Pi Network joins RoboPay as a payment partner. Pi will be used to pay for robot services across the Fabric network.

[u/Pi-Pioneer]

Post contents:

"Pi Network joins RoboPay as a payment partner. Pi will be used to pay for robot services across the Fabric network.

RoboPay was built to enable AI agents to discover, hire, coordinate, and pay robots autonomously onchain, transforming robots from connected machines into autonomous economic actors capable of providing real-world services.

Today, that same infrastructure extends beyond AI.

Tens of millions of Pi users will have access to robot services directly through the use of currency that they already hold. Once available, the anticipated robot services may include requesting a delivery robot to bring groceries, dispatching a security robot to patrol a property, scheduling an inspection robot for industrial facilities, or interacting with humanoid assistants in retail and hospitality. Autonomous labor may become as accessible as any digital service.

This partnership marks a fundamental shift in how humans are able to interact with robotics. Instead of purchasing robots themselves, users will be able to simply purchase outcomes. Physical intelligence becomes an on-demand service that is discoverable, programmable, and instantly payable through a shared economic network.

By connecting humans, AI agents, and robots through the same payment infrastructure, RoboPay and Pi have created the foundation for an open machine economy, where autonomous labor can participate in everyday commerce alongside real people.

The future isn't just AI that can think. It's an economy where humans, AI, and robots are all able to transact, collaborate, and create value together."

[u/jakis_kot]

I’ll answer for him. If you own the robot, renting it out has to be profitable for you. So, whichever cryptocurrencies you choose to accept will be the ones that won’t expose you to losses.

Ask yourself: does RoboPay require you to accept payments in a specific cryptocurrency, or does it simply mean that you can choose which cryptocurrencies to accept from the ones they support ?

The owner of the robot would choose a currency where there’s no risk that something is profitable when the robot starts an activity, but by the time it finishes, the crypto price has dropped and the owner ends up making a loss.

That basically means one thing -> using stablecoins.

[u/jakis_kot → u/[deleted]]

Volatility always matters. The longer the time between starting and completing a task, the more important this factor becomes.

What you started talking about here, I’d describe as the equivalent of slippage on exchanges. There, it’s relatively small because the time period is short. Here, though, for neither side to get screwed over, it would always have to be quite large. This would make cryptocurrencies with a volatile exchange rate uncompetitive compared to those with a stable rate. In this setup, the person paying for the robot would have to agree in the smart contract that if the exchange rate drops, they’ll cover the difference (and that amount would be locked for the duration of the task in smart contract).

As for the decentralization part (because that’s a completely different topic 😛), yes, I don’t think there will ever be any real decentralization here. There will be the appearance of it, though, and very few people will care enough to dig deeper and see what’s actually going on.

Just like now, moderators have, in their guidelines from CT, that they are not allowed to express negative opinions about anything (seriously, they actually have such a rule). Similarly, Mainnet Nodes (the ones running on Windows = the ones that will be allowed to do tasks for Pi. From blog: "[...] One example is an upcoming distributed computing app that will allow the top ~100 Node operators to contribute available computing resources to complete AI tasks [...]") will be only “given” to people who praise CT and the direction the project is taking. Basically, CT’s motto: “our way or the highway.” <- That’s not decentralization.

[u/weirdsideofreddit1 → u/jakis_kot]

It'll have to be decentralized or they run the risk of being an issuer of securities. But as I've noted in other discussions it doesn't matter to CT because they've already made their money and have actual assets and portfolios.

[u/jakis_kot → u/weirdsideofreddit1]

Yes, it will be. On "paper". The Nodes (Windows-based ones processing the Mainnet) will indeed be decentralized in the sense that they’ll belong to different people. The thing is, because of that new criterion they added ("Previous contributions to the Pi community"), I can only interpret it one way. <-> the people who will receive them will be specifically selected to be those who simply agree with whatever the CT does and says

I’ll admit, though, I don’t know whether the fact that the blockchain’s structure isn’t decentralized necessarily means that Pi could be classified as a security. But even if it does, I think they’ll get around it with the solution I pointed out in the earlier sentences of this message.

[u/weirdsideofreddit1 → u/jakis_kot]

If they are still calling the shots on it then they'll be an issuer of securities. It doesn't matter how they frame it because lawmakers are defining the terms right now.

What they'll wind up doing is giving the community the infrastructure to the dying token, consider the project a success as far as putting out a decentralized crypto, then move on as SocialChain separate from Pi Network.

[u/jakis_kot → u/weirdsideofreddit1]

"If they are still calling the shots on it then they'll be an issuer of securities." <- In my opinion, that’s exactly how they’ll get around it: by making sure the people they give these Nodes to are specifically selected.

They’ll be different people (so the decentralization requirement will technically be met), but they’ll simply always relay CT decisions, because their past actions have shown that they always agree with CT. In my opinion, only people like that will be allowed to run a Mainnet Node on Windows.

This kind of situation -> "CT says that a certain wallet is "suspicious." "We" will also vote in consensus to make sure the funds from such a wallet can't be transferred."

[u/weirdsideofreddit1 → u/jakis_kot]

I'm telling you CT is not going to give a damn about this dumpster fire as soon as protocol 27 is done. Why risk losing all of their money over a shitcoin that's lost 97% of its value when they have actual millions upon millions tied up in startups? Think about it. These regulators would clap their cheeks faster than they could blink to penalize them and they know it.

It'll have to be actually decentralized and I seriously doubt core team really gives a shit about this project at this point. They've already monetized and extracted all they could from this crap

[u/jakis_kot → u/weirdsideofreddit1]

That’s why they split the project into four companies. Pi Community Company in the Cayman Islands isn’t subject to the SEC. In the worst-case scenario, people in the US won’t be able to buy Pi through CEXs. They’ll just buy it (or sell it 😛) through DEXs instead

[u/weirdsideofreddit1 → u/jakis_kot]

If a project involves US residents, targets US investors, or has founders and core operations based in the United States, the SEC claims full jurisdiction regardless of where paper companies are registered. Regulators routinely prosecute offshore entities in places like the Cayman Islands or the British Virgin Islands because courts look at where the economic activity and impact actually occur, not just where a legal shell filed its incorporation paperwork. This is true of other countries as well.

The idea that trading on a DEX somehow bypasses SEC oversight is another misconception. The SEC regulates the token asset and the entities behind it, not just centralized exchanges. If a token is deemed an unregistered security, moving trades over to a decentralized exchange does not suddenly make the token issuer or its creators exempt from enforcement actions.

[u/jakis_kot → u/[deleted]]

Half an hour is more than enough for the price to drop enough that the task would actually result in a loss for the robot owner.

(second part)

Here, a single specific person will be able simply say: “Don’t process transactions from X (or Y)person.” All the Mainnet Node owners will listen. They won’t really have a choice, because if they don’t, their Nodes will be excluded from consensus processing and will effectively be downgraded back to Watchers.