MILAGPT
← All articlesShare:Telegram
The cooperative story

A cooperative by analogy: what Soviet housing co-ops teach us

The best way to explain what the MILAGPT cooperative is — remember how people in the USSR built homes for themselves. No developer, no race for profit — and somehow better quality than the state managed.

July 5, 2026 · The MILAGPT cooperative

A personal starting point

"I'm inspired by the practice of cooperative housing construction in the Soviet Union. This approach made it possible to build quality housing for members — without a race for income, for the good of the members themselves."— Shakhruz Ashirov, founder of MILAGPT

How it worked: the mechanics of a housing co-op

In March 1958 the USSR Council of Ministers adopted Resolution No. 320 "On housing construction and dacha construction cooperation" — and Soviet citizens got a legal way to build themselves a flat without waiting decades in the state queue.

The mechanics were simple and fair:

  • Future residents joined together in a cooperative and paid in a share — a first instalment of about 30% of the flat's cost (20% in remote regions).
  • The state gave the cooperative a loan of up to 70% of the building's cost (up to 80% in the Far North and in mining settlements) for a term of up to 20–25 years.
  • The rate — 0.5% a year. Not 20%, not 24% — zero point five.
  • The building belonged to the cooperative, and the flats were allocated among the shareholders. The residents managed the building themselves.
0.5%annual loan rate for housing co-ops
70–80%of the building's cost was covered by the state loan
~80,000cooperative apartment buildings were started in the first half of the 1980s
7–8%the co-ops' share of housing construction in the USSR (its ceiling)

Why cooperative buildings were better

Everyone who lived in the USSR knew it: a "cooperative building" sounded like a mark of quality. Residents of state-built new blocks finished them off themselves — picking up the trades of painter, plasterer and tiler. In cooperative buildings the quality was noticeably higher.

The reason wasn't technology — the buildings were put up by the same construction trusts from the same panels. The reason was incentives:

A fair caveat: why housing co-ops never went mass-market

We're not idealising this. The co-ops' share never exceeded 7–8% of Soviet housing construction (5.9% by the end of the 1980s): by joining a cooperative, a family lost its place in the free state queue, the share wasn't affordable for everyone, and the number of cooperatives was capped by quotas. In Lithuania cooperatives accounted for 15.9% of construction, in Belarus — 13.6%: where there were fewer restrictions, the model immediately showed itself stronger.

The lesson isn't that cooperatives are a niche. The lesson is that even in a rigidly centralised economy, people united in a cooperative built better and with more care — because they were building for themselves.

The model is alive: Zurich today

Cooperative housing isn't Soviet exotica but a working practice around the world. In Zurich — one of the most expensive cities on the planet — more than 18% of households (about 35,000 of 195,000) live in cooperative flats. 141 active housing cooperatives manage more than 42,000 flats, and rents in them are about 20% below market.

The principle is the same as in the Soviet co-ops: a price "at cost" — it covers the land, construction and upkeep but creates no profit for an outside owner. The value stays with the residents.

Now replace "building" with "AI infrastructure"

The MILAGPT analogy, point by point:

Housing co-op (1958)MILAGPT cooperative (2026)
The building the shareholders live inThe core code and the servers that the AI bot factories run on
The share — a contribution for your own flatThe MILA share — a stake in the shared infrastructure
A state loan of 70% at 0.5%A community-sourced contribution: the members' code, work and money
Residents accept the building fussily — they'll live thereFactory owners develop the core fussily — their business runs on it
Rent at cost, with no developer's marginInfrastructure at cost; 40% of net profit — dividends to members
The building is run by the shareholders' meetingThe cooperative is run by voting: 1 member = 1 vote

The key difference from a corporate platform is the same as between a housing co-op and a developer: a platform corporation builds to make money off you; a cooperative builds so that things work for you. A corporation can raise prices, close an API, "switch off" your business. In a cooperative the infrastructure belongs to those who work on it.

And one more difference — this time from the co-ops themselves: the Soviet cooperative ran into quotas and bans, while a digital cooperative scales without permission. Code, unlike a panel building, copies for free: every new factory makes the core stronger for everyone.

A housing co-op for the AI era

We're building MILAGPT as a housing co-op for the AI era: the community invests in a shared core — factories of smart assistants, servers, knowledge — and owns it together. Without a race for an outside shareholder's income, for the good of the members. Built to last — because it's built for ourselves.

Subscribe · @ashotonline

Sources:
  • Resolution of the USSR Council of Ministers of 20.03.1958 No. 320 "On housing construction and dacha construction cooperation" (in Russian): docs.historyrussia.org · GARANT
  • "Housing cooperatives in the USSR" — Kommersant (7–8% share, mechanics; in Russian): kommersant.ru/doc/1495585
  • Housing construction cooperative — Wikipedia (loan terms, ~80 thousand buildings, 5.9% by the end of the 1980s, Lithuania 15.9% / Byelorussian SSR 13.6%; in Russian): ru.wikipedia.org ru.wikipedia.org
  • "Soviet-style mortgage" — AiF (30% instalment, 0.5%, quality; in Russian): aif.ru
  • Resolution of the USSR Council of Ministers of 19.08.1982 No. 765 (70–80%, 25 years; in Russian): docs.cntd.ru/document/9018370
  • Why Nonprofit Cooperatives Are Thriving in Zurich — Shelterforce (18% of households, 35k/195k, at cost): shelterforce.org
  • Zurich's Cooperative Housing — laos.io (141 cooperatives, 42,000 flats, ~20% below market): laos.io

This is an article from the MILAGPT "Blog" section. Here we take apart the ideas we're building the cooperative on — and sometimes share news. · ← All articles · Home · White Paper

MILAGPT · Tashkent

Want a digital employee like this for yourself?

Write to Mila: she replies in seconds, at any time of day or night.

Write to Mila →
Mila · MILAGPT

Get your own Mila

Tell her about your business in Telegram and she'll help from the very first conversation.

Get your own Mila →
← All blog articles