During DevCon, DeSci suddenly became a buzzword. A little bit of twitter controversy around funding mechanisms, a picture of two crypto billionaires around a panel on the topic, and a meme is made.

I first picked up DesSci as a concept at Zuzalu, a “network state” style co-living experiment in Montenegro. I met an emerging community on the fringes of academic topics in NY, and some people with a vague notion of supporting scientific advancement through an ICO type of incentive mechanism. The concept was raw, but the mission was clear.

The modern scientific system is broken — major findings are locked behind expensive paywalls, young researchers struggle to secure funding, established institutions monopolize resources, and the pressure to "publish or perish" has created a culture that values headlines over breakthroughs.

Instead of pushing the boundaries of human knowledge, scientific researchers spend half their careers writing grant proposals and jumping through bureaucratic hoops. It is an endless maze of red tape that favors 'safe' research over innovation, and it is in drastic need of an overhaul.

“Is the point of research to make other professional academics happy, or is it to learn more about the world?” —Noah Grand, former lecturer in sociology, UCLA

Most scientific funding currently comes from either government grants, institutional endowments, private foundations, or corporate sponsorships.

This has several critical flaws:

1. Bias Toward Established Researchers: Established institutions and senior researchers often receive a disproportionate share of funding, leaving younger, less experienced scientists struggling to break through.

2. Bureaucratic Red Tape: Researchers must spend excessive time drafting and submitting grant applications, a process that can take months with no guarantee of success.

3. Focus on Safe Projects: Funding agencies often prioritize "safe bets" with predictable outcomes over riskier, potentially groundbreaking ideas.

4. Lack of Inclusivity: Minority groups and researchers from underrepresented regions face significant barriers to accessing funding.

The failures of the modern scientific system can be visualized best through the "Valley of Death" — a metaphorical chasm that separates early-stage discoveries from mature, market-ready products.

Universities and national laboratories excel in discovery and basic research but often lack the funding or incentives to take their innovations further into applied research or product development.

On the other hand, corporations are driven by profit motives and are reluctant to invest in the uncertain and resource-intensive process of advancing early-stage ideas.

This leaves promising innovations stranded in the valley, unable to secure the resources or support needed to progress.

The result is a graveyard of unrealized potential — breakthroughs in medicine, renewable energy, and countless other life-saving fields never made it past the gap.

Decentralized Autonomous Organizations (DAOs) and Quadratic Funding allow researchers to secure funding directly from investors who believe in their work.

How it works:

1. Researchers propose their study to a DeSci funding platform (operated through a DAO).

2. Patients, doctors, and investors can directly fund the research.

3. Funds are released automatically as milestones are reached.

4. Successful outcomes generate returns for early supporters.

This democratization of funding will enable community-driven investment in neglected research areas, allowing ideas currently being blocked by grant boards to succeed based on their merits.

Blockchain-based publishing platforms make research freely accessible and turn peer reviews from an unpaid afterthought into an integral, rewarded part of the scientific process.

How it works:

1. Research papers are submitted to a decentralized platform.

2. Qualified reviewers stake tokens to participate.

3. The review process is tracked transparently onchain.

4. Reviewers earn rewards for quality feedback.

5. Approved papers are instantly published and accessible.

No more months or years waiting for papers to navigate the labyrinth of peer-reviews and publishing requirements — quality research can reach the world as soon as it's ready.

Token-based funding models and IP-NFTs (Non-Fungible Tokens representing intellectual property) allow scientists to keep control over their discoveries.

How it works:

1. Researchers tokenize their research concept as an IP-NFT.

2. Community members invest by purchasing token shares.

3. Research proceeds with clear ownership rights.

4. Successful discoveries automatically distribute returns to all participants.

This system lets researchers and early supporters benefit directly when their research leads to viable treatments or applications — doing away with the current rigged system of publishers and scientific journals receiving the lion's share of the profits.

Decentralized storage solutions like IPFS and Arweave replace the siloed, paywall-prohibited data repositories of the current system.

How it works:

1. Research data is uploaded to decentralized storage.

2. Access rights are managed by smart contracts (which govern data sharing while still protecting privacy and intellectual property rights).

3. Other researchers can request data access.

4. Data usage is tracked and compensated automatically.

Every experiment, every data point, and every methodology becomes part of a permanent, accessible record of scientific progress.

This transparency also allows for wide-scale reproducibility — no more wondering if a study can be replicated; every step of the research process is preserved and verifiable.

President Trump's appointment of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to lead Health and Human Services (HHS) signals the potential for an overhaul in the department's operations.

Known for his willingness to challenge conventional thinking, RFK is uniquely positioned to embrace technologies that disrupt the status quo.

Blockchain and DeSci are poised to be at the heart of this transformation:

• Research grants issued via blockchain allow the public to trace every dollar from allocation to outcome.

• Global researchers can pool resources and knowledge without the bottlenecks of bureaucracy — blockchain ensures data integrity and ownership.

• Tokenized intellectual property allows research to find funding and scale rapidly (this model aligns perfectly with RFK's focus on breaking down barriers to innovation).

• Data is stored and shared using blockchain technology, making it secure and widely accessible to all researchers.

• Democratized participation. Underserved communities and minority researchers gain access to funding and resources. Blockchain ensures their contributions are recognized and rewarded.

If RFK wants to lead HHS into the future, integrating blockchain and DeSci into research priorities could set a precedent for an open, accessible, and efficient health ecosystem.

“The market for DeSci isn’t just scientists—it’s all of us.” - Paul Kohlhaas, DeSci pioneer.

With the tools and decentralized infrastructure Web3 provides, DeSci is set up to succeed… in theory.

In practice, DeSci lives in a world of memecoins, rug pulls, and pump-driven swing traders.

In fact, a DeSci version of pump.fun has already appeared on Solana (I won't link to it for obvious reasons).

In such a chaotic environment, how can anyone know if the research they're funding is genuine, somewhat peer reviewed, and credible?

Hint: the answer is ZK.

zkTLS merges Zero-Knowledge Proofs (ZKPs) with TLS encryption. This ensures verifiable, private communication while maintaining data integrity.

For DeSci, this means every interaction — whether it's a proposal submission, a funding allocation, or a data exchange — can be encrypted and verified without exposing sensitive information.

Researchers, institutions, and funders can collaborate knowing that their communications are secure and free from tampering.

For example, imagine a group of researchers proposing a bold, untested cancer therapy. Using zkTLS, their communications with funders can remain confidential, but the authenticity of their claims and milestones can still be validated.

This transparency without exposure ensures that backers are supporting legitimate efforts without risking their funds on unverified promises.

zkTLS answers the "what?", but not the "who?"

Who are these researchers? Are they qualified?

zkIdentity solutions — such as ZK-based Self Sovereign Identity (zkSSI) protocols — allow researchers to prove their credentials and expertise without revealing their personal details.

Researchers in politically volatile regions can prove their affiliations and qualifications to funders without jeopardizing their safety or anonymity.

Similarly, whistleblowers or independent scientists can contribute to research projects without the fear of political or institutional backlash.

By ensuring that communication is genuine and credentials are verifiable, ZK can protect Decentralized Science from falling into the same traps as other crypto-fueled trends.

Assuming DeSci overcomes the issues that the crypto market will throw its way, it will still only be at the very start of its adoption journey.

The Decentralization of Science aims to completely overhaul a centuries-old system.

To say there will be heavy resistance is an understatement:

• Regulatory Uncertainty: DAOs and IP-NFTs exist in legal grey areas, token-based funding faces complex securities laws, and privacy regulations aren't designed for decentralized systems.

• Institutional Resistance: Universities don't want to give up their IP control, publishing houses protect their monopolies, and funding bodies will fight against losing their influence.

• Technical Complexity: The steep learning curve of crypto wallets, gas fees, and tokenization creates barriers for scientists more comfortable in labs than Web3.

• Integration Challenges: Current DeSci platforms lack seamless integration with the existing research workflows, tools, and databases that scientists rely on daily.

However, these issues are not just issues for DeSci, but those faced by most emerging fields in Web3. In fact, the broken nature of the scientific system makes DeSci such an attractive option for researchers, it could be a pioneer in overcoming these Web3 hurdles.

As Web3 matures, more researchers will discover the freedom DeSci offers. Science may finally be taken out of the hands of bureaucrats and start being driven directly by those in search of knowledge, discovery, and human advancement.

Head to Level-Up to find the building blocks to start creating your own DeSci tools and products.

During DevCon, DeSci suddenly became a buzzword. A little bit of twitter controversy around funding mechanisms, a picture of two crypto billionaires around a panel on the topic, and a meme is made.

I first picked up DesSci as a concept at Zuzalu, a “network state” style co-living experiment in Montenegro. I met an emerging community on the fringes of academic topics in NY, and some people with a vague notion of supporting scientific advancement through an ICO type of incentive mechanism. The concept was raw, but the mission was clear.

The modern scientific system is broken — major findings are locked behind expensive paywalls, young researchers struggle to secure funding, established institutions monopolize resources, and the pressure to "publish or perish" has created a culture that values headlines over breakthroughs.

Instead of pushing the boundaries of human knowledge, scientific researchers spend half their careers writing grant proposals and jumping through bureaucratic hoops. It is an endless maze of red tape that favors 'safe' research over innovation, and it is in drastic need of an overhaul.

“Is the point of research to make other professional academics happy, or is it to learn more about the world?” —Noah Grand, former lecturer in sociology, UCLA

Most scientific funding currently comes from either government grants, institutional endowments, private foundations, or corporate sponsorships.

This has several critical flaws:

1. Bias Toward Established Researchers: Established institutions and senior researchers often receive a disproportionate share of funding, leaving younger, less experienced scientists struggling to break through.

2. Bureaucratic Red Tape: Researchers must spend excessive time drafting and submitting grant applications, a process that can take months with no guarantee of success.

3. Focus on Safe Projects: Funding agencies often prioritize "safe bets" with predictable outcomes over riskier, potentially groundbreaking ideas.

4. Lack of Inclusivity: Minority groups and researchers from underrepresented regions face significant barriers to accessing funding.

The failures of the modern scientific system can be visualized best through the "Valley of Death" — a metaphorical chasm that separates early-stage discoveries from mature, market-ready products.

Universities and national laboratories excel in discovery and basic research but often lack the funding or incentives to take their innovations further into applied research or product development.

On the other hand, corporations are driven by profit motives and are reluctant to invest in the uncertain and resource-intensive process of advancing early-stage ideas.

This leaves promising innovations stranded in the valley, unable to secure the resources or support needed to progress.

The result is a graveyard of unrealized potential — breakthroughs in medicine, renewable energy, and countless other life-saving fields never made it past the gap.

Decentralized Autonomous Organizations (DAOs) and Quadratic Funding allow researchers to secure funding directly from investors who believe in their work.

How it works:

1. Researchers propose their study to a DeSci funding platform (operated through a DAO).

2. Patients, doctors, and investors can directly fund the research.

3. Funds are released automatically as milestones are reached.

4. Successful outcomes generate returns for early supporters.

This democratization of funding will enable community-driven investment in neglected research areas, allowing ideas currently being blocked by grant boards to succeed based on their merits.

Blockchain-based publishing platforms make research freely accessible and turn peer reviews from an unpaid afterthought into an integral, rewarded part of the scientific process.

How it works:

1. Research papers are submitted to a decentralized platform.

2. Qualified reviewers stake tokens to participate.

3. The review process is tracked transparently onchain.

4. Reviewers earn rewards for quality feedback.

5. Approved papers are instantly published and accessible.

No more months or years waiting for papers to navigate the labyrinth of peer-reviews and publishing requirements — quality research can reach the world as soon as it's ready.

Token-based funding models and IP-NFTs (Non-Fungible Tokens representing intellectual property) allow scientists to keep control over their discoveries.

How it works:

1. Researchers tokenize their research concept as an IP-NFT.

2. Community members invest by purchasing token shares.

3. Research proceeds with clear ownership rights.

4. Successful discoveries automatically distribute returns to all participants.

This system lets researchers and early supporters benefit directly when their research leads to viable treatments or applications — doing away with the current rigged system of publishers and scientific journals receiving the lion's share of the profits.

Decentralized storage solutions like IPFS and Arweave replace the siloed, paywall-prohibited data repositories of the current system.

How it works:

1. Research data is uploaded to decentralized storage.

2. Access rights are managed by smart contracts (which govern data sharing while still protecting privacy and intellectual property rights).

3. Other researchers can request data access.

4. Data usage is tracked and compensated automatically.

Every experiment, every data point, and every methodology becomes part of a permanent, accessible record of scientific progress.

This transparency also allows for wide-scale reproducibility — no more wondering if a study can be replicated; every step of the research process is preserved and verifiable.

President Trump's appointment of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to lead Health and Human Services (HHS) signals the potential for an overhaul in the department's operations.

Known for his willingness to challenge conventional thinking, RFK is uniquely positioned to embrace technologies that disrupt the status quo.

Blockchain and DeSci are poised to be at the heart of this transformation:

• Research grants issued via blockchain allow the public to trace every dollar from allocation to outcome.

• Global researchers can pool resources and knowledge without the bottlenecks of bureaucracy — blockchain ensures data integrity and ownership.

• Tokenized intellectual property allows research to find funding and scale rapidly (this model aligns perfectly with RFK's focus on breaking down barriers to innovation).

• Data is stored and shared using blockchain technology, making it secure and widely accessible to all researchers.

• Democratized participation. Underserved communities and minority researchers gain access to funding and resources. Blockchain ensures their contributions are recognized and rewarded.

If RFK wants to lead HHS into the future, integrating blockchain and DeSci into research priorities could set a precedent for an open, accessible, and efficient health ecosystem.

“The market for DeSci isn’t just scientists—it’s all of us.” - Paul Kohlhaas, DeSci pioneer.

With the tools and decentralized infrastructure Web3 provides, DeSci is set up to succeed… in theory.

In practice, DeSci lives in a world of memecoins, rug pulls, and pump-driven swing traders.

In fact, a DeSci version of pump.fun has already appeared on Solana (I won't link to it for obvious reasons).

In such a chaotic environment, how can anyone know if the research they're funding is genuine, somewhat peer reviewed, and credible?

Hint: the answer is ZK.

zkTLS merges Zero-Knowledge Proofs (ZKPs) with TLS encryption. This ensures verifiable, private communication while maintaining data integrity.

For DeSci, this means every interaction — whether it's a proposal submission, a funding allocation, or a data exchange — can be encrypted and verified without exposing sensitive information.

Researchers, institutions, and funders can collaborate knowing that their communications are secure and free from tampering.

For example, imagine a group of researchers proposing a bold, untested cancer therapy. Using zkTLS, their communications with funders can remain confidential, but the authenticity of their claims and milestones can still be validated.

This transparency without exposure ensures that backers are supporting legitimate efforts without risking their funds on unverified promises.

zkTLS answers the "what?", but not the "who?"

Who are these researchers? Are they qualified?

zkIdentity solutions — such as ZK-based Self Sovereign Identity (zkSSI) protocols — allow researchers to prove their credentials and expertise without revealing their personal details.

Researchers in politically volatile regions can prove their affiliations and qualifications to funders without jeopardizing their safety or anonymity.

Similarly, whistleblowers or independent scientists can contribute to research projects without the fear of political or institutional backlash.

By ensuring that communication is genuine and credentials are verifiable, ZK can protect Decentralized Science from falling into the same traps as other crypto-fueled trends.

Assuming DeSci overcomes the issues that the crypto market will throw its way, it will still only be at the very start of its adoption journey.

The Decentralization of Science aims to completely overhaul a centuries-old system.

To say there will be heavy resistance is an understatement:

• Regulatory Uncertainty: DAOs and IP-NFTs exist in legal grey areas, token-based funding faces complex securities laws, and privacy regulations aren't designed for decentralized systems.

• Institutional Resistance: Universities don't want to give up their IP control, publishing houses protect their monopolies, and funding bodies will fight against losing their influence.

• Technical Complexity: The steep learning curve of crypto wallets, gas fees, and tokenization creates barriers for scientists more comfortable in labs than Web3.

• Integration Challenges: Current DeSci platforms lack seamless integration with the existing research workflows, tools, and databases that scientists rely on daily.

However, these issues are not just issues for DeSci, but those faced by most emerging fields in Web3. In fact, the broken nature of the scientific system makes DeSci such an attractive option for researchers, it could be a pioneer in overcoming these Web3 hurdles.

As Web3 matures, more researchers will discover the freedom DeSci offers. Science may finally be taken out of the hands of bureaucrats and start being driven directly by those in search of knowledge, discovery, and human advancement.

Head to Level-Up to find the building blocks to start creating your own DeSci tools and products.