Pi Network Introduces PiRC1 Token Framework for Mainnet Ecosystem

TheNewsCryptoPublicado em 2026-02-23Última atualização em 2026-02-23

Resumo

Pi Network has introduced the PiRC1 token framework, a new utility-oriented standard for creating and managing tokens within its Mainnet ecosystem. This framework provides structured guidelines for token issuance, distribution, and emission logic, aiming to support real-world applications and services. A key feature is that funds from token launches will be directed to liquidity pools rather than project teams, enhancing trade stability. The proposal is open for community feedback on GitHub, reflecting Pi Network’s focus on community-driven governance. The move is expected to attract more developers and provide competitive advantages by offering clear operational parameters. This development coincides with significant Mainnet growth, including millions of users completing identity verification.

The Pi Network has rolled out a new utility-oriented token design framework for the Mainnet ecosystem, which highlights structured standards for the launch of future tokens. The move is a breakthrough for the network as it continues to develop its Open Network phase. Through the establishment of token standards, Pi Network aims to offer developers a clear guideline on how to create tokens within the ecosystem.

Structured Token Standards and Emission Logic

The PiRC1 document describes guidelines for token creation, management, and distribution patterns in the ecosystem. The guidelines focus on real-world applications rather than hypothetical scenarios, promoting tokens that enable applications and services running on Mainnet. As per the design published, the ecosystem tokens would co-exist with the native Pi coin, enabling decentralized applications and digital commerce. The design specifies the emission logic to inject the tokens into the system in a structured fashion.

The document also outlines ways that are expected to facilitate liquidity creation. According to the proposed structure, funds raised from the launch of ecosystem tokens would go into liquidity pools and not directly to project teams. This is expected to improve the stability of trade flows and eliminate structural uncertainties.

Developers expected to implement the proposal can examine the technical details and offer comments before final implementation. Pi Network has published the framework publicly on GitHub to allow community members to contribute to its improvement.

Community Engagement and Ecosystem Development

The proposal has been framed by Pi Network as part of a larger initiative to promote community-driven governance and development. Members of the community can access the document and provide feedback during the feedback period. Industry analysts have pointed out that well-defined token standards can help remove confusion for developers working on blockchain networks. Well-structured supply dynamics and rules for token emissions can also help improve clarity for participants in the ecosystem.

The announcement comes at a time when Pi Network is celebrating the growth of its Mainnet ecosystem. Millions of users have completed identity verification and switched over to Mainnet, and developers are working on applications in the network environment.

Experts believe that standardized token frameworks could assist in attracting more developers with clearer operating parameters. The standardized design of tokens could also give the ecosystem a competitive edge over projects that do not have standardized guidelines. The Pi Network has not set a final timeline for implementation, as the proposal is still open for community feedback.

Highlighted Crypto News:

AI Automation Mishap Leads to $442K Memecoin Transfer on Solana

Perguntas relacionadas

QWhat is the main purpose of the PiRC1 token framework introduced by Pi Network?

AThe PiRC1 token framework provides structured standards for token creation, management, and distribution within the Pi Mainnet ecosystem, focusing on real-world applications and enabling decentralized applications and digital commerce.

QHow does the PiRC1 framework propose to handle funds raised from ecosystem token launches?

AFunds raised from ecosystem token launches would go into liquidity pools rather than directly to project teams, aiming to improve trade flow stability and eliminate structural uncertainties.

QWhere has Pi Network published the PiRC1 framework for community review and contribution?

APi Network has published the framework publicly on GitHub to allow community members to examine technical details, offer comments, and contribute to its improvement.

QHow does the PiRC1 framework aim to benefit the Pi Network ecosystem according to industry analysts?

AWell-defined token standards can remove confusion for developers, while structured supply dynamics and emission rules provide clarity for ecosystem participants, potentially attracting more developers and giving the ecosystem a competitive edge.

QWhat milestone is Pi Network celebrating alongside the introduction of the PiRC1 framework?

APi Network is celebrating the growth of its Mainnet ecosystem, with millions of users having completed identity verification and migrated to Mainnet, while developers are building applications in the network environment.

Leituras Relacionadas

Dialogue with Jia Hang | Looking Back at Two Decades of Chinese Payment Going Global

**Summary: A Conversation with Jia Hang on Two Decades of China's Payment Globalization** Jia Hang, a veteran with over twenty years in payments, reflects on China's attempts to build a global payment network through three key phases: UnionPay (card networks), Alipay+ (digital wallets), and now, stablecoins. His journey began at UnionPay International, aiming to establish China's card network abroad. While successful in following Chinese tourists ("where Chinese go, UnionPay goes"), it struggled to achieve true global scale. The core lesson: card networks like Visa/Mastercard's unassailable advantage isn't just technical standards, but their deeply entrenched **governance and profit-sharing models** that create powerful network effects. Competing as the "same species" is nearly impossible. At Ant Group, he led Alipay+, a strategy to bypass card networks by interconnecting local e-wallets worldwide. While innovative, it faced a similar ceiling. Mobile QR payments and card swipes were essentially **the same species competing for the same pie**, lacking a disruptive value proposition for users or a sustainable new incentive model to replace the card networks' established flywheel. Today, at Singapore's DCS, Jia focuses on stablecoin-based payments. He argues stablecoins represent a fundamental shift. They are not competing with Visa for consumer payments but challenging the **traditional banking and account system for value movement**. Products like "U Cards" (stablecoin-linked payment cards) are transitional, leveraging existing card networks for acceptance while building new rails. The real potential lies in stablecoins enabling seamless, low-cost global value transfer, potentially reorganizing the financial infrastructure around **accounts rather than cards**. Jia believes stablecoin adoption for local retail payments, cross-border transactions, and as high-yield savings vehicles is becoming irreversible. This could gradually reduce reliance on traditional fiat channels, especially in regions with weak currencies or capital controls. The quest for the "next global payment network" continues, now centered on whether stablecoins can successfully bridge Web2 and Web3, establish new governance, and create compelling user value beyond mere cost reduction.

marsbitHá 3m

Dialogue with Jia Hang | Looking Back at Two Decades of Chinese Payment Going Global

marsbitHá 3m

Circle's Stock Price Plunges 76%, Hong Kong Dollar Stablecoin Set to Launch Within Two Weeks

Circle's stock price has plunged approximately 76% from its 2023 peak, reflecting a major market revaluation. Despite this, Circle President Heath Tarbert emphasized the company's focus on long-term execution and its dominant position with USDC's $73 billion circulation across 34 blockchains. The competitive landscape is intensifying. A new consortium-backed stablecoin, Open USD, is attempting to challenge incumbents by sharing reserve yields with partners. More significantly, Visa's new stablecoin platform, initially supporting Open USD while also being compatible with USDC, could erode Circle's network effects. In response, Circle is expanding into real-world payments through partnerships like the one with Japan's JCB. Separately, Tether (USDT) faces a two-year compliance window under new U.S. regulations, requiring it to adjust its reserve composition away from assets like Bitcoin and loans towards cash and U.S. Treasuries. Meanwhile, in Hong Kong, Standard Chartered-backed fintech firm Dian Dian is poised to launch a licensed HKD-pegged stablecoin (HKDAP), moving the industry into a phase where the real test is integrating licensed stablecoins into actual payment flows and corporate treasury systems. The sharp decline in Circle's stock underscores a broader shift: the stablecoin market is moving from a winner-takes-all dynamic to a multi-player competitive arena where execution, compliance, and real-world utility are becoming paramount.

marsbitHá 4m

Circle's Stock Price Plunges 76%, Hong Kong Dollar Stablecoin Set to Launch Within Two Weeks

marsbitHá 4m

Amidst Capital's Encirclement, Decentralization is the Sole Defense for Public Blockchains

In a landscape dominated by power and profit motives, the author argues that decentralization is not merely one desirable feature among many in blockchain design—it is the singular, non-negotiable defense against corporate and capital capture. The article adopts a Machiavellian, realist perspective on human institutions, positing that businesses will inevitably attempt to co-opt any valuable network to protect their profits and dominance. While external attacks like 51% forks are often discussed, the greater existential risk is internal capture—the gradual erosion of a protocol’s neutrality by vested interests, as seen historically with platforms like Visa and Google. The piece critiques permissioned chains, highly centralized “permissionless” layer-1s, and layer-2s without sufficient decentralization (e.g., single sequencers) as inherently vulnerable. These compromised systems, promoted by established financial players, are framed as delaying tactics to stifle truly open networks that threaten existing high-fee, inefficient business models. Real-world examples, such as closed enterprise consortiums that exclude competitors, illustrate how such systems cement oligopolies rather than foster innovation. The author concludes that while decentralized protocols like Ethereum are imperfect and costly to operate, they represent the only viable long-term equilibrium. In a market where value naturally flows to the most secure and neutral settlement layer, only maximally decentralized public blockchains can resist being subsumed by capital and powerful incumbents.

Foresight NewsHá 14m

Amidst Capital's Encirclement, Decentralization is the Sole Defense for Public Blockchains

Foresight NewsHá 14m

Who Decides the Rules of Bitcoin? BIP-110 Ignites Governance Debate

Bitcoin's governance is once again at the center of a heated debate, this time ignited by BIP-110, the "Reduced Data Temporary Softfork." This proposal aims to curb non-monetary data (like inscriptions and Runes) by introducing seven new consensus-layer restrictions over a year, such as limiting new output scripts to 34 bytes and restoring the OP_RETURN cap to 83 bytes. The controversy stems from BIP-110's fundamental shift: it moves the battle against "spam" from node relay and miner policies to the consensus layer, rendering currently valid transactions invalid. Supporters, arguing that default policy governance has failed (highlighted by Bitcoin Core v30's relaxation of OP_RETURN limits), see this as necessary to protect node resources and Bitcoin's monetary focus. Opponents, led by figures like Michael Saylor and Adam Back, warn it dangerously centralizes governance. Saylor listed 110 reasons against it, criticizing its low 55% miner activation threshold and potential for chain splits. Back emphasized Bitcoin's "permissionless" ethos, arguing no single group should impose value judgments via consensus rules. Further complicating matters, technical critiques suggest BIP-110 may be technically circumventable, and a "BlockSlop" vulnerability in its upgrade path poses a consensus risk. The debate has drawn in diverse stakeholders: miners (with pools like Ocean signaling support and Foundry polling clients), node operators (like Bitcoin Knots), and new players like corporate treasury holder MicroStrategy (Saylor), whose market influence adds a novel dimension. Ultimately, BIP-110 acts as a governance stress test, exposing the unresolved question: who decides Bitcoin's rules? It pits the authority of miners, node operators, developers, and capital holders against each other, with each side claiming to defend Bitcoin's core principles of neutrality and security.

marsbitHá 31m

Who Decides the Rules of Bitcoin? BIP-110 Ignites Governance Debate

marsbitHá 31m

Who Decides Bitcoin's Rules? BIP-110 Ignites Governance Debate

Title: Who Decides Bitcoin's Rules? BIP-110 Ignites Governance Debate A new technical proposal, BIP-110 (Reduced Data Temporary Softfork), has sparked a fundamental governance debate within the Bitcoin community. It aims to impose new consensus rules for one year to limit non-financial data (like inscriptions and Runes) on-chain, moving beyond simple node and miner policy filters to invalidate currently valid transactions. Supporters argue that default policies have failed due to workarounds, necessitating consensus-layer changes to protect Bitcoin's core monetary function from data spam. Critics, including Michael Saylor and Adam Back, contend this dangerously centralizes judgment, undermines permissionlessness, and sets a risky governance precedent. They advocate for market-based solutions like fees or Layer 2s instead. The debate exposes deeper tensions: miners are divided on activation; node operators assert their sovereignty; Bitcoin Core developers influence defaults without direct accountability; and large corporate holders like MicroStrategy now wield narrative influence. Technically, BIP-110 may not fully block data and carries a disclosed consensus bug risk. Ultimately, BIP-110 acts as a stress test, forcing the community to confront the unresolved question: who legitimately decides what Bitcoin is and how it evolves, amidst competing claims from miners, nodes, developers, and capital holders.

链捕手Há 43m

Trading

Spot