Skip to main content

Mind (Mind Language)

Mind (Mind Language) — a reference card for a crypto project: what the product does and how verifiable the project’s key claims are; also — alignment with the Decentralized AI thesis (DecAI Fit).

Mind (Mind Language) — an AI/Agents + Infra project on Ethereum, token (symbol: MND).

Disclaimer

Important: this page is a reference overview of the project. Within DecAIHub, we separately record a verification based on open sources within the AI thesis (what is real AI/onchain/why a token, and which sources this is based on).
This is not financial advice and not a recommendation to buy/sell/hold any asset. We do not assess price, returns, or entry/exit timing.
Conclusions are based on publicly available materials found as of the verification date. The absence of confirmation does not imply the absence of the technology.

TL;DR (for readers who are not into AI)

  • What it is: a language/tool for assembling programs from “nodes” + a “chat to program” interface.
  • Who it’s for: developers and users who need a no‑code/low‑code way to describe algorithms.
  • Why onchain/token: the token (ERC‑20) is confirmed onchain; the necessity of the token for the product is not established (no Tier‑1 confirmation found).

How it works (very briefly)

  1. The user does: describes a goal/logic in natural language (in the Mind/MindTrade interface).
  2. The system does: builds a program as a graph of “nodes” (nodes) and links them into a workflow.
  3. The user gets: a visual representation of the program/algorithm and the ability to execute/refine it (per the project docs).
  4. Where the blockchain is: the ERC‑20 token is confirmed onchain; other onchain logic is not established.
  5. Token role (if any): the utility/necessity of the token for the product are not established (no Tier‑1 confirmation found).

Quick links: AI thesis fit

Project passport

Field Value
Project name Mind (Mind Language)
Also known as (aliases) Mind Language; MindTrade; MND
Logo (logo) —
Token symbol (ticker) MND
Category AI/Agents | Infra
Primary chain (chain) Ethereum
Type EVM
Network status mainnet
Consensus (consensus) PoS (Ethereum)
Launch date (launch_date) —
Project status (status) unknown
Token (standard) ERC-20
Token contract 0xa0dd6dd7775e93eb842db0aa142c9c581031ed3b
Token model (token_type) —
Max supply 100,000,000
Issuance fixed (capped)
Tokenomics (tokenomics, brief) Max total supply: 100,000,000 MND (per the network explorer).
Governance —
Admins/keys —
Audit —
Bug bounty —
Team (team) —
Funding (investors/funding) —
AI component (ai_component) graph-oriented language + chat-to-program
Use‑case (use_case) program/algorithm synthesis from text
DecAI Fit — AI thesis fit 2/6 — low alignment with the Decentralized AI thesis
DecAI Fit component summary ai_score 1 / onchain_score 1 / token_score 0 / evidence_score 1
Last verified 2026-02-11

General project overview

Mind describes a “graph‑oriented” approach to programming: a program is assembled from nodes (nodes) with functional code, which are linked into a graph. The project documentation also describes a “chat to program” interface, where the user formulates an intent and the system builds a program in real time.

Features/modules

  • Graph‑oriented program of nodes: a node hides the details of a specific action.
  • Linking nodes into a workflow: assembling “large” programs from small actions.
  • Chat to program: the user describes a goal, the system constructs a program (per the docs).

Typical scenarios

  • Scenario 1: a user describes a task in text → the system creates a graph program.
  • Scenario 2: a user edits/adds nodes → receives an updated workflow.

Getting started (wallet/network)

  • What you need: documentation/access to the application (no Tier‑1 confirmation found of where exactly it runs and whether public access is available).
  • Network/chain: Ethereum — only for operations with the MND token.
  • Fees: Ethereum fees apply to token transactions; use of the application/docs — not established.

Architecture/tech (non‑AI)

  • Components: an offchain application/interface + an onchain ERC‑20 token contract.
  • Participant roles: users (create/edit graph programs); other roles are not established.
  • Where logic runs: application logic — offchain; the token is confirmed onchain.
  • Dependencies: Ethereum RPC (for the token).

Token/economics (expanded, no forecasts)

  • Token utility: not established (no Tier‑1 confirmation found).
  • Protocol necessity drivers: not established.
  • Who pays fees: token users (Ethereum) — applicable to transactions.
  • Where fees go: to the Ethereum network validators (gas).
  • Issuance/burn: capped max supply 100,000,000 (per the network explorer); other details are not established.
  • Security/incentive mechanisms: not established.
  • Distribution and token issuance schedule: not established.
  • Treasury: not established.

Governance

  • Who makes decisions: not established (no Tier‑1 confirmation found).
  • How protocol parameters change: not established.
  • Where decisions are discussed/made: not established.
  • Keys/multisig: —.

Security and incidents

  • Audits: not found (no Tier‑1 confirmation identified).
  • Bug bounty: not found.
  • Incidents: not found.
  • Threat model: not established.

Project status and timeline

  • Current status: the token — Ethereum mainnet; application/product status — not established.
  • Key releases/milestones: not found.
  • Roadmap: not found.

Ecosystem/integrations

  • Integrations: not established (no Tier‑1 confirmation found).
  • Partners: not established.
  • Where it’s actually used: not established.

AI component of the project

  • What is real AI here? The docs describe a scenario where AI helps build a program/algorithm in graph format (“chat to program”).
  • What is truly onchain? The ERC‑20 contract of the MND token on Ethereum is confirmed onchain.
  • Why is a token needed? No Tier‑1 description of the utility/necessity of the token for the product was found.
  • Red flags (based on the information found): token‑washing (the token exists, but its role is not confirmed by Tier‑1); double‑check the whitepaper/docs on token utility and the availability of a reproducible demo.

DecAI Fit component summary

  • DecAI Fit: 2/6 — low alignment with the Decentralized AI thesis
Component Level Score
AI reality low 1
Onchain necessity low 1
Token necessity low 0
Evidence Tier‑1 present 1
Details

AI reality

AI_0 — AI intent (Tier‑1 roadmap) (1/0)

  • AI_0 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): AI is described in Tier‑1 as part of the product (not just intent/roadmap).
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://docs.trade.mindlang.ai/
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): There is a Tier‑1 description of “chat to program”, so this is not a pure intent flag.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

AI_1 — what the AI does (1/0)

  • AI_1 (decision): 1
  • Claim (one line): AI/the system builds a program as a graph of nodes based on a textual intent (“chat to program”).
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://docs.trade.mindlang.ai/
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): The Tier‑1 documentation describes what the system does and what the result looks like (a graph program).
  • Conflict note (if any): —

AI_2 — demos/examples (1/0)

  • AI_2 (decision): 0 Claim (one line): No reproducible App/Demo (Tier‑1) was found.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — —
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): No specific launch/demo was found in the available Tier‑1 sources.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

AI_3 — metrics/quality (1/0)

  • AI_3 (decision): 0
  • Metrics: not found.
  • Context (version/date/how measured): not found.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — —
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): There are no quantitative metrics/benchmarks (Tier‑1) for the quality of the AI part.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

AI_4 — tech description/architecture/versions (1/0)

  • AI_4 (decision): 0 Claim (one line): No technical description of the AI architecture/model versions (Tier‑1) was found.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — —
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): The documentation’s description of the language does not contain model parameters/versions/AI architecture as a separate component.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

Onchain necessity

OC_1 — contracts/addresses/chain (1/0)

  • OC_1 (decision): 1
  • Chain: Ethereum
  • Addresses/identifiers: token contract 0xa0dd6dd7775e93eb842db0aa142c9c581031ed3b
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://etherscan.io/token/0xa0dd6dd7775e93eb842db0aa142c9c581031ed3b
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): There is a verifiable onchain artifact on a public explorer.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

OC_2 — onchain beyond just a token (1/0)

  • OC_2 (decision): 0 What useful logic is onchain: not established (no Tier‑1 confirmation found).
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — —
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): No Tier‑1 description of onchain logic of the product other than the token was found.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

OC_3 — onchain is critical (1/0)

  • OC_3 (decision): 0
  • “Replace the blockchain” test: not established (there is no Tier‑1 statement that the blockchain is critical to a property of the product).
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — —
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): The criticality of the blockchain is not proven by Tier‑1.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

Token necessity

TK_0 — no token (1/0)

  • TK_0 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): The project has a token, MND (ERC‑20).
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://etherscan.io/token/0xa0dd6dd7775e93eb842db0aa142c9c581031ed3b
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): The existence of the token is confirmed by the onchain contract.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

TK_1..TK_4 (1/0)

TK_1 — payment for the service (1/0)

  • TK_1 (decision): 0 Claim (one line): Use of the token as payment for the service (Tier‑1) was not found.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — —
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): There is no Tier‑1 description of the token’s payment utility.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

TK_2 — incentives/collateral/penalties (1/0)

  • TK_2 (decision): 0 Claim (one line): Token‑based incentives/collateral/penalties (Tier‑1) were not found.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — —
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): There is no Tier‑1 description of incentives/slashing/collateral.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

TK_3 — governance (1/0)

  • TK_3 (decision): 0 Claim (one line): Governance utility of the token (Tier‑1) was not found.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — —
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): There is no Tier‑1 source about voting/token holders’ rights.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

TK_4 — token is replaceable (1/0)

  • TK_4 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): The replaceability of the token is not established (there is no Tier‑1 description of the role of the token).
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — —
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): Without confirmed utility, the replaceability test cannot be correctly applied.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

Evidence (table)

Tier Source What it proves
Tier‑1 https://docs.trade.mindlang.ai/ Description of “Mind language” and the “chat to program” interface (AI part/product description).
Tier‑1 https://etherscan.io/token/0xa0dd6dd7775e93eb842db0aa142c9c581031ed3b The existence of the MND token (ERC‑20) and the onchain contract on Ethereum; max supply (capped) 100,000,000.
Tier‑1 — No Tier‑1 source for claim “utility/necessity of the token for the service” was found.

No comments to display

Back to top