MyZubster: from an open-source MVP to evidence, MRV and a circular economy ecosystem
Over the last few days, MyZubster has moved through several different layers of development.
Not just code.
Not just visuals.
Not just a marketplace.
We are starting to connect these pieces around one principle:
No evidence → no material claim.
This post explains where the project is today, what we have actually demonstrated, what is still experimental, and where we want to go next.
1. What is MyZubster?
MyZubster is an open-source ecosystem exploring how software, marketplaces, local communities, AI, environmental observations and circular-economy processes can work together.
The long-term idea is a cycle such as:
OBSERVE
↓
DOCUMENT
↓
CONNECT
↓
MEASURE
↓
VERIFY
↓
RECOVER / REGENERATE
↓
NEW CYCLE
But there is an important distinction.
A diagram is not evidence.
A visual is not certification.
A blockchain hash is not scientific validation.
And an MVP is not automatically a production-ready system.
So we are trying to build the project with explicit boundaries between concept, implementation, evidence and external validation.
2. The Marketplace: moving from concept to real transactions
One major milestone has been the MyZubster Marketplace.
We have implemented a Seller flow based on:
STRIPE CHECKOUT
↓
SUBSCRIPTION
↓
SIGNED WEBHOOK
↓
SELLER MEMBERSHIP
↓
MARKETPLACE ACCESS
↓
LISTING PUBLICATION
The Seller membership flow has been tested with a real subscription and a real listing publication.
That matters because MyZubster is no longer only describing a marketplace architecture.
Parts of the transaction infrastructure are actually running.
The next important product gate is the other side of the marketplace:
BUYER
↓
REQUEST
↓
MESSAGING
↓
EXCHANGE
↓
COMPLETION
↓
REPUTATION
Closing this loop is one of our current priorities.
3. Nicola enters MyZubster: N4K48
Another important experiment is the work being developed with Nicola.
Inside the visual and narrative layer of MyZubster, Nicola is represented as:
N4K48 // Explorer // Neon Plaza
The cyberpunk identity is storytelling.
Behind it, however, there is a real technical MVP.
The project has worked on components including:
- observation APIs;
- JSON persistence;
- atomic writes;
- retrieval of stored observations;
- end-to-end tests;
- coordinate validation;
- Docker;
- persistent volumes;
- health checks;
- CI;
- Gunicorn;
- local AI;
- Ollama;
- Qdrant;
- local RAG over observations.
This gives us an interesting bridge:
N4K48
↓
REAL ACTIVITY
↓
OBSERVATION
↓
TECHNICAL EVIDENCE
↓
MYZUBSTER
The cyberpunk universe can therefore represent real project progress without pretending that the visual itself proves the progress.
4. Connecting N4K48 to the circular economy
We have now connected the N4K48 profile to MyZubster's circular-economy visual layer.
The conceptual path becomes:
N4K48 / Nicola
↓
OBSERVE
↓
DOCUMENT
↓
EVIDENCE
↓
MEASURE
↓
VERIFY
↓
CIRCULAR ECONOMY
↓
RECOVERY / REGENERATION
↓
NEW CYCLE
We also created visual representations for:
- MyZubster Circular Economy;
- circular-economy value/payment flows;
- the MyZubster Space Station;
- Neon Plaza and N4K48.
These visuals help explain the architecture.
But we deliberately keep this boundary:
Visual storytelling does not equal environmental evidence.
5. The next challenge: MRV
This brings us to one of the most important areas we are now exploring:
MRV — Measurement, Reporting and Verification.
Imagine that MyZubster records an environmental observation.
We can hash the payload.
We can timestamp it.
We can preserve provenance.
We can prevent replay.
We can demonstrate that a payload has not changed.
But that still doesn't prove that the underlying physical measurement is scientifically correct.
That distinction is fundamental.
We therefore see several trust layers:
DATA
↓
INTEGRITY
↓
PROVENANCE
↓
MEASUREMENT VALIDITY
↓
EXTERNAL VERIFICATION
↓
ACCREDITATION / ATTESTATION
For example:
SHA-256 can demonstrate integrity.
It cannot, by itself, demonstrate the truth of a physical environmental claim.
6. Why we are being careful with environmental rewards
We are also experimenting with architectures for environmental rewards.
This creates a much higher trust requirement.
A system must not be able to assign a high-value environmental status simply because somebody uploaded metadata or generated a hash.
For that reason, our direction is increasingly:
SELF REPORTED
↓
EVIDENCE
↓
TECHNICAL VERIFICATION
↓
AUTHORIZED VALIDATION
↓
ELIGIBLE RESULT
Any economic reward should remain fail-closed when the required evidence or validator authorization is missing.
This is especially important if MyZubster eventually connects environmental evidence to economic incentives.
7. A very useful conversation with CSMT
Today we also had a very positive exploratory conversation with CSMT.
The purpose was not to announce a partnership.
It was to ask a more important question:
How do we move from a working technical pilot to an MRV approach that can be evaluated seriously?
The meeting went well.
The next step proposed is another conversation involving a colleague with more specialized expertise in the relevant field.
For us, this is valuable because the next challenge is no longer simply:
Can we build it?
It is:
What evidence is required for an external expert to evaluate it?
Our desired next gate is therefore something like:
TECHNICAL PILOT
↓
EVIDENCE PACKAGE
↓
MRV METHODOLOGY
↓
EXTERNAL REVIEW
↓
VALIDATED PILOT
We are not calling CSMT a formal MyZubster partner at this stage.
The discussion is an exploratory technical process.
8. Looking toward LIFE — carefully
We are also exploring whether this work could eventually become relevant to a future European LIFE pathway.
Again, wording matters.
We are not saying:
- that MyZubster has LIFE funding;
- that a LIFE application has been approved;
- that CSMT is a LIFE partner;
- or that the current pilot already satisfies LIFE requirements.
Instead, we are asking what would have to become true for a credible future path to exist.
A possible progression is:
PILOT
↓
MRV
↓
EXTERNAL VALIDATION
↓
REPLICABILITY
↓
CONSORTIUM / PARTNERS
↓
FUTURE APPLICATION
Evidence first.
Claims later.
9. Singapore: defining the regulatory boundary
We have also been exploring a potential Singapore pilot.
A particularly useful step was receiving guidance from the Monetary Authority of Singapore's FinTech Regulatory Sandbox team regarding the Phase 1 configuration we described.
The proposed first phase focuses on operational/environmental data and non-transferable evidence credentials, without investment rights, fundraising, custody, trading or live payment functionality.
Based on the configuration presented, MAS indicated that the Phase 1 did not appear to involve a financial service regulated by MAS, meaning the MAS Regulatory Sandbox would not apply to that phase.
This does not mean MAS has approved or certified MyZubster.
It gives us something different and useful:
a clearer regulatory boundary for the experiment as described.
Any future financial functionality would require a separate regulatory assessment before activation.
So our architecture remains:
PHASE 1
DATA
+
MRV
+
PROVENANCE
+
EVIDENCE
----------------
FUTURE FINANCIAL LAYER
SEPARATE
REGULATORY
ASSESSMENT
10. Open Banking: exploring the connection to real financial infrastructure
In parallel, we have started exploring how MyZubster could interact with traditional banking infrastructure.
The first goal is deliberately limited:
read-only account connectivity.
For example:
AUTHORIZED USER
↓
OPEN BANKING
↓
BALANCE / TRANSACTIONS
↓
MYZUBSTER
No payment initiation is required for this initial exploration.
We contacted Banco BPM about the appropriate route.
The bank informed us that its contacted channel cannot provide direct assistance for connecting MyZubster to customer accounts.
We remain interested in proceeding and have therefore asked for the appropriate Open Banking / PSD2 technical channel, documentation or authorized provider route.
This is still exploratory.
There is no live Banco BPM integration today.
11. The architecture is becoming clearer
Putting everything together, MyZubster is starting to look less like one application and more like a set of connected layers.
MYZUBSTER
│
┌─────────────┼─────────────┐
│ │ │
MARKETPLACE N4K48 MRV
│ │ │
SELLER / PILOT / EVIDENCE
BUYER LOCAL AI │
│ │ VALIDATION
└──────┬──────┘ │
│ │
CIRCULAR ECONOMY ──────────┘
│
RECOVERY / REUSE
│
NEW CYCLE
Around this core there are additional experimental interfaces:
CSMT → methodology / expert discussion
LIFE → possible future European pathway
SINGAPORE → operational evidence pilot exploration
OPEN BANKING → financial-data interoperability exploration
12. What we are NOT claiming
Open-source projects can move quickly.
Claims should move more slowly.
So here are some explicit boundaries.
MyZubster is not claiming that:
- environmental results are already scientifically validated;
- hashes are equivalent to signatures or accreditation;
- CSMT is already a formal partner;
- LIFE funding has been obtained;
- MAS has approved MyZubster;
- Banco BPM is integrated with MyZubster;
- visual concepts prove technical functionality;
- an evidence token automatically represents a verified environmental asset.
These distinctions are part of the architecture, not legal fine print added afterward.
13. What comes next
Our immediate roadmap is becoming much simpler.
Product
SELLER FLOW
↓
BUYER FLOW
↓
COMPLETE MARKETPLACE LOOP
Nicola / N4K48
MVP
↓
EVIDENCE PACKAGE
↓
MRV
↓
EXTERNAL REVIEW
Circular economy
OBSERVATION
↓
MEASUREMENT
↓
PROVENANCE
↓
VERIFICATION
↓
RECOVERY
↓
REPLICATION
Institutional exploration
CSMT
↓
SPECIALIST FOLLOW-UP
↓
METHODOLOGY
↓
VALIDATION PATH
International exploration
SINGAPORE PHASE 1
↓
OPERATIONAL DATA
↓
MRV / EVIDENCE
↓
VALIDATION
Financial interoperability
OPEN BANKING
↓
READ-ONLY
↓
AUTHORIZED PROVIDER / API
↓
TECHNICAL VALIDATION
Building in public
One reason we keep these repositories and technical decisions visible is that MyZubster is being developed as an open ecosystem.
We want developers, researchers, sustainability experts, organizations and contributors to be able to challenge assumptions.
If an environmental claim is weak, we want to know.
If the MRV model is insufficient, we want to improve it.
If a trust boundary is wrong, we want to fix it before economic value depends on it.
The goal isn't to make the biggest claim.
The goal is to progressively make stronger claims supported by stronger evidence.
BUILD
↓
TEST
↓
DOCUMENT
↓
MEASURE
↓
VERIFY
↓
LEARN
↓
REPLICATE
That's where MyZubster is today.
And that's the direction we're building toward.
MyZubster — open source, evidence first, circular by design.
GitHub: MyZubster Ecosystem
Project: MyZubster
N4K48: Nicola's technical and visual pilot
Top comments (0)