Where Pascal could be tempted. And what stops it.
Pascal's commercial interest is alignment. Not extraction.
— § 0 · the principle —
§ 1How Pascal makes money
Pascal earns from subscription fees and nothing else. The list below is the complete enumeration of revenue sources Pascal does not use:
§ 2No proprietary trading
Pascal does not run a proprietary trading book. There is no internal Pascal account that trades the same signals before your account does, or that takes the other side of your trades.
The Architect's personal capital, where it exists in Pascal, is deployed under the same Pascal that paying users access — same selector, same strategies, same governance, same execution order. There is no Pascal-internal advantage.
§ 3No information leakage
Aggregate trade telemetry across users — strategies firing, regimes detected, positioning across the cohort — is not sold, shared, or provided to third parties. No exchange, market-maker, or counterparty receives advance signal of Pascal's intended actions.
The decision data Pascal uses internally to improve the architecture is aggregated and anonymised; it is never sold and never identifiable to an external party.
§ 4No exchange kickbacks
Pascal does not receive commission, rebates, referral payments, or any other consideration from the exchanges Pascal supports. Exchange selection is yours; Pascal's supported-venues list is determined by technical suitability — liquidity, API quality, regime fidelity — not commercial relationship.
If Pascal ever enters a commercial relationship with an exchange, it will be disclosed on this page before the relationship begins.
§ 5Tier ordering
Pascal does not execute trades for higher subscription tiers ahead of lower tiers. Execution order is determined by the runtime cycle that produced the signal — not by who pays more.
Where multiple accounts qualify for the same signal in the same cycle, the order in which Pascal places trades is determined by deterministic ordering on the runtime queue, not by tier ranking.
§ 6The Architect's role
The Architect retains final authority on Pascal's protocol ratifications — strategy promotions, governance changes, the operating rubric of the institution. This is the role Pascal's architecture explicitly carves out (read the Governance Model).
The Architect does not trade against users. The Architect does not see individual user trades except for support purposes that the user has consented to. The Architect is bound by the same Custody Statement and Privacy Statement as Pascal itself.
§ 7The institutional layer
The Tier-8 Board and Tier-7 supervisors are part of Pascal. They are not adversarial to user outcomes — they exist to catch architectural drift before it affects user accounts.
Where a governance decision could plausibly deteriorate user alignment, the Board's ratification rubric weights against the change. This is by design: protocol changes that would weaken the user-Pascal alignment fail the Board's review.
§ 8Disclosure of any future conflict
If Pascal ever encounters a structural conflict of interest not addressed on this page, the Architect commits to disclosing it in writing on this page before the conflicting activity begins.
This page is the canonical place to look for current Pascal conflicts. If it does not list a conflict, Pascal does not have it.
Pascal makes money when you keep your subscription. You keep your subscription when Pascal performs honestly.
This document is a working draft. Final legal text will be ratified by regulated counsel before public launch. The substantive principles above reflect Pascal's intended posture.