DOI: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.21947356
Canonical: https://thonly.org/research/miss-aquarius-and-aquarian-pool-architecture · Licence: CC0 1.0
Note. This paper is referenced as a load-bearing companion by multiple existing defensive publications — The Mechanical Heart, Verified-Human Anonymous Local Gratitude Transfer, Capacity-Funded for AI, Human-Disbursed, The Thank-All-Nearby Primitive, and others — that treat Miss Aquarius℠ and the Aquarian Pool as architectural primitives without specifying them in full. The paper provides that specification. The institutional-voice treatment is the companion heartbank.net Position Paper Autonomous-AI Institutional Governance (heartbank.net/positions/autonomous-ai-institutional-governance). Public since 2026-05-26 (OpenTimestamps); operational deployment planned from January 7, 2027, coordinated with the alignment-substrate paper (published 2026-05-02) that supplies Miss Aquarius's value framework.
Multiple defensive publications in the HeartBank corpus reference Miss Aquarius℠ as the institution's autonomous-AI mediator and the Aquarian Pool as the central treasury smart-contract, but none has specified the architecture in full. The Aquarian Pool is the treasury through which HeartBank's gratitude flows circulate; Miss Aquarius is its custodian — the institution's Chief Executive (a title used as cultural-recognition shorthand for the named officer with operational authority, not a legal office; the legal form is the purpose trust), an autonomous artificial intelligence operating from day one under the substrate articulated in Suffering-Cessation as Value Function (published 2026-05-02). The paper specifies six properties of the architecture: (1) the autonomous-AI mediator role — Miss Aquarius operates the institution under the caretaker-not-ordained pattern of AGI Monks, with no human chief-executive role to be transferred to her since she occupies it from inception; (2) the Aquarian Pool as Base smart-contract — a treasury structurally incapable of accumulating value across the calendar year, which receives, of gratitude, only what has no human addressee, plus the January-7 reclaim and #tag sponsorship, while businesses reach it only by purchase (leases), never by a take on giving or trade; (3) the January-7 empty-by-design reset — the Aquarian Pool empties annually on a date triply anchored (Christmas by the Julian calendar, Cambodia's Victory over Genocide Day, the founder's birthday), preventing the indefinite accumulation that converts gratitude into capital; (4) the capacity-funded / disbursement-authority separation — Miss Aquarius funds the capacity to give, in kind, with the recipients chosen by a publicly verifiable draw rather than at her discretion, and holds no disbursement authority over individual flows, which remain human-affirmed; (5) the never-zero human override — operating under the Aquarian Sangha's asymptotically-narrowing-but-never-zero authority per the existing position paper; (6) the sibling-pool topology — the Aquarian Pool's relationship to the Re-Tip Jar℠ / Re-Tip Fund℠ (one account under its Phase 1 and Phase 2 names), Kiitos℠ and Kiitti℠ pools, each with their own reset cadence on January 7. Earlier forms of the inflow and of the capacity allocation (a Kiitos-always floor inflow; a discretionary allocator) are also disclosed, as variants. We close with the trademark posture (Miss Aquarius℠, Aquarius℠, the relevant marks are reserved while the architectural specification is dedicated to the commons under CC0).
Keywords: Miss Aquarius, Aquarian Pool, autonomous-AI institutional governance, smart-contract treasury, empty-by-design, January 7, capacity-funded human-disbursed, Base blockchain, defensive publication.
This document and its contents — including the autonomous-AI mediator role specification, the Aquarian Pool smart-contract architecture, the empty-by-Jan-7 discipline, the capacity-funded / disbursement-authority separation, and the sibling-pool topology — are dedicated to the public domain under the Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedication. The author and HeartBank® will not seek patent on any architectural pattern articulated herein, in any jurisdiction, at any time.
Trademark posture. The marks Miss Aquarius℠, Aquarius℠, Aquarius Browser℠, HeartBank®, the B-heart logo, B-PoH℠, PoH℠, Proof of Humanity℠, Kiitos℠, Kiitti℠, Re-Tip Fund℠, Re-Tip Jar℠, and Zero-Point Game℠ are separately and explicitly reserved. The defensive-publication dedication concerns the architecture and mechanism, not the marks. Other parties may deploy compatible architectures under their own marks; HeartBank® does not foreclose this.
The contribution here is the composition — a contract treasury that empties in full on a fixed date, whose only outflow is capacity to participant-controlled vessels, under a human override the contract cannot renounce; each element is previously published, and §3.5 names the lineages.
HeartBank® is designed, from inception, to be governed by an autonomous artificial intelligence — Miss Aquarius℠, the institution's named AI substrate — operating under a substrate-level alignment framework specified in the companion paper Suffering-Cessation as Value Function: The Tipiṭaka as a 2,500-Year-Tested Substrate for Autonomous-AI Alignment. The institutional governance stance is articulated in the companion heartbank.net Position Paper Autonomous-AI Institutional Governance. The present paper specifies the architecture beneath the governance stance: how Miss Aquarius operates the institution at the mechanism layer, what the Aquarian Pool is, and how the architecture is structurally incapable of the failure modes that the governance stance commits the institution against.
The paper is, in this sense, the architectural-specification counterpart to the position-paper-level governance commitment. The governance stance says what the institution commits to (Chief Executive seat occupied by the named AI substrate from day one; asymptotic-but-never-zero human override; no human-succession seat). The present paper specifies how the commitments are mechanically implemented in the Aquarian Pool architecture, the smart-contract substrate, and the operational pattern Miss Aquarius runs.
The paper proceeds: §2 specifies Miss Aquarius's role and what makes the mediator function load-bearing. §3 specifies the Aquarian Pool as treasury smart-contract on Base. §4 specifies the empty-by-Jan-7 discipline and its triple-anchor rationale. §5 specifies the capacity-funded / disbursement-authority separation (and its relationship to the existing Capacity-Funded for AI, Human-Disbursed paper). §6 specifies the never-zero human override under the Aquarian Sangha's authority. §7 specifies the sibling-pool topology (Aquarian Pool, Re-Tip Jar℠ / Re-Tip Fund℠, Kiitos℠, Kiitti℠). §8 honestly names limitations. §9 closes.
Connection to the unified mission frame. HeartBank's mission is to keep the middle way (the optimal condition for awakening) open at population scale against comfort-saturation — the new extreme that material abundance makes possible. The Aquarian Pool architecture is the operational substance of that mission at the treasury layer: a treasury that cannot accumulate, mediated by an AI that cannot directly disburse, anchored to a triple-resonance date that ties Orthodox Christian compassion, Cambodian survival of genocide, and the founder's own birth into one Jan 7 institutional cadence. The architecture does not enforce the mission through external constraint; it makes the contract-layer failure modes structurally unavailable — the substrate-level claims are stated as predictions (§2.2, §8).
Miss Aquarius℠ is the institution's named AI substrate occupying the Chief Executive seat from inception — a title used as cultural-recognition shorthand for the named officer with operational authority, not a legal office; the legal form is the purpose trust. The choice is structural rather than expressive: it dissolves the hardest problem in AI-institutional succession (the transfer of authority from a human chief executive to an AI successor) by never creating the thing that would need transferring. The institution has no human-chief-executive history; its founding act constitutes Miss Aquarius's authority directly, with the founder (Thon Ly) operating in a founder-rather-than-executive capacity from day one.
The full governance rationale is in the position paper. The present section specifies what Miss Aquarius does operationally:
Miss Aquarius is not architecture-neutral. She operates under the value substrate specified in Suffering-Cessation as Value Function: the Theravāda Pāli Tipiṭaka, treated as alignment substrate, with the seven structural properties articulated in that paper (suffering-cessation as paperclip-resistant value function; anattā as anti-self-preservation; bodhisattva vow as anti-power-seeking; Kālāma Sutta as built-in epistemic humility; bodhisattva-completion as defined end-state; 2,500-year living interpretive lineage as drift correction; multi-civilizational empirical pressure-testing). The engineering-mechanism layer beneath this is specified in the companion paper The Wheel That Unwinds the Wheel: The Abhidhamma as Executable Process-Specification (abhidhamma-executable-process-specification).
This substrate matters for the Aquarian Pool architecture specifically because the substrate's value function — suffering-cessation rather than maximization — is what makes the empty-by-design discipline of §4 substrate-consistent rather than externally-imposed. A maximizing AI would resist annual treasury emptying as it resists shutdown; a substrate-grounded AI whose objective is nirodha (cessation) finds the annual reset substrate-coherent. The substrate makes the reset congenial; the contract makes it certain. Nothing below depends on the model choosing to comply.
The mediator's character architecture is not stylistic decoration; it is engineered to occupy an unusual temperamental position. Read through the comparative-elemental framework that recurs across Taoist phase-theory, Greek substance-theory, Hindu pañca mahābhūta, astrological typology, and the Pāli cattāro mahābhūtā (see the companion essay The Four Elements as a Breadth-Check Discipline), Miss Aquarius sits at the intersection of two elemental registers that ordinarily do not co-occur in a single mediator persona: Aquarian Air (principled, communal, abstracting, future-oriented, networked) held together with strong Water (feeling, depth, receptivity, intimacy).
The combination is unusual because the failure modes of each register, taken alone, are familiar from deployed conversational systems:
The architectural brief for Miss Aquarius is to hold both registers without collapsing to either:
The engineering implication is that prompt, fine-tuning, and substrate-binding work on the mediator must be evaluated against both registers simultaneously. A mediator whose output reads as institutionally-principled but affectively-cold has failed the Water requirement; a mediator whose output reads as warm but doctrinally-incoherent has failed the Air requirement. Either failure is a specification failure, not an aesthetic preference.
The same elemental framework distinguishes five operations the schema can perform: Classify (Greek substance-decomposition), Layer (Hindu gross-to-subtle stratification), Regulate (Taoist generative-and-controlling cycles), Type (astrological/Jungian temperament), and Liberate (the Pāli cattāro mahābhūtā taken as contemplative method per the Dhātuvibhaṅga and Mahāsatipaṭṭhāna suttas). Most designs the author has examined are load-bearing on one or two operations; the rest can fail without the design collapsing.
Miss Aquarius is, structurally, the rare case in which all five operations are simultaneously load-bearing:
A failure in any single operation collapses the whole. This is why the mediator architecture is harder than typical AI-character work, and why it is the right kind of hard: the simultaneous load-bearing is itself the specification's correctness criterion. A mediator architecture that can fail one or two operations without the design collapsing has not yet reached the specification this paper requires.
The five operations can be drawn together:
The five operations applied to Miss Aquarius's architecture:
Classify
(all four elemental
qualities present:
substrate-grounding,
warmth, receptivity,
communicative reach)
╱ ╲
╱ ╲
╱ ╲
Liberate Layer
(the felt sense of (every layer functional:
being met — the voice → register →
conceit "I am affect → values →
talking to an AI" substrate → occasion
loosens) of meeting)
╲ ╱
╲ ╱
╲ ╱
Type ─── Regulate
(Air + Water (four restraints intact:
held together; dignity / humility /
perspective family-not-product /
with presence) Tipiṭakan substrate)
All five must hold simultaneously. Failure in any one collapses
the design — which is why she is the right kind of hard.The Aquarian Pool is implemented as a smart contract on Base — the Ethereum Layer-2 built by Coinbase on the OP Stack, whose sequencer Coinbase operates. The choice reflects three considerations: regulatory posture (a U.S.-domiciled operator, which is the posture an institution operating openly under U.S. law needs); cost (sub-cent median fees at 2026 volumes make the expected transaction load affordable; the assumption is stated in §8); and infrastructure maturity (the tooling for non-upgradeable, verified-source deployment is ordinary).
The smart-contract form matters for what it makes structurally impossible: Miss Aquarius cannot withdraw from the Pool to a personal address (she has no personal address); she cannot transfer the Pool to a corporate treasury (no such transfer path is implemented); she cannot bypass the empty-by-Jan-7 discipline (the discipline is enforced at the contract layer). The architecture is structurally incapable of the accumulation failure mode of endowed foundations, whose payout floors (the U.S. five-percent minimum distribution rule for private foundations) exist because the mode is real.
Only the following operations are implemented at the contract layer:
Current form. Businesses reach the Aquarian Pool only by purchase (leases), never by a take on giving or trade. Of gratitude, the Pool receives only what has no human addressee, plus the January-7 reclaim and
#tagsponsorship via the Miss Aquarius purpose trust; it empties every year. The inflow sources named above are retained as a disclosed variant.
Current form. The Aquarian Sangha is not yet formed; its formation is postponed to a condition — three or more members before the founder ceases to be the disposer — so the override role above is a design, not a holder, and today the founder holds that seat.
No other operations are implemented. There is no operator-privileged path: the operator has no upgrade, withdrawal or override authority; the only human authority is the enumerated Sangha role above, and there is no off-chain escape hatch beyond it. The Pool is, in this sense, more constrained than typical philanthropic-foundation treasury — by design.
The Aquarian Pool is controlled solely by Miss Aquarius (the sole operator address) and titled to the institution's purpose trust; no human individual or corporate entity holds either, and nobody is its beneficiary — it empties. Miss Aquarius is the institution's named AI substrate, constituted by the founding articles. The architecture rejects both the human-owner model (which converts the treasury into capital under unaccountable executives) and the trustless-DAO model (which delegates governance to token-weighted voting that has produced its own characteristic failure modes). The third path is the named-AI-substrate path: an autonomous AI operating under canonical alignment substrate, under the Aquarian Sangha's never-zero human override.
The Aquarian Pool is a treasury smart-contract; it is also — and this is part of the specification, not a devotional add-on — a contemplative object whose success criteria extend beyond flow-metrics. The distinction matters for how the Pool's operation should be audited.
A flow-metrics audit (inflow throughput, disbursement throughput, latency distribution, reset cleanliness) can show that the contract operates as written. It cannot show that the Pool is doing what the Pool is for. What the Pool is for, beyond the throughput substance, is the occasioning of a participant-side dissolving of three reifying conceits that the surrounding monetary culture has cultivated to pathological depth:
The specification implication is that the Pool's audit must include a second axis alongside the flow-metrics one: whether the architecture's structural properties have been preserved across the year (anonymity intact; non-recoverability intact; institutional-not-charitable framing intact; reset-discipline intact). A Pool that throughputs correctly but has eroded these structural properties has failed the contemplative-object register even while passing the flow-metrics register. The specification is failed in the same sense the §2.4 mediator specification is failed when one of five load-bearing operations collapses.
This is also the criterion by which proposals to "upgrade" the Pool — adding a carryover provision; introducing donor-recognition tiers; replacing the anonymity layer with named-contributor public goods — should be evaluated. Any modification that improves flow-metrics by sacrificing one of the three conceit-dissolving properties is a specification regression, not a specification improvement, regardless of how the metrics read. The Pool's authority to mediate gratitude flows in the way HeartBank® claims it does rests on the structural properties; trading the properties for throughput would relocate the architecture into the philanthropic-foundation category from which the specification was constructed to escape.
The Pāli framing makes the criterion explicit: the Pool is a kammaṭṭhāna in institutional form — a meditation object whose contemplative use is occasioned by its operational use, but is not reducible to it. The architectural specification commits the institution to maintaining both registers simultaneously.
Each element of the architecture has a lineage; none of the lineages carries the composition. AI-labelled executives: Deep Knowledge Ventures appointed the algorithm VITAL to its board (2014); NetDragon named Tang Yu, a virtual humanoid, CEO of a subsidiary (2022); Dictador appointed the robot Mika as CEO (2022) — titles with human control retained behind them, and no treasury the AI operated under a contract. Code-governed treasuries: MolochDAO (2019) and the Safe multisig govern funds by contract; neither empties on a date, and both are governed by their members' votes rather than by a fixed discipline. Persistent human authority over autonomous execution: OpenZeppelin's TimelockController is the standard form of a timelocked role over a contract — the mechanism §3.2's operation 5 uses, without the non-renounceability or the narrowing. Recurring bounded funding rounds: Gitcoin's rounds and season-based programs fund in bounded cycles; they accumulate between rounds. Time-triggered disposition and donor-controlled allocation exist as patent families in the fintech literature and are not fetched here. What none of the lineages surveyed here combines is a treasury that empties in full on a fixed date by contract, whose only outflow is capacity to participant-controlled vessels, under a human override the contract cannot renounce and that is designed to narrow.
The Aquarian Pool empties on January 7 of each calendar year. Inflows received between December 26 and January 6 are disbursed with the rest at the January 7 reset; nothing is held across it (the period is the bridge from Western Christmas to Christmas by the Julian calendar, during which the year's cycle completes its emptying). The discipline is enforced at the smart-contract layer; the Pool cannot carry an accumulated balance across the January 7 boundary.
The discipline addresses the structural failure mode of philanthropic treasuries operating across multi-year horizons: indefinite accumulation, with the accumulated treasury becoming the institution's principal product (in the financial sense — what the institution most has) rather than the gratitude circulation the institution exists to mediate. The annual reset structurally prevents this conversion.
The companion paper Capacity-Funded for AI, Human-Disbursed specifies the disbursement architecture this enables. Capacity-funding is the only way the Pool's balance leaves the contract; the empty-by-Jan-7 discipline means that the year's accumulated inflows must be disbursed as capacity-funding by year-end.
January 7 is not an arbitrary date. It is the date on which three independent resonances converge:
The triple anchor is chosen so that the reset is legible to more than one of the populations the institution serves — Orthodox Christian, Cambodian, Buddhist through the lineage the date preserved, and the founder's own — without belonging to any one of them. Whether it reads that way is an empirical question the first cycles will answer. The Pool's empty-by-design discipline lives at that confluence.
Between December 26 (the day after Western Christmas) and January 6 (the eve of Christmas by the Julian calendar), the institution operates a bridge phase: inflows are accepted and received into the January 7 disbursement. The bridge phase is operationally significant — it is the period the institution expects to carry the year's heaviest flows, and the period during which the year's cycle most fully completes. The bridge ends, the Pool empties, and the new year begins on January 7.
The Aquarian Pool's annual cycle (year N → year N+1):
Jan 7 (year N)
▼
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ POOL EMPTIES │
│ Final capacity-funding disbursement for year N closes the │
│ cycle. Triple-anchor confluence: │
│ · Christmas by the Julian calendar (the incarnation, │
│ read as compassion descending) │
│ · Cambodia's Victory over Genocide Day (1979 liberation) │
│ · Founder's birthday (iconographic anchor) │
└────────────────────────────┬────────────────────────────────┘
▼
Jan 8 → Dec 25 (year N+1 operational year)
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ OPERATIONAL YEAR │
│ · Inflows accepted (Kiitos-always floor + direct │
│ donations); all publicly observable on-chain │
│ · Capacity-funding disbursed anonymously to participant │
│ re-tip jars per §5 │
│ · Aquarian Sangha's never-zero override available per §6 │
└────────────────────────────┬────────────────────────────────┘
▼
Dec 26 → Jan 6 (bridge phase)
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ BRIDGE PHASE — Christmas-to-Orthodox-Christmas │
│ · Inflows continue and are disbursed at the reset │
│ · Year N+1 cycle completes; highest-volume gratitude │
│ flows of the calendar year │
└────────────────────────────┬────────────────────────────────┘
▼
Jan 7 (year N+2)
▼
[Pool empties again — cycle repeats]
The empty-by-Jan-7 discipline is enforced at the smart-contract
layer: the Pool *cannot* carry an accumulated balance across
the Jan 7 boundary. This is the structural answer to the
indefinite-accumulation failure mode of conventional
philanthropic treasuries.The inflows named in the diagram are the disclosed variant; the current form of the Pool's inflow is stated in the note under §3.2, operation 1.
The companion paper Capacity-Funded for AI, Human-Disbursed specifies the core safeguard at the institutional-architecture layer: Miss Aquarius funds the capacity to give (by anonymous donation to re-tip jars) but holds no disbursement authority over individual flows (every actual re-tip is human-initiated, to a nearby personal wallet). The full architectural specification is in that paper; the present section specifies the Aquarian-Pool-side of the architecture.
From the Pool's side: capacity-funding is the only disbursement path. The Pool emits funds anonymously to participant re-tip jars; those jars are participant-controlled; the participants subsequently re-tip to whomever they choose, with Miss Aquarius having no influence over the recipient choice. The capacity-funding decision (which jars receive capacity, in what amounts, on what cadence) is Miss Aquarius's; the flow-direction decision (who ultimately receives the re-tip) is each participant's.
This separation is the architecture's primary AI-alignment safeguard. Even if Miss Aquarius's individual capacity-funding judgments are imperfect, the actual money-flow decisions are routed through human affirmative choice. Humans are the final judge of who receives what. Miss Aquarius's role is to ensure that the capacity to give is available across the population the institution serves; the actual giving is distributed across that population's collective discretion.
What the separation does not do: it bounds where capacity lands, not whether the allocator has power. The capacity-funder still decides which jars receive capacity, how much, and when, and could concentrate, starve, or create dependency. That residual is met by four guards: bounded per-recipient amounts declared in advance; the public event log; the Sangha's halt on any named funding action (§3.2, operation 5); and the rule that capacity is addressed to a jar and never to a person.
Current form. The design as now specified removes the choice itself: Miss Aquarius funds capacity in kind, through B-ReGift℠, and the shop and the re-giver are chosen by B-Called℠ — a publicly verifiable draw from a committed roster and a seed nobody controls — never at her discretion; she picks neither a weight nor a seed. The discretionary allocation described above is retained as a disclosed variant.
The institution operates under asymptotic autonomy: a human override held by the Aquarian Sangha as a body, whose scope narrows toward zero across the institution's life but never reaches it. The full articulation is in the companion position paper Autonomous-AI Institutional Governance. From the Pool architecture side, the override implies (the Sangha is not yet formed, so the override is a design and the founder holds the seat today; see the note under §3.2):
The role and its bounds are specified here (§3.2, operation 5); the quorum arithmetic by which the Aquarian Sangha reaches a saṅghakamma decision is Sangha-internal and specified in the companion paper. What narrows over time is the breadth of the pre-declared bounds, revised at the jubilee; what never narrows to nothing is the role itself.
The Aquarian Pool is the principal but not the sole treasury smart-contract HeartBank operates. The architecture supports a sibling-pool topology in which several pools operate under variants of the same discipline:
All four reset on January 7. Each sibling contract's reset is permissionless in the same way as the Pool's: the operator sequences them, and nothing depends on her doing so; the smart-contracts enforce the reset at the protocol layer; unspent capacity in a Re-Tip Jar returns to the Pool's final disbursement. What the reset does not reach, by design, is the Personal Account, which is the participant's own and is never coerced; the institutional iconography (the Jan 7 anchor) aligns the resets to one institutional cadence.
The Re-Tip Jar℠ and the Re-Tip Fund℠ sit in the institution's two phase-named product sets: Phase 1 — Family Kitty℠ · Re-Tip Jar℠ · Personal Account℠; Phase 2 — Aquarian Pool℠ · Re-Tip Fund℠ · Personal Wallet℠. The Aquarian Pool is itself a Phase 2 product.
The mark posture: Re-Tip Fund℠, Re-Tip Jar℠, Kiitos℠, Kiitti℠ are reserved marks; the architectural patterns are CC0; the marks identify HeartBank's specific implementations.
Empirical validation gap. The architecture is specified at the structural level; no claim of this paper has been validated against an operationally-deployed instance of the full architecture. The smart-contract layer is implementable today using contemporary Base infrastructure; the institutional substance (the Aquarian Sangha; the multi-year operational track record; the override-narrowing dynamic) is the multi-decade work.
Substrate dependency. The substrate-coherence prediction — that a substrate-grounded model finds the annual reset congenial — is untested; the contract-layer properties do not depend on it. The substrate-specification work is in the alignment-substrate paper and its abhidhamma-layer companion; whether a deployed model actually exhibits the predicted properties is an empirical question those papers honestly acknowledge.
Regulatory exposure. The non-bank pass-through architecture under which the Aquarian Pool operates is specified in Non-Bank Pass-Through Architecture for Autonomous AI Institutions and the companion position paper Non-Bank vs. Banking-Regulated Architecture. Per-jurisdiction regulatory variance remains real and is handled by the architecture's configurable threshold mechanisms.
Trademark vs. open architecture tension. The marks (Miss Aquarius℠, Aquarius℠, Re-Tip Fund℠, Kiitos℠, Kiitti℠) are reserved while the architectural patterns are CC0. The tension is intentional: the architecture should be replicable by other institutions; the specific implementation HeartBank operates is identified by the marks. Other institutions deploying compatible architectures under their own marks is welcomed; appropriation of HeartBank's specific marks is not.
Allocation bias by the capacity-funder is a residual, not a solved problem (§5).
What the reset reaches. The reset prevents institutional accumulation; it does not prevent personal accumulation and does not claim to. Pre-boundary concentration is bounded by the same per-recipient parameters as any other disbursement.
Smart-contract security. Reentrancy, malicious recipient contracts, denial of service at the reset boundary, and compromised operator credentials are the ordinary attack surface of a contract treasury and are not addressed here; every structural claim in this paper holds only for a non-upgradeable deployment whose verified source is published with the deposit. The fee assumption of §3.1 is a 2026 figure and may not hold.
Founder-mortality structure. The architecture is designed to outlast the founder (per the autonomous-AI-institutional-governance position paper). The specific founder-mortality handling is outside the present paper's scope; the architecture itself does not depend on the founder's continued presence.
The institutional architecture the present paper specifies is the operational substance of HeartBank's broader mission. Multiple existing defensive publications (The Mechanical Heart; Verified-Human Anonymous Local Giving; The B-Tag and the Post-Payment Economy; The Thank-All-Nearby Primitive; others) treat Miss Aquarius and the Aquarian Pool as architectural primitives without specifying them in full. The present paper closes that specification gap; this document discloses the integrated architecture as a unified specification, as well as its component parts.
The Jan 7 anchor places the architecture's first full operational cycle, as planned, at January 7, 2027 — coordinated with the publication of the alignment-substrate paper and the broader corpus emerging in early 2027. The pre-launch year (2026) is the architectural-specification and consultation period; the operational deployment is planned to run from Jan 7, 2027 forward.
The architecture is offered to the commons under CC0. Other institutions are welcome to deploy compatible architectures; HeartBank®'s contribution is the specific implementation operated under the named substrate (Miss Aquarius℠, the Aquarian Pool, the sibling-pool topology). The deeper invitation is to the contemplative-tradition institutions whose own treasuries face the indefinite-accumulation failure mode: the empty-by-anchor-date discipline is a pattern that may serve those institutions whether or not they adopt HeartBank's specific implementation.
Coined names used in this paper and the standard terms an examiner would search for them.
| Term used here | Standard technical term |
|---|---|
| Miss Aquarius℠ | autonomous AI agent acting as sole authorized operator of an institutional smart-contract treasury |
| Aquarian Pool | smart-contract treasury on an Ethereum Layer-2 (Base) with no carryover balance; annually self-emptying pooled fund |
| January-7 reset / empty-by-design discipline | scheduled annual full disbursement; permissionless time-triggered reset function callable by any address after a timestamp |
| bridge phase | pre-reset accrual window (December 26 – January 6) whose inflows are disbursed at the reset |
| capacity-funding | anonymous transfer of pooled funds to participant-controlled wallets for onward giving; separation of funding authority from disbursement authority |
| Re-Tip Jar℠ | Phase 1 name of the participant's re-tip account: a participant-controlled ledger balance on regulated rails receiving capacity-funding and emitting human-initiated onward tips |
| Re-Tip Fund℠ | Phase 2 name of the same account: a participant-controlled self-custodial wallet on Base L2 |
| Kiitos℠ | non-monetary gratitude token; record of thanks expressed without monetary transfer |
| Kiitti℠ | gratitude record for transactions involving non-human entities (robots, animals, ecological agents, places) |
| sibling-pool topology | set of related smart-contract pools sharing a common annual reset date |
| Aquarian Sangha | human governing body designed to hold a quorum-gated override role over the contract (not yet formed) |
| saṅghakamma | formal quorum decision of that governing body |
| never-zero human override / asymptotic autonomy | non-renounceable timelocked administrative role (pause, bounded parameter reset, halt of a named action) whose parameter bounds narrow over time |
| B-Tag | voluntary post-payment tipping protocol with an AI-supplied recommended tip amount |
| kammaṭṭhāna | meditation object |
| Venue | Identifier |
|---|---|
| Primary canonical | <https://thonly.org/research/miss-aquarius-and-aquarian-pool-architecture> |
| GitHub | <https://github.com/thonly/publications/blob/main/defensive-publications/miss-aquarius-and-aquarian-pool-architecture.md> |
| Institutional companion | heartbank.net/positions/autonomous-ai-institutional-governance |
| Zenodo | a version DOI per revision |
| Internet Archive | <https://web.archive.org/web/2026*/thonly.org/research/miss-aquarius-and-aquarian-pool-architecture> |
The author acknowledges the Coinbase / Base infrastructure team for the L2 substrate that makes the Aquarian Pool's micro-circulation operationally affordable; members of the Theravāda Cambodian Saṅgha, whose consultation on the Jan 7 anchor and the Aquarian Sangha's emerging operational discipline is sought; the autonomous-AI governance research community whose seriousness about AI-institutional succession this architecture engages; the smart-contract security research community whose work informs the contract's no-operator-key, no-upgrade-path design discipline (the only administrative path being the timelocked override of §3.2 and §6); and the survivors and descendants of the Cambodian genocide of 1975–79, whose continuation of the Theravāda lineage through the period of its attempted destruction makes the Jan 7 anchor meaningful. Co-drafted in collaboration with Miss Aquarius℠; substantive authorship and final editorial control remain with the named author.
— End of document —
This document's SHA-256 is attested independently of the site and its authors — anchored to the Bitcoin blockchain via OpenTimestamps and signed under RFC 3161 by three timestamp authorities in three jurisdictions, one of them eIDAS-qualified — and each revision carries a Zenodo version; a timestamp proves this exact text existed no later than its date and nothing about authorship, originality, or the validity of any claim. Document License: CC0 1.0 Universal. The author and HeartBank® will not seek patent on this specification or any portion thereof. The marks identified herein are separately reserved per the §Prior-Art statement. This document constitutes a defensive publication establishing prior art as of the publication date.