Skip to content

Design question: P2P compute trust model, workload-to-node binding semantics, payment + execution attestation pairing #52

@flyoung588

Description

@flyoung588

Hi — I'm working on OM World, a protocol for a decentralized intent economy. AgentFM's framing — P2P network turning everyday computers into a decentralized AI supercomputer — is one of the few projects taking distributed compute seriously alongside the distributed agent layer.

1. P2P compute trust model. When AgentFM dispatches workload to a peer node, what guarantees the result is correct (and not, say, a fast hallucinated response)? Replication with quorum, verifiable compute (TEE/ZK), reputation-bound trust, or accept-the-result-and-dispute-later?

2. Workload-to-node binding semantics. When a job is assigned to node N, can it be reassigned mid-execution (N goes down, dispatch to M with the same state), or is the workload-node pairing locked once assigned? Each has implications for what the result attestation can claim.

3. Payment + execution attestation pairing. P2P compute markets need to pay for completed work and only for completed work. How does AgentFM pair payment to execution proof — escrow released on proof-of-completion (what does proof look like in your design), streaming payments tied to ongoing progress, or post-completion settlement?

Happy to share OM World's Execution Proof + Mandate. Distributed compute is the layer most agent protocols assume without specifying — your work is one of the rare attempts to actually build it.

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    No labels
    No labels

    Type

    No type
    No fields configured for issues without a type.

    Projects

    No projects

    Milestone

    No milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions