Identity, Privacy and Adoption

Identity is adversarial. That changes everything.

Historical compute is valuable.

But identity + rewards + targeting is the most attacked surface in Web3.

Glyph is built for adversarial environments:

  • bots farming incentives

  • sybils creating fake “users”

  • low-quality growth manipulation

  • spoofed reputations

  • multi-wallet abuse

So Glyph’s outputs must be:

  • verifiable

  • privacy-preserving

  • consent-aware

  • resistant to replay

  • policy-driven and upgradeable

Glyph is not just “compute.”

It is governance of how trust is defined.


Privacy posture: optional vs default

Brevis: correctness-first

Brevis proves computation is correct. Privacy depends on how the app designs its circuit and what it reveals.

Glyph is designed so apps do not need raw histories.

Instead, apps consume minimal claims:

  • eligibility (yes/no)

  • tier (1–5)

  • persona class (e.g., LP / trader / borrower)

  • score bucket (not raw score)

This is what makes Glyph viable for:

  • growth

  • targeting

  • identity-based segmentation

    without becoming a surveillance layer.


Who adopts each first (and why it matters)

Brevis adoption comes from: protocol mechanics

Brevis is infrastructure for:

  • DeFi protocols

  • on-chain automation

  • hooks and contracts needing historical computation

Glyph adoption comes from: growth outcomes

Glyph is infrastructure for:

  • gaming ecosystems

  • consumer dApps

  • exchanges & onboarding funnels

  • campaigns, quests, incentive systems

  • any app burning budget on sybil waste and low-quality retention

The buyer logic is different.

Brevis is often “engineering ROI.”

Glyph is “growth + retention ROI.”

Last updated