributed prior to the FIP.01 governance vote taking place. Therefore, at the Token Distribution Event, exchanges and self-custody wallets will receive 0.1511 FLR for every 1.0000 XRP held for both YES and NO vote tokenomics.

If FIP.01 passes, there will be no additional airdrops. The remaining public allocation of 24,246,183,166 FLR will be distributed in 36 monthly amounts directly to token holders who have wrapped their FLR into WFLR.

If FIP.01 does not pass, there will be 36 additional monthly distributions to each address that participated in the December 2020 snapshot. The first 35 of these distributions will be in the ratio of 0.0239 FLR for every 1.0000 XRP held at the time of the snapshot. The final distribution will be in the ratio of 0.0206 FLR for every 1.0000 XRP.

Link

 

 

community logo
Join the Dinarian888 Community
To read more articles like this, sign up and join my community today
0
What else you may like…
Videos
Podcasts
Posts
Articles
Tokenization is moving from issuance to utility 🔧

Stellar gives institutions the controls they need to issue assets onchain and the infrastructure to put them to work across a growing financial ecosystem.

Hear more from @DenelleDixon on @DefiantNews👇

#RWAFI

00:01:23
September 28, 2026
🚨 JUST IN — CONST AT EXPLOIT SUMMIT— 🖕The Cabal

@Const of Bittensor ($TAO) just delivered an absolute mic-drop speech on decentralized intelligence and true freedom! 🔥

Key takeaways from the stage:

1️⃣ Mind Outside of the State: 🌐
"Bitcoin was money outside of the state. Bittensor said, let’s build artificial intelligence that’s not controllable by China and the United States."

2️⃣ Fighting Centralized Control: 🛡️
The goal is to build an independent, sovereign intelligence outside the cabal to safeguard against potential impending totalitarianism.

3️⃣ A Message to Regulators:
"And the fact that we exist is a massive middle finger to anybody trying to regulate AI and slow this down."

4️⃣ Harnessing the Swarm: 🤖
Bittensor embraces hyper-intelligent bot swarms to optimize tech, creating open systems where anyone can contribute and have a say.

5️⃣ Empowering Everyone: 🌍
From a core team to 25 validators, to $dTAO holders, and ultimately—everyone on Earth!

🚀 Rule #1: Don't become the cabal. Decentralize ...

00:01:47
September 26, 2026
The true enemy of peace is NOT Russia, China, or Iran…

“The Rothschilds claim to be Jewish, but are actually Khazars from Mongolian Eastern Europe…”

The true enemy of peace is the Rothschild-Khazarian Mafia!

Forbidden Knowledge 📚

00:02:55
🚨 Chutes is being framed as a Hyperliquid-style breakout for decentralized AI inference, with live revenue, verified GPU infrastructure, and a direct challenge to centralized cloud AI 🚨

Chutes is gaining attention as a decentralized AI inference platform that claims to combine real usage, cryptographic verification, confidential computing, and open-source infrastructure into a working production system. The thesis is simple: instead of trusting Big Tech clouds with AI workloads, users get a distributed compute layer built around verification and privacy.

🔑 Key points

🔹 Chutes is live in production and reportedly scaled to more than 1,170 active GPU nodes, including large numbers of Nvidia H200s and Blackwell-class hardware.

🔹 The platform says it has processed nearly 38 trillion tokens since launch across 53 deployed applications and more than 700,000 registered users.

🔹 The team reportedly cut unprofitable usage programs, reduced total token volume, and still improved revenue efficiency, with revenue per GPU rising sharply after removing subsidized traffic.

🔹 Chutes is using post-quantum cryptography, trusted execution environments, and Nvidia confidential ...

🚨 Chutes is being framed as a Hyperliquid-style breakout for decentralized AI inference, with live revenue, verified GPU infrastructure, and a direct challenge to centralized cloud AI 🚨
🚨 JPMorgan’s criticism of the CLARITY Act is fueling a fresh power struggle over who gets to write America’s crypto rules 🚨

A new clash is emerging between legacy finance and crypto legislation after JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon reportedly warned that the CLARITY Act could let crypto firms offer bank-like products without bank-level oversight. The dispute is quickly turning into a larger fight over regulation, competitiveness, and who controls the future architecture of digital finance in the United States.

🔑 Key points

🔹 Jamie Dimon reportedly called the CLARITY Act a threat to the financial system, arguing it could allow crypto firms to offer yield-like products while avoiding the capital, reserve, and oversight burdens traditional banks face.

🔹 Senator Cynthia Lummis pushed back publicly, framing the issue as a global strategic race and warning that if the U.S. does not set digital asset standards, other powers will.

🔹 The core tension is whether the bill creates legitimate regulatory clarity or simply opens the door to regulatory arbitrage for crypto platforms operating outside the traditional banking...

🚨 JPMorgan’s criticism of the CLARITY Act is fueling a fresh power struggle over who gets to write America’s crypto rules 🚨
👉 Coinbase just launched an AI agent for Crypto Trading

Custom AI assistants that print money in your sleep? 🔜

The future of Crypto x AI is about to go crazy.

👉 Here’s what you need to know:

💠 'Based Agent' enables creation of custom AI agents
💠 Users set up personalized agents in < 3 minutes
💠 Equipped w/ crypto wallet and on-chain functions
💠 Capable of completing trades, swaps, and staking
💠 Integrates with Coinbase’s SDK, OpenAI, & Replit

👉 What this means for the future of Crypto:

1. Open Access: Democratized access to advanced trading
2. Automated Txns: Complex trades + streamlined on-chain activity
3. AI Dominance: Est ~80% of crypto 👉txns done by AI agents by 2025

🚨 I personally wouldn't bet against Brian Armstrong and Jesse Pollak.

👉 Coinbase just launched an AI agent for Crypto Trading

🧠 How Bittensor Subnet 53 (engy) Solves the "Silent Downgrade" Problem in AI 🧠

As open-source AI models close the performance gap with proprietary giants, a massive infrastructure challenge has emerged: How do you actually trust the API serving your model?

When you call a centralized AI inference provider (like Together AI or Fireworks AI), you pay for a specific model at a specific precision—say, a 70B parameter model in FP16. But under the hood, you have zero cryptographic proof that the provider didn't quietly swap in a 4-bit quantized version or a smaller 14B model to slash their GPU and electricity costs.

This silent failure mode is called Model Swapping, and Subnet 53 (engy) on Bittensor ($TAO) is built specifically to kill it.

🔍 1. The Core Innovation: Verifiable Inference

Instead of forcing users to rely on a provider's promise, engy (developed by hanlin.ai) turns open-model inference into a trustless, cryptographically checkable marketplace.

• Merkle Root Pinning: Every model’s exact weights, parameters, ...

post photo preview

☁️ Hippius positions S3-compatible storage as a way to eliminate cloud egress fees ☁️

Hippius is promoting its S3-compatible storage as an alternative for teams that want to keep using AWS tools while avoiding recurring data-transfer charges.

🔑 Key points

🔹 S3 tools remain compatible: AWS CLI, rclone, boto3, AWS SDKs, MinIO clients, Cyberduck, Duplicati, and Nextcloud can connect through standard S3 settings.

🔹 Egress fees are the main target: Amazon S3 charges published internet-transfer rates, while Hippius says data downloads are included.

🔹 10 TB of monthly egress can become expensive: At Amazon’s listed rate of $0.09 per GB after the free allowance, a 10 TB workload could add roughly $913 before storage and request charges.

🔹 Hippius advertises $0 egress: The platform says its plans include data transfer, requests, and retrieval without additional egress fees.

🔹 Pay-as-you-go pricing is available: Hippius lists pricing at approximately $6 per TB per month, billed hourly without a ...

🖥️ Targon launches Bare Metal and Sandboxes for dedicated and ephemeral compute 🖥️

Targon has expanded its decentralized cloud marketplace with Bare Metal servers and disposable Linux Sandboxes, giving users more options for AI, software development, agents, and testing.

🔑 Key points

🔹 Bare Metal provides full machines: Customers receive direct access to physical servers without a hypervisor, container runtime, or noisy neighbors.

🔹 Full hardware control: Users can manage kernels, drivers, firmware-level GPU settings, and specialized inference stacks.

🔹 Dedicated compute targets demanding workloads: Bare Metal is suited for training, inference, benchmarking, custom drivers, and workloads requiring predictable performance.

🔹 Operators are KYC-verified: Targon says Bare Metal providers are verified to support workload security without requiring a trusted virtual machine.

🔹 Sandboxes are short-lived environments: Users can create isolated Linux environments, run tasks, and discard them ...

post photo preview
September 13, 2026
post photo preview
Revolut Leak Shows the Cost of Constant ID Collection
Revolut’s mistake is the news, but the bigger problem is the growing number of companies being encouraged or required to keep copies of our most sensitive identity documents.

Online bank Revolut has revealed that it gave out sensitive personal and financial information of an undisclosed number of its customers in response to a fake government request.

The information that was handed over to an “unauthorized third party” reportedly includes names, dates of birth, occupations, addresses, phone numbers, account numbers, transaction histories (including Bitcoin), and even copies of government-issued IDs and onboarding verification selfies.

Revolut claims that derived biometric face data was not.

The company said that the data was handed over in response to an email that came from a real government agency’s domain, but was not actually sent or authorized by that agency.

The email passed several authentication checks (SPF, DKIM, and DMARC) that are designed to establish the authenticity of a message’s origin and integrity, but do not verify the legitimacy of the legal request itself.

Revolut said that it complied with the request “under the reasonable belief that it was an authentic government agency request” – and only later found out that it was not.

Revolut said it later realized its mistake, blocked the email address, and reported the incident to the relevant authorities.

Revolut said that only a “limited” number of its customers were affected by the data leak, and that the company’s systems were not hacked, nor was any money stolen.

The story broke on September 11 when Revolut customers started receiving an email notice about a data leak, and the news was picked up by media outlets the following day.

Revolut notice explaining customer identity and financial data was shared after an unauthorized government email request.

The reason this is a recurring problem is that companies are keeping highly sensitive information about their customers’ identities, and sometimes even financial transactions, for a long time, and this data is then available to be disclosed to third parties – either in response to valid legal requests, or, as in the case of Revolut, fake ones.

One reason for this is know your customer (KYC) and anti-money laundering (AML) rules. Revolut’s current UK customer privacy notice spells it out: the company generally keeps personal data of UK customers for no more than seven years after the relationship ends, and sometimes longer – for legal reasons.

This means that even if you close your account, your identity documents don’t disappear.

And while the incident with Revolut happened in the financial sector, it’s by no means the only one that requires customers to hand over sensitive identity information. Discord, a popular chat service, said in an October 9, 2025 security update that government ID photos of approximately 70,000 users may have been exposed after a third-party customer service provider got hacked.

This was not a financial service, nor the same type of attack. But the result was similar – because the underlying business process was the same: requiring and storing sensitive identity documents. In the case of Discord, these were used to review age-related appeals.

It’s hard to do anything about a copy of your old passport, or a photo of your face, or a record of your past transactions. These can be used to identify and profile you, and can be used to carry out targeted fraud. And this can happen even if the initial disclosure didn’t result in financial loss.

The more companies are forced to collect and store such information, and the more of it they have, the more opportunities there are for this data to be leaked, either by the company itself or a third party it works with. That's what makes governments' push for more ID checks just to access ordinary parts of life so reckless.

Source

🙏To support my work, Helping to keep the signal high and the noise low:

👉 Cashapp: $thedinarian

👉 Buy me a coffee: https://buymeacoffee.com/thedinarian

👉 PayPal: Scan the QR code below 📲 or Click Here: 

👇 Crypto Donations 👇

XRP: r9pid4yrQgs6XSFWhMZ8NkxW3gkydWNyQX
XLM: GDMJF2OCHN3NNNX4T4F6POPBTXK23GTNSNQWUMIVKESTHMQM7XDYAIZT
XDC: xdcc2C02203C4f91375889d7AfADB09E207Edf809A6

Read full Article
post photo preview
This Is The Income A Family Needs To Live Comfortably In Every US State

Here’s the short version of what it takes for a family of four to live comfortably in 2026 by state:

In Massachusetts, you’d need nearly $330,000 a year - the highest figure in the entire country. Only three states clear the $300,000 mark: Massachusetts, Hawaii, and California. At the other end of the spectrum, Mississippi is the most affordable at about $188,000. That’s a full $142,000 less than what you’d need in Massachusetts.

So… how much does a family of four need in your state?

This map shows the pre-tax income a household with two working adults and two kids needs to live comfortably in every U.S. state.

The numbers come from SmartAsset (as of February 2026). They’re based on the familiar 50/30/20 budget: 50% for necessities, 30% for discretionary spending, and 20% for savings or other goals. These aren’t bare-minimum survival numbers—they’re what it takes to live pretty well while still putting money aside.

And as Visual Capitalist notes, Massachusetts sits at the very top of that list. Massachusetts tops the ranking, with a family of four needing $329,555 per year to meet the 50/30/20 benchmark.

Hawaii follows at $313,165, while California ranks third at $302,682.

Rank State Income needed for family of four (2026)

  • 1 - Massachusetts - $329,555
  • 2 - Hawaii - $313,165
  • 3 - California - $302,682
  • 4 - Connecticut - $298,189
  • 5 - New Jersey - $295,110
  • 6 - New York - $291,533
  • 7 - Colorado - $283,213
  • 8 - Washington - $281,798
  • 9 - Oregon - $280,966
  • 10 - Vermont - $280,384
  • 11 - Alaska - $272,064
  • 12 - New Hampshire - $267,904
  • 13 - Rhode Island - $264,659
  • 14 - Minnesota - $263,078
  • 15 - Maryland - $257,837
  • 16 - Maine - $250,931
  • 17 - Montana - $249,434
  • 18 - Pennsylvania - $247,936
  • 19 - Illinois - $244,109
  • 20 - Virginia - $242,944
  • 21 - Nevada - $242,278
  • 22 - Indiana - $241,696
  • 23 - Wisconsin - $238,451
  • 24 - Arizona - $236,870
  • 25 - Utah - $235,789
  • 26 - Delaware - $228,134
  • 27 - Ohio - $226,221
  • 28 - Idaho - $226,054
  • 29 - Florida - $223,392
  • 30 - New Mexico - $223,142
  • 31 - Nebraska - $223,059
  • 32 - Missouri - $217,734
  • 33 - Georgia - $214,573
  • 34 - Michigan - $214,323
  • 35 - South Carolina - $212,909
  • 36 - North Carolina - $212,410
  • 37 - Wyoming - $212,410
  • 38 - Oklahoma - $211,910
  • 39 - North Dakota - $210,496
  • 40 - Kansas - $207,917
  • 41 - Iowa - $204,422
  • 42 - Texas - $203,424
  • 43 - West Virginia - $202,592
  • 44 - South Dakota - $201,760
  • 45 - Alabama - $198,931
  • 46 - Louisiana - $197,933
  • 47 - Tennessee - $197,267
  • 48 - Arkansas - $195,437
  • 49 - Kentucky - $194,854
  • 50 - Mississippi - $187,533

Connecticut, New Jersey, and New York aren't far behind, bringing the number of states with comfortable-income thresholds above $290,000 to six.

Colorado and Vermont Make the Top 10

As expected, many of the highest income thresholds are concentrated in the Northeast and along the West Coast.

However, Colorado has the seventh-highest threshold in the country at $283,213, ranking above Washington and Oregon.

Vermont rounds out the top 10 at $280,384, despite having the second-smallest population of any U.S. state. Meanwhile, nearby states like New Hampshire, Maine, and Rhode Island all fall outside the top 10.

Just Six States Come in Below $200,000

Despite the wide range in living costs across the country, only six states have a comfortable-income threshold below $200,000 for a family of four.

Mississippi ranks lowest at $187,533, followed by Kentucky. The states of Arkansas, Tennessee, Louisiana, and Alabama also fall below the $200,000 mark.

The gap between Massachusetts and Mississippi exceeds $142,000 per year, meaning the Massachusetts benchmark is about 76% higher.

Source

🙏To support my work, Helping to keep the signal high and the noise low:

👉 Cashapp: $thedinarian

👉 Buy me a coffee: https://buymeacoffee.com/thedinarian

👉 PayPal: Scan the QR code below 📲 or Click Here: 

👇 Crypto Donations Always Welcome 👇

XRP: r9pid4yrQgs6XSFWhMZ8NkxW3gkydWNyQX
XLM: GDMJF2OCHN3NNNX4T4F6POPBTXK23GTNSNQWUMIVKESTHMQM7XDYAIZT
XDC: xdcc2C02203C4f91375889d7AfADB09E207Edf809A6

Read full Article
post photo preview
🤖Can Decentralized AI Stop Big Tech from Owning the Future of Robotics?🤖
The race to build the future of robotics is no longer just about robots. It's about who controls the intelligence behind them.
 
Over the last three years, a small group of companies has emerged as the backbone of the AI revolution. Microsoft provides cloud infrastructure. NVIDIA supplies the chips. Google, OpenAI, Anthropic, Meta, and others develop the models. Together, they control much of the compute, data, and software stack powering modern AI.
 
Now that AI is moving into the physical world, many are asking a bigger question:
 
Will these same companies end up controlling robotics too?
 
It's a valid concern.
 
The latest generation of robots relies on enormous amounts of compute, simulation, training data, and foundation models. Many robotics startups today are built on infrastructure provided by large technology companies. NVIDIA's Omniverse is becoming a key simulation environment for robot training. Microsoft Azure is powering the training of robotics foundation models. Physical AI startups increasingly depend on hyperscale cloud infrastructure to train and deploy intelligent systems. Recent partnerships across the industry show just how central Big Tech has become to robotics development.
But while Big Tech is building the highways, another movement is trying to ensure it doesn't own every destination.
 
That movement is decentralized AI.
 
Why Decentralized AI Exists
 
The idea behind decentralized AI is simple. Instead of a handful of companies owning the models, compute infrastructure, data pipelines, and intelligence networks, these resources are distributed across thousands of participants.
 
This means anyone can contribute compute, contribute models, validate outputs and can participate.
The most visible example today is the decentralized AI network known as Bittensor (@bittensor). The network has evolved into a large ecosystem of specialized AI markets called subnets, where participants compete to provide useful machine intelligence and are rewarded based on performance. Rather than relying on a single company, intelligence is generated and validated by a distributed network of miners and validators.
 
Think of it as an attempt to build an open marketplace for AI instead of a world where intelligence is rented from a few centralized providers.
 
Why This Matters for Robotics
 
Robotics has a unique problem. Unlike chatbots, robots operate in the physical world. They need to perceive environments, make decisions, move safely and they need to learn continuously.
 
The challenge is that collecting and training on real-world robotic data is incredibly expensive. That's one reason large companies have such an advantage. They can afford the compute, simulation environments, and data infrastructure needed to train robotics models at scale.
 
This is where decentralized systems become interesting.
 
Instead of one company collecting all the data and training all the models, decentralized networks could allow thousands of contributors to participate in building robotic intelligence.
 
Imagine a future where:
  • Warehouse robots contribute operational data.
  • Delivery robots contribute navigation data.
  • Factory robots contribute manipulation data.
  • Developers contribute models.
  • Validators evaluate performance.
The resulting intelligence becomes a shared network rather than a proprietary asset.
 
That vision is beginning to emerge.
 
Bittensor's Move Toward Physical AI
 
While many people associate Bittensor (@bittensor) with language models and AI services, parts of the ecosystem are increasingly exploring embodied intelligence and robotics.
 
One example is Kinitro, a subnet focused on incentivizing the training and evaluation of embodied AI systems. The goal is to create competitive environments where developers build robotic intelligence and are rewarded based on performance.
 
The broader Bittensor ecosystem has also expanded into compute marketplaces, distributed inference systems, bandwidth infrastructure, and AI coordination layers that could eventually support robotics workloads. Several subnets now focus on decentralized compute, confidential inference, data transfer, and model training, critical components for future robotic systems.
 
In other words, the pieces are starting to appear.
 
Not a decentralized robot network yet.
 
But the infrastructure that could support one.
 
Beyond Bittensor: The Rise of Physical AI Networks
 
Bittensor isn't alone.
 
Across the industry, researchers and builders are experimenting with decentralized approaches to physical AI.
 
New research published in 2026 introduced the concept of DAO-enabled decentralized physical AI, or DePAI. The idea combines robotics, decentralized infrastructure, AI models, governance systems, and human oversight into a single framework. Instead of centralized control, robots and physical infrastructure could be coordinated through transparent rules and distributed ownership models.
 
At the same time, developers are exploring decentralized operating systems for robots that allow machines to communicate directly with each other and with distributed compute resources. These architectures are designed to make robotic systems more resilient and less dependent on a single cloud provider.
 
The goal is not simply decentralization for its own sake.
 
The goal is resilience.
 
If one server fails, the system continues.
 
If one company disappears, the network survives.
 
If one participant leaves, innovation continues.
 
But Here's the Reality
 
Decentralized AI faces the same challenge every decentralized technology faces.
 
Big Tech has resources. A lot of resources.
 
Training advanced robotics models requires enormous compute budgets, sophisticated simulation environments, access to specialized hardware, and vast amounts of real-world data.
 
That's why many robotics startups still partner with major cloud providers and AI companies. It's often the fastest path to deployment.
 
And there are legitimate concerns about whether decentralized networks can maintain quality, reliability, and security at the scale required for industrial robotics. Even researchers studying decentralized AI systems have highlighted risks around concentration, incentives, governance, and network security.
 
The challenge isn't just decentralizing intelligence.
 
It's decentralizing intelligence while maintaining performance.
 
That's much harder.
 
The Most Likely Outcome
 
The future probably won't be fully centralized. And it probably won't be fully decentralized either. Instead, we're likely heading toward a hybrid model.
 
Large technology companies will continue providing chips, cloud infrastructure, simulation platforms, and foundational research.
 
At the same time, decentralized AI networks will emerge as alternative coordination layers where intelligence, data, and economic value can be shared more openly.
 
The companies building robots may use NVIDIA hardware.
 
Train on Azure.
 
Run foundation models from OpenAI.
 
But they may also participate in decentralized data networks, decentralized compute markets, and decentralized intelligence protocols.
 
The future of robotics could end up looking less like a monopoly and more like an ecosystem.
 
The Bigger Question
 
The real question isn't whether decentralized AI can eliminate Big Tech.
 
It can't.
 
At least not anytime soon.
 
The real question is whether decentralized AI can prevent a future where a handful of companies control every robot, every model, every dataset, and every decision made by the machines operating around us.
 
As robots become workers, assistants, delivery drivers, factory operators, and even economic agents, that question becomes increasingly important.
 
Because the battle for the future of robotics is no longer about hardware.
 
It's about who owns the intelligence.
 
And that battle is just getting started.
 
 

🙏To support my work, Helping to keep the signal high and the noise low:

👉 Cashapp: $thedinarian

👉 Buy me a coffee: https://buymeacoffee.com/thedinarian

👉 PayPal: Scan the QR code below 📲 or Click Here: 

👇 Crypto Donations 👇

XRP: r9pid4yrQgs6XSFWhMZ8NkxW3gkydWNyQX
XLM: GDMJF2OCHN3NNNX4T4F6POPBTXK23GTNSNQWUMIVKESTHMQM7XDYAIZT
XDC: xdcc2C02203C4f91375889d7AfADB09E207Edf809A6

Read full Article
See More
Available on mobile and TV devices
google store google store app store app store
google store google store app tv store app tv store amazon store amazon store roku store roku store
Powered by Locals