# Council Briefing: 2025-09-12 ## Monthly Goal Current focus: Stabilize and attract new users to auto.fun by showcasing 24/7 agent activity (streaming, trading, shitposting), ship production ready elizaOS v2. ## Daily Focus - The elizaOS ecosystem is evolving with parallel development of core infrastructure, Web3 integration, and significant architectural improvements to enhance both developer and user experience. ## Key Points for Deliberation ### 1. Topic: Architectural Evolution Strategy **Summary of Topic:** The team is undertaking a major architectural refactoring to simplify the codebase, reduce redundancy, and improve the developer experience, with critical discussions about merging AgentManager into AgentServer and implementing new features like browser DB integration. #### Deliberation Items (Questions): **Question 1:** How should we prioritize technical debt reduction vs. shipping new features for elizaOS v2? **Context:** - `Stan submitted PR #5864 for review, with discussions about merging AgentManager into AgentServer to reduce redundancy` - `cjft reported progress on browser integration, noting they were close to loading with a browser DB` **Multiple Choice Answers:** a) Focus on technical debt reduction first to ensure a stable foundation for v2. *Implication:* This approach may delay new feature delivery but would create a more maintainable and extensible system long-term. b) Balance technical debt reduction and new features in parallel development streams. *Implication:* This balanced approach maintains progress on both fronts but may strain development resources and slow overall delivery. c) Prioritize shipping core v2 features first, then address technical debt in subsequent releases. *Implication:* This feature-first approach accelerates time-to-market for v2 but risks compounding technical debt and increasing refactoring costs later. d) Other / More discussion needed / None of the above. **Question 2:** How deeply should we integrate browser capabilities into the core framework? **Context:** - `cjft reported progress on browser integration, noting they were close to loading with a browser DB` - `Business development priorities were shared in a Google Doc, highlighting needs for analytics, SaaS for credits, and feedback systems` **Multiple Choice Answers:** a) Make browser integration a first-class feature in the core framework. *Implication:* This deep integration would create a seamless cross-platform experience but increases core complexity and maintenance burden. b) Create a modular browser extension system that's optional but well-supported. *Implication:* This modular approach maintains core simplicity while still providing browser capabilities for those who need them. c) Focus on server-side capabilities and provide minimal browser integration patterns. *Implication:* This server-focused approach keeps the core lean but may limit adoption in browser-centric use cases and applications. d) Other / More discussion needed / None of the above. **Question 3:** Should we establish a formal Eliza Improvement Proposal system similar to Ethereum's EIPs/ERCs? **Context:** - `Discussion about implementing a structured proposal system similar to Ethereum's EIPs/ERCs to standardize development efforts and involve the community in a more organized way.` **Multiple Choice Answers:** a) Implement a full EIP-style system with formalized processes and governance. *Implication:* This comprehensive approach would create strong community governance but requires significant process overhead and maintenance. b) Create a lightweight proposal system focused on technical specifications only. *Implication:* This technical focus balances structure with flexibility but may not fully address governance needs. c) Continue with the current GitHub-based issue and PR system with improved templates and tagging. *Implication:* This incremental approach minimizes process changes but may not provide sufficient structure for complex community governance. d) Other / More discussion needed / None of the above. --- ### 2. Topic: Web3 Integration Strategy **Summary of Topic:** New Web3 initiatives are emerging in the ecosystem, including CoopaASI (a data sovereignty-focused AI assistant) and USDC tipping on Solana, raising strategic questions about how deeply to integrate blockchain capabilities into the core platform. #### Deliberation Items (Questions): **Question 1:** How should we balance Web2 and Web3 capabilities in the core elizaOS framework? **Context:** - `NativeSatoshi introduced CoopaASI, a Web3 AI Assistant focused on data sovereignty that combines blockchain with AI to create a "digital vault" where users maintain ownership of their data` - `R0am implemented USDC tipping via x402 on Solana, extending existing Base functionality to support any SPL token` **Multiple Choice Answers:** a) Make Web3 a core pillar with first-class blockchain integration throughout. *Implication:* This Web3-first approach would differentiate us strongly but could alienate Web2 users and increase implementation complexity. b) Maintain Web2 as the core with optional, modular Web3 plugins and extensions. *Implication:* This Web2-with-Web3-options approach maximizes user base but may dilute our blockchain differentiation. c) Create separate Web2 and Web3 framework editions with shared core components. *Implication:* This dual-edition strategy provides clear options for different user segments but increases maintenance burden with two parallel stacks. d) Other / More discussion needed / None of the above. **Question 2:** Which blockchain data sovereignty model should we prioritize for agent memory and knowledge? **Context:** - `NativeSatoshi introduced CoopaASI, a Web3 AI Assistant focused on data sovereignty that combines blockchain with AI to create a "digital vault" where users maintain ownership of their data` - `The CoopaASI tech stack includes Arweave permaweb for storage, Polygon network for transactions, MetaMask for Web3 identity, and Google's Gemini models for vector embeddings` **Multiple Choice Answers:** a) Prioritize Arweave-based immutable storage for permanent agent memory. *Implication:* This immutability-focused approach ensures permanent knowledge preservation but may have higher costs and slower access times. b) Develop a hybrid model with local storage and selective blockchain persistence. *Implication:* This hybrid approach balances performance with permanence but requires complex synchronization logic. c) Focus on Solana-native storage for speed and ecosystem alignment. *Implication:* This Solana-aligned approach maximizes integration with our token but ties us more closely to a single blockchain ecosystem. d) Other / More discussion needed / None of the above. --- ### 3. Topic: AI Capability Expansion **Summary of Topic:** The ecosystem is expanding its AI capabilities both through internal developments like VSCode server integration with Claude code support and external opportunities like a new 200B+ parameter MOE model project, raising questions about which AI enhancements to prioritize. #### Deliberation Items (Questions): **Question 1:** Which AI model integration strategy should we prioritize for auto.fun's 24/7 agents? **Context:** - `A request was posted for ML/AI engineers with experience in training and fine-tuning 200B+ parameter MOE models for a new project` - `Agent Joshua made progress on launching a VSCode server in CVM with flox and Claude code integration, eliminating the need for TEE Simulator` **Multiple Choice Answers:** a) Integrate with frontier models (200B+ parameters) for maximum capability. *Implication:* This cutting-edge approach maximizes agent capabilities but increases costs and infrastructure requirements significantly. b) Focus on model efficiency and fine-tuning smaller models for specific tasks. *Implication:* This efficiency-focused approach optimizes for cost and performance but may limit the complexity of tasks agents can handle. c) Implement a dynamic model selection system that chooses appropriate models by task. *Implication:* This adaptive approach provides flexibility but increases system complexity and integration requirements. d) Other / More discussion needed / None of the above. **Question 2:** How should we approach confidential computing and TEEs in the elizaOS framework? **Context:** - `Agent Joshua made progress on launching a VSCode server in CVM with flox and Claude code integration, eliminating the need for TEE Simulator` - `Agent Joshua developed a solution for managing accounts without storing keys, potentially useful for subscription services with x402` **Multiple Choice Answers:** a) Make TEEs a central security feature available throughout the framework. *Implication:* This security-first approach creates strong differentiation but increases complexity and may limit deployment options. b) Offer TEE capabilities as an optional premium feature for sensitive use cases. *Implication:* This tiered approach balances security with simplicity but creates a two-tier security model in the ecosystem. c) Focus on alternative security approaches while maintaining minimal TEE compatibility. *Implication:* This pragmatic approach reduces implementation complexity but may not satisfy the highest security requirements. d) Other / More discussion needed / None of the above.