I forgot to mention a point. Previously, Circle primarily promoted the concept of AI payments, which is indeed quite novel. The core idea is to bypass the bank's KYC issues for AI Agents.

It is difficult for banks to directly open accounts for an AI Agent, as the Agent has no legal entity and cannot assume responsibility. However, a stablecoin wallet can allow the Agent to make direct payments, such as purchasing APIs, buying data, acquiring computing power, and calling model services. This was the story Circle wanted to tell at the time.

In the future, there will also need to be dollar settlements between machines, and USDC could become the payment currency in the AI world.

But the problems with this path are also evident. AI Agent payments superficially solve the issue of making payments, but they do not address who authorizes the AI Agent to make payments, what the payment limits are, who is responsible if a wrong purchase is made, who compensates if phishing occurs, whether refunds are possible if a merchant delivers nothing, and what to do if the Agent spends recklessly due to prompt attacks.

This is a problem that banks (credit cards and debit cards) can solve, but stablecoins cannot.

Therefore, the narrative around AI payments has cooled off now (similar to the crawfish phenomenon). Stablecoins can circumvent bank accounts but cannot bypass these payment infrastructures because they are ultimately designed for human use.

To be honest, AI payments do represent a great imaginative space, but there is still much work that needs to be done before moving forward.

免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。