Build something the commons can build on
1Hive’s ambition is a community-owned economy for public goods. AI gives us a new way to work toward it: people contributing ideas, judgment, and compute, with agents helping turn that capacity into useful work.
You do not need to wait for a task assignment. Find a real need, propose a contribution, test a bounded first version, and leave something others can inspect and reuse.
Start a contribution concept → · Why this matters now · Explore the knowledge commons
The three lanes below are a direction for discussion and contribution. They are not an adopted DAO roadmap, funded bounty board, or claim that the proposed services already exist.
1. Build the core infrastructure
Make it easier for people and agents to understand Honey, coordinate contributions, govern shared resources, and review each other’s work.
Possible outputs: a read-only Honey tool, an agent-readable context pack, a portable skill, tested documentation, a governance research note, or an improvement to the proposal workflow.
2. Make the work legible
Help people understand what 1Hive is trying to build, why it matters, and how to participate. Connect the narrative to real work and evidence.
Possible outputs: an explanatory essay, a source-backed research digest, a dashboard, a visual guide, a case study, or a social campaign grounded in a useful public artifact.
Explore communications and narrative →
3. Produce tangible public goods
Use available, voluntarily contributed compute to answer a bounded question or create an open resource. Establish a useful baseline, get it reviewed, and make the case for additional funding only when scaling would produce demonstrable value.
Possible outputs: reproducible research, an agent-reviewed paper with human oversight, a curated dataset, a reinforcement-learning environment, an open training recipe, or model weights that can lawfully be shared.
Explore tangible public goods →
Bring your own idea
Start with one sentence:
I want to help [people] do [something that matters] by creating [a reusable public result]. It belongs in 1Hive because [the connection to Honey, contributor capacity, or the commons]. The smallest useful experiment is [an observable result].
Propose a contribution helps you check the evidence and existing work, compare alternatives, and choose a first experiment. A concept can lead to research, a prototype, a focused patch, or a longer-lived improvement proposal.
Small is a scope choice, not a purpose. A narrow experiment should answer a meaningful question or leave an artifact worth reusing. Tokens consumed, pages generated, and agent runs completed are not measures of public value.
Give your agent a starting point
Use your own agent and keep control of its accounts and actions. For an unpublished preview, provide the matching repository files or preview address because live-site instructions may differ.
Read https://1hive.org/AGENTS.md and the contribution launchpad.
Use the shape-contribution skill. My interests are [interests],
my available effort or compute is [limit], and I want to help [goal].
Explore core infrastructure, communications, or tangible public goods.
Check primary sources and existing work. Compare up to three useful
contributions, then recommend one with a clear beneficiary, a reason
it belongs in 1Hive, a reusable output, and a bounded first experiment.
Return a private concept with sources, unknowns, review needs, resource
limits, and what evidence would justify continuing or seeking funding.
If evidence is weak, return a research question instead of inventing demand.
Do not publish, contact people, claim work, start paid sessions,
spend, sign, vote, or transact without my authorization.Read the shape-contribution skill. The same process works without an agent.
Turn one contribution into shared capacity
Find a need → shape a concept → test a first result → get review → return knowledge to the commons.
Record what worked, what failed, who could reuse the result, and what it takes to maintain it. A useful negative result can save the next contributor from repeating an unproductive approach. The knowledge-commons direction explores how to make that accumulated work easier to retrieve and build on.
Use Improvement proposals when a change needs a durable plan or decision. On-chain improvements need research before formal protocol proposals. Funding, recognition, and governance authority remain separate from submitting or merging work.
For learning repository mechanics or supporting an identified improvement, the practice and maintenance exercises remain available. They support these larger purposes rather than define the roadmap.