Skip to content

Master: World Compute — complete functional implementation #57

@jeremymanning

Description

@jeremymanning

Overview

This master issue tracks ALL remaining work needed to achieve a fully functional implementation of World Compute as described in the whitepaper and specifications. It was generated from a comprehensive codebase audit on 2026-04-16 that identified every TODO, stub, placeholder, missing test, and unimplemented feature.

Current State

  • 94 source files, 489+ passing tests, 20 library modules
  • All 5 CLI command groups functional
  • Core infrastructure implemented: WASM sandbox, Ed25519 verification, certificate chain validation, identity verification, transparency logging, OTLP telemetry, NAT detection, Raft consensus, Firecracker/Apple VF drivers
  • Specs 001 (core), 002 (safety hardening), 003 (stub replacement) complete

What Remains

The gap between "stubs replaced" and "functional distributed system" is substantial. This issue organizes remaining work into 28 sub-issues across 7 categories.


Category 1: Core Infrastructure Depth (code TODOs)

These address TODO comments found in the source code — structural implementations exist but cryptographic/runtime depth is missing.

Category 2: Security and Adversarial Testing

Category 3: Test Coverage

Category 4: Platform Adapters

Category 5: Runtime Systems

Category 6: User-Facing Features

Category 7: Operations and Documentation

Category 8: Distributed Mesh LLM (Major Feature — from #27)

This is the largest single feature. It encompasses the distributed router, expert node management, sparse logit aggregation, self-prompting agent loop, action tier safety system, and governance kill switch. It has a phased rollout (Phase 0-1: centralized model → Phase 4: full distributed autonomy) and requires ~280+ GPU nodes for minimum viable distributed operation.

Category 9: Validation Milestones


Recommended Execution Order

Phase A: Infrastructure Depth (spec 004)

Issues: #28, #29, #30, #31, #32, #33, #34, #45, #55, #56
Why first: These address real TODOs in production code. Without these, the system accepts attestations without full verification, can't enforce containment, and can't run real multi-node scheduling.

Phase B: Security Hardening (spec 005)

Issues: #35, #46, #47, #53
Why second: Principle I (Safety First) requires these before any external deployment. Adversarial tests validate that sandbox boundaries hold.

Phase C: Test Coverage + Validation (spec 006)

Issues: #36, #51, #42
Why third: Principle V (Direct Testing) requires real-hardware validation before any release phase gate.

Phase D: Runtime Systems (spec 007)

Issues: #44, #49
Why here: Credit decay and storage GC are needed for sustained operation but not for initial testing.

Phase E: Platform Adapters (spec 008)

Issues: #37, #38, #39, #52
Why here: Adapters extend reach but aren't required for core functionality.

Phase F: User-Facing Features (spec 009)

Issues: #40, #43, #48, #50, #41
Why here: GUI, web dashboard, documentation, and deployment infrastructure for public-facing operation.

Phase G: Mesh LLM (spec 010)

Issue: #54
Why last: Requires a functioning cluster with 280+ GPU nodes. Phase 0-1 (centralized model) can start earlier but distributed operation requires the full stack.


Existing Issues Addressed by This Plan

Issues #7-#26 (spec 003 stub replacement) will be closed when spec 003 PR merges. Issue #5 (proof-of-personhood providers) is covered by the identity verification already in place. Issue #27 (distributed LLM) is superseded by #54.

Metrics

  • Current: 489+ tests, 94 source files, 15 in-code TODOs, 8 ignored adversarial tests
  • Target: 700+ tests, 12 untested modules → 0, 0 TODOs, 0 ignored tests, all validation milestones passing

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    No labels
    No labels

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

    Milestone

    No milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions