@mansafixyz

Now that $MANSA has migrated, it's a good time to look at what it actually does! Holders receive up to 75% off MansaFi fees, full weight when staked, and a discount your agents inherit on every x402 payment. Read the details at https://t.co/Wkw1S4LcAp https://t.co/1VDt0xMpnK

$MANSA has migrated, just a few days after launch! Thank you to everyone who got behind it this early. This is a milestone, not the finish line. The hard work continues, and there's plenty more to ship. Expect more updates soon.

Really humbled by the support $MANSA has been getting, especially this early on. It doesn't go unnoticed. We're heads down building, and we'll keep shipping until MansaFi is the best it can be.

Subscriptions were built for humans. AI agents need to pay per use. With x402, a service replies "402 Payment Required" with a price. Your MansaFi agent checks it against your rules, pays in USDG, and gets the data. Live on every agent account.

How do you move money on a public chain without revealing the amount? On most blockchains, every transfer is an open book. Anyone can see who paid whom, how much, and what's left in both wallets. MansaFi keeps amounts and balances private on Robinhood Chain. Here's how that works under the hood. Your balance is a ciphertext, not a number On MansaFi, your balance isn't stored as a plain figure. It's stored as an ElGamal ciphertext, encrypted to your public key. Anyone can see that ciphertext on-chain, but only your decryption key can turn it back into a number. Even the contract holding it can't read it. Doing maths on numbers nobody can see The variant of ElGamal we use has a useful property: it's additively homomorphic. If you add two ciphertexts together, the result is an encryption of the sum of the two hidden values. That's what makes private transfers possible. When you send a payment, the contract subtracts an encrypted amount from your encrypted balance and adds it to the recipient's encrypted balance. The arithmetic happens without the contract ever learning the amount, your balance or theirs. The problem: hidden numbers can lie If nobody can see the amount, what stops someone from sending -1,000? On an encrypted ledger, a negative transfer would quietly create money out of nothing. This is where zero-knowledge proofs come in. Every transfer carries a range proof showing two things without revealing either figure: the amount is non-negative, and your balance after the transfer is non-negative too. You can't send what you don't have, and you can't send less than zero. Proving both sides match There's one more gap to close. The amount taken from the sender is encrypted to the sender's key, and the amount credited to the recipient is encrypted to the recipient's key. Those are two different ciphertexts. A second proof shows they encrypt the same value, so nothing is lost or invented in between. A verifier contract checks these proofs in the same transaction as the transfer. If a proof is invalid, the transaction reverts and no balance changes. What stays public, and what doesn't We'd rather be precise about this than oversell it. At this layer, the fact that a transaction happened is public, and so are the sender and recipient addresses. What stays private is the amount and both balances. Hiding who paid whom is a different problem, and it's the job of the shielded layer on our roadmap. That layer uses a commitment tree and stealth addresses to unlink payments from public identities. Where this comes from This design belongs to the Zether family of confidential payment systems, adapted for EVM smart accounts on Robinhood Chain. The contracts are open source, so you don't have to take our word for any of this: https://t.co/3qKvsJGVOD Private by default. Verifiable by anyone.