Nik McFly
EN
NUMBERS & SOURCES

Where the numbers come from.

A short reference for the business numbers and research mentioned on this site.

Business numbers come from my own records. Research notes link to the original papers. Personal stories are marked as personal stories.

01 · MY OWN CATALOG · INDICATIVE VALUATION

100+ AI tracks · 20M+ streams · $250k indicative catalog value

Updated 1 August 2026
What I say
A catalog of more than 100 AI-music tracks has crossed 20 million streams, generates recurring catalog income, and carries an indicative value of approximately $250,000.
What it means
The value is an income-based estimate for the catalog with 100% of rights retained, using the approach standard in music-catalog transactions. Streams, revenue, and catalog value are separate measures — none of them can be derived from another.
Where it comes from
Our own catalog, distributor, royalty, and income records. A prospective buyer has independently assessed the catalog in the several-hundred-thousand-dollar range. The income-multiple method is standard in music-catalog transactions:Royalty Exchange valuation framework ↗Opulous 2026 valuation methodology ↗
What it does not prove
The catalog is not listed for sale, and no transaction has taken place; this is an indicative estimate, not a formal appraisal. These results reflect my own catalog and do not promise the same outcome for a client.
02 · RESEARCH · NOT YET PEER REVIEWED

What the MIT “Your Brain on ChatGPT” study actually reported

Research status checked 1 August 2026
What I say
In an essay-writing experiment, the ChatGPT group showed the weakest and least connected brain activity of the three groups and had trouble quoting its own work accurately.
What it means
The researchers measured brain activity while people wrote essays. Fifty-four people completed the first three sessions and 18 completed a fourth session.
Where it comes from
Kosmyna et al., “Your Brain on ChatGPT: Accumulation of Cognitive Debt when Using an AI Assistant for Essay Writing Task,” arXiv:2506.08872 (2025).MIT Media Lab summary ↗arXiv preprint ↗Methodological comment ↗
What it does not prove
This was one small study of one writing task, and it has not yet been peer reviewed. It does not prove that using AI makes everyone less intelligent. The earlier “55%” shortcut has been removed from this site because the paper does not support such a simple number.
03 · RESEARCH PAPER

Microsoft Research survey on confidence and critical thinking

Research status checked 1 August 2026
What I say
In a survey of 319 workers, people who trusted AI more reported doing less critical thinking. People who trusted their own judgment more reported doing more.
What it means
The workers shared 936 examples of using AI at work and described how much thinking they used in those tasks.
Where it comes from
Lee et al., CHI 2025, “The Impact of Generative AI on Critical Thinking: Self-Reported Reductions in Cognitive Effort and Confidence Effects From a Survey of Knowledge Workers.”Microsoft Research publication ↗DOI ↗
What it does not prove
This was a survey, so it shows a link rather than direct cause and effect. It does not prove that every use of AI harms thinking.
04 · PAST CLIENT WORK

1,500+ people trained · 25+ AI integrations · 24 businesses / 33 countries

Current site statement as of 1 August 2026
What I say
These numbers come from work done through Hybrain and related AI programs before the current AI Music Strategy service.
What it means
The training number counts people who attended delivered programs. The project number counts work launched for clients, not experiments or social posts.
Where it comes from
Project, client, and program records. Hybrain is linked from the About page.Hybrain ↗
What it does not prove
This shows wider AI experience. It does not show what a client will achieve from an AI Music Strategy session.
05 · PERSONAL HISTORY

Early Bitcoin community and family history

Language clarified 1 August 2026
What I say
Nik describes Bitcoined as, to his knowledge, the first Bitcoin community on Facebook in 2011. The Khrushchev–Kennedy liaison story is family history about his grandfather.
What it means
These are personal stories, not proof of business results. The site labels them that way.
Where it comes from
Personal and family archive. Public corroborating material is incomplete.
What it does not prove
Until a dated archive or independent historical source is published, readers should treat these as first-person and family-history statements.
UPDATES

I update a number when the underlying result changes.

Research notes are updated if a paper changes, is corrected, or no longer supports the wording used here.

Send me a correction →