Building MyZubster in Public: From MVP to MRV, Circular Economy and Verifiable Evidence
MyZubster is evolving from an open-source MVP into something broader: an ecosystem connecting software development, local AI, marketplaces, environmental evidence and circular-economy workflows.
The principle guiding the architecture is simple:
No evidence → no material claim.
Here is where we are today.
From code to verifiable progress
One of our current technical pilots is being developed with Nicola, represented inside the MyZubster cyberpunk universe as N4K48.
Behind the visual identity is a real technical MVP.
The work includes:
- observation APIs;
- JSON persistence and atomic writes;
- end-to-end testing;
- coordinate and payload validation;
- Docker and persistent volumes;
- health checks;
- CI;
- Gunicorn;
- Ollama;
- Qdrant;
- local RAG over observations.
The interesting part is not the cyberpunk character itself.
It is the connection between a digital identity and real, traceable technical activity.
N4K48
↓
ACTIVITY
↓
OBSERVATION
↓
TECHNICAL EVIDENCE
↓
MYZUBSTER
Connecting this to the circular economy
We are now exploring how the same evidence-first approach could support circular-economy processes.
Conceptually:
OBSERVE
↓
DOCUMENT
↓
MEASURE
↓
VERIFY
↓
RECOVER
↓
REGENERATE
↓
NEW CYCLE
This immediately creates a difficult engineering question:
What exactly are we proving?
If I hash an environmental observation with SHA-256, I can demonstrate that the payload has not changed.
That does not demonstrate that the physical measurement was correct.
So we need different trust layers:
DATA
↓
INTEGRITY
↓
PROVENANCE
↓
MEASUREMENT VALIDITY
↓
AUTHORIZED VALIDATION
↓
ACCREDITATION
This distinction is becoming central to the architecture.
MRV instead of blockchain magic
We are exploring Measurement, Reporting and Verification (MRV) as the bridge between software evidence and environmental claims.
A system can provide:
- timestamps;
- hashes;
- provenance chains;
- anti-replay controls;
- immutable references;
- evidence packages.
But cryptographic integrity is only one layer.
For example:
HASH_VERIFIED != SCIENTIFICALLY_VERIFIED
and:
SHA256_DIGEST != DIGITAL_SIGNATURE
and most importantly:
TECHNICAL_EVIDENCE != ENVIRONMENTAL_ACCREDITATION
Those boundaries matter even more when economic incentives are introduced.
Environmental rewards must fail closed
We have also been reviewing architectures for rewarding verified environmental actions.
A possible conceptual hierarchy is:
UNVERIFIED
↓
SELF_REPORTED
↓
EVIDENCE_SUBMITTED
↓
TECHNICALLY_VERIFIED
↓
AUTHORIZED_VALIDATION
The dangerous implementation would be allowing the highest trust level simply because somebody submits metadata and a valid hash.
That is not enough.
If economic value depends on an environmental claim, our direction is:
Missing evidence or missing validator authorization = no payout.
Fail closed.
Marketplace infrastructure
In parallel, MyZubster is becoming an operational marketplace.
The Seller path has progressed through:
STRIPE CHECKOUT
↓
SUBSCRIPTION
↓
SIGNED WEBHOOK
↓
SELLER MEMBERSHIP
↓
MARKETPLACE ACCESS
↓
LISTING
The next product gate is completing the other side:
BUYER
↓
REQUEST
↓
MESSAGING
↓
EXCHANGE
↓
COMPLETION
↓
REPUTATION
This matters because eventually the circular-economy layer should connect to real interactions rather than exist as an isolated sustainability dashboard.
External validation is becoming the next challenge
We recently had a positive exploratory discussion with CSMT around the project and the MRV direction.
A follow-up with a more specialized colleague has been proposed.
That does not mean CSMT is currently a formal MyZubster partner.
The interesting result is different:
we are reaching the point where the question changes from:
“Can we build this?”
to:
“What evidence would an external expert require to validate this?”
Our next desired progression is:
TECHNICAL MVP
↓
EVIDENCE PACKAGE
↓
MRV METHODOLOGY
↓
EXTERNAL REVIEW
↓
VALIDATED PILOT
Singapore: keeping the financial boundary explicit
We have also explored a possible Singapore Phase 1 based on environmental/operational data and non-transferable evidence credentials.
The configuration presented excludes:
- investment rights;
- fundraising;
- custody;
- trading;
- live payment functionality.
Guidance received from the Monetary Authority of Singapore's FinTech Regulatory Sandbox team indicated that, based on the Phase 1 configuration described, it did not appear to involve a MAS-regulated financial service and therefore the Regulatory Sandbox would not apply to that phase.
This is not regulatory approval or certification of MyZubster.
For us, it provides a useful architectural boundary:
PHASE 1
────────────
DATA
MRV
PROVENANCE
EVIDENCE
↓ separate boundary ↓
FUTURE FINANCIAL LAYER
──────────────────────
REGULATORY ASSESSMENT
LICENSING IF APPLICABLE
AUTHORIZED INFRASTRUCTURE
Open Banking
Another experiment is connecting MyZubster to existing financial infrastructure.
The first target is intentionally boring:
read-only Open Banking.
USER AUTHORIZATION
↓
OPEN BANKING / PSD2
↓
ACCOUNT DATA
↓
MYZUBSTER
No payment initiation is required for this first exploration.
We have contacted Banco BPM regarding the appropriate route. The contacted banking channel cannot directly support the integration, so we have requested guidance toward the appropriate Open Banking/PSD2 technical channel, documentation or authorized provider.
There is currently no live Banco BPM integration.
Why all these boundaries?
Because building in public also means documenting what does not exist yet.
MyZubster does not currently claim that:
- a hash proves an environmental result;
- environmental rewards are automatically verified;
- CSMT is a formal partner;
- LIFE funding has been obtained;
- MAS approved MyZubster;
- Banco BPM is integrated;
- a cyberpunk visual proves a technical feature.
Instead:
CONCEPT
↓
CODE
↓
TEST
↓
EVIDENCE
↓
MEASUREMENT
↓
EXTERNAL VALIDATION
↓
CLAIM
Each transition should require stronger evidence.
Where we're heading
The architecture is gradually converging around several connected layers:
MYZUBSTER
│
┌──────────────┼──────────────┐
│ │ │
MARKETPLACE N4K48 MRV
│ │ │
SELLER/BUYER LOCAL AI EVIDENCE
│ │ │
└──────────────┼──────────────┘
↓
CIRCULAR ECONOMY
↓
RECOVERY / REGENERATION
↓
NEW CYCLE
The next major milestone isn't another diagram.
It's turning the N4K48 technical pilot into an evidence package that an external specialist can actually evaluate.
That's the experiment we're building now.
If you're a developer working on provenance, MRV, local AI, Open Banking, circular systems or evidence architectures, I'd be interested in comparing approaches.
Build → Test → Document → Measure → Verify → Learn → Replicate.
— Daniel Ioni
Creator, MyZubster