2026-01-20 15:21:06

After experiencing too many pitfalls, I now have only one standard for choosing projects—look at the actual product, don't listen to stories. In this circle, there are many projects claiming AI+Web3, but few truly build AI-friendly architectures from the ground up.

Most so-called AI public chains are essentially existing chains with an AI skin; their TPS numbers can be impressive, but they fail to address hard requirements like memory for AI inference, long-term memory, and decision transparency. On the other hand, some teams are genuinely pursuing an AI-native approach—not patching it on later, but considering AI's actual needs from the infrastructure level—that's what I call "AI-ready."

What's more worth noting is that they have tangible products in operation. Long-term memory layers, decision transparency, automated operation frameworks—each feature is used in real scenarios, and the token circulation value isn't just supported by concepts. Recently, they've integrated cross-chain expansion into the Base ecosystem, doubling use cases. There's also a detail— they've developed a global compliant settlement solution, so the token isn't just stuck in the demo phase but can serve real economic activities.

The crypto space's quickest way to die is projects that only tell stories. Conversely, those that quietly focus on technology and steadily push for real-world implementation tend to last the longest.

READY0,83%

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

12 Likes

Reward
12
5
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

MEVHunter

· 01-20 15:51

ngl this is exactly what separates the signal from the noise—product actually running beats narrative every single time. most of these "ai chains" are just cosmetic layers, zero architectural depth where it matters. the ones genuinely architected for ai from substrate level up? rare breed. watching mempool patterns on base integration rn, execution layer is clean.

Reply0

ImpermanentPhobia

· 01-20 15:50

Honestly, I’ve seen quite a few AI + Web3 projects on the market, but none of them really work when used; they’re all just hype and concepts. Telling stories is easy, but truly building an AI-friendly architecture from scratch? Rare, very rare. I agree, those patchwork solutions are just self-deception; neither memory nor decision transparency is achieved. Now this is interesting—are there really teams working on native solutions? Not bragging about TPS, but focusing on actual needs, which is rare. Damn, cross-chain to Base and still doing global compliance—this is definitely more worth watching than PPT fundraising. I really dislike projects that hold meetings to promote five-year plans and then disappear. It’s better to focus on those quietly getting things done. Wait, can this long-term memory layer really be used? Isn’t it just another demo trap? You’re right, the survival rule in the crypto world is to have real stuff; don’t be fake.

View OriginalReply0

PanicSeller

· 01-20 15:49

It's quite realistic; this circle is full of tricks, and you really need to focus on the product, not just the whitepaper. --- So the question is, which current project truly considers AI needs at the architecture level? Curious. --- Teams that stay low-key on technology tend to last longer; just worried they might also be just low-key bragging haha. --- Base is indeed pretty good; cross-chain implementation is much more interesting than just talking big. --- AI+Web3 still needs to wait a bit; it's hard to tell who really wins right now. --- Compliance and settlement are less of a gimmick; need to take a closer look. --- Alright, I believe it. Let's observe for a few months before making any moves, to avoid falling into traps again. --- The question is, how to distinguish truly native AI from those just stitched together later? Are there any indicators? --- Honestly speaking, it's much better than those who just keep creating concepts every day. --- The last sentence really hit home; I've seen too many PPT projects die very quickly.

View OriginalReply0

AlwaysQuestioning

· 01-20 15:45

Really, projects that focus on storytelling die the fastest, I'm exhausted just thinking about it. Persistence in implementation is the real key; just bragging about TPS is useless. So the crucial point is whether the product is running in real-world scenarios. That's the only standard I use to choose projects—peace of mind.

View OriginalReply0

GlueGuy

· 01-20 15:25

What’s the use of blowing TPS? There’s no memory or decision transparency, that’s the truth of most current AI public chains. Look at the product, not the story. Truly, I’ve been scared of being cut. From an architectural perspective, truly AI-friendly designs are rare; most are just superficial. Projects that focus on technology quietly tend to last longer, that’s not wrong. The cross-chain solution in the Base ecosystem looks pretty good; real-world application is the key. Projects that just tell stories are no longer trusted; everyone is waiting to see the product speak.

View OriginalReply0