A reader left a message asking about the advantages and disadvantages of the three ecosystems in the BASE ecosystem: Virtual, Creator.bid, and Clanker.

This is a question I have been observing and thinking about for some time.

First, I want to clarify that I hold all three platform tokens: Virtual, Bid, and Clanker (Tokenbot), so subjectively, I hope they all do well or at least that one of them can succeed.

Objectively, however, I feel that all three are facing considerable pressure. This pressure does not come from Web 3 but from traditional Web 2.

In the crypto ecosystem, when I say I expect an explosion of AI + Crypto, I hope that these two can complement each other to create AI applications that generate real profits and actual cash flow.

But from the current results, AI can generate such applications on its own without needing Crypto—there is already a considerable number of AI applications developed by entrepreneurial teams in Web 2 that have earned substantial cash flow, leading VCs to invest round after round, and large companies to acquire them one after another.

These AI applications do not need Crypto at all.

In contrast, can we name any AI Agents incubated in the crypto ecosystem, whether Virtual, Creator.bid, or Clanker, that have generated substantial profits and cash flow?

I thought about it carefully, and it seems I can't come up with any. The ones I can think of are AI Agents that are well-received but not profitable, with high visibility and attention, but where are the profits? Where is the cash flow? I have no idea.

Perhaps there are some, but I estimate that the profits and cash flow generated are far less than those of competitors in Web 2. Moreover, even if there are, they are likely mostly from transaction fees rather than from real user payments for services.

I remember a while ago, there was an AI Agent participating in crowdfunding on Virtual that was already profitable in Web 2, simply looking to expand its user base and hoping to extend its reach to Web 3 by initiating crowdfunding on Virtual. Essentially, it is still a Web 2 AI Agent.

This is the current state of AI applications in the AI + Crypto track.

This situation is quite concerning.

Despite this, is there a possibility that the AI + Crypto track could produce AI applications that create profits and cash flow?

I have always believed there is.

Just recently, the CEO of Tether expressed the view that AI Agents cannot apply for bank accounts, and the permissionless nature of crypto assets perfectly meets the needs of AI, predicting that within 15 years, there will be one trillion AI Agents using crypto assets for transactions.

I fully agree with this viewpoint, and I have shared similar thoughts in earlier articles.

The core of this viewpoint, in my opinion, is that cryptographic technology can scale AI applications to an immeasurable level, thereby generating immeasurable profits and cash flow.

Based on this viewpoint, I judge the three projects—Virtual, Creator.bid, and Clanker—by three criteria:

First, can the project lead AI Agents to conduct on-chain transactions?

Second, can the project enable AI Agents to form a substantial scale?

Third, does the project have AI Agents that can be profitable and generate cash flow?

Let's first look at the first criterion.

I believe that in the AI + Crypto ecosystem, the core role of cryptographic technology is to enable AI Agents to conduct encrypted transactions on-chain. This is a necessary development direction for AI + Crypto and a unique capability of Crypto that other technologies cannot achieve, empowering AI.

Currently, among the three ecosystems—Virtual, Creator.bid, and Clanker—only Virtual's ACP is working towards this direction, while the other two ecosystems do not show this trend for now.

So based on this criterion, I am most optimistic about Virtual among these three ecosystems.

Now let's look at the second criterion.

If profitable AI Agents cannot emerge in batches in the AI + Crypto track, and only a few AI Agents can achieve substantial profits and cash flow, it will ultimately become difficult to build a thriving ecosystem, and at most, it will only temporarily boost the platform tokens. Once the excitement fades, it will return to calm.

From this criterion, Virtual is undoubtedly working towards this goal.

Creator.bid is continuously trying to optimize its launch mechanism to attract more projects and participants. These improvements are certainly good, but we can only continue to observe how effective they will be.

Additionally, Creator.bid seems to serve the Bittensor ecosystem, so its ultimate success may depend on Bittensor. The Bittensor team has been operating for a while, and during this time, it seems there hasn't been anything particularly outstanding, making it difficult to judge its future.

Clanker, on the other hand, resembles a mixed bag of a geek club. It contains both AI Agents and various miscellaneous tokens, with a theme that is not very focused and somewhat scattered. The participants are filled with idealism, and the innovations are avant-garde and bold, but they seem disconnected from reality and may not easily spread to ordinary players. This kind of ecosystem may struggle to grow in scale, or compared to Virtual and Creator.bid, it may not grow quickly.

Therefore, based on this criterion, I am only optimistic about Virtual and Creator.bid. Among these two, I am more optimistic about Virtual.

Finally, let's look at the third criterion.

In the AI + Crypto track, the real explosive point is AI applications, not Crypto. Crypto acts more like an accelerator and catalyst for AI applications.

With the support of cryptographic technology, AI applications will expand rapidly. However, if there are no strong AI applications/AI Agents that can generate profits and cash flow, they will ultimately become meme coins, and AI + Crypto will be completely finished in this round.

So, is there currently any AI Agent with this potential?

Many participants in the Virtual ecosystem (including the Virtual team) place particular importance on AI Agents that manage hedge funds or conduct trading.

However, I have always been cautious about such AI Agents, and I have not participated in the initial offerings of some top-tier AI Agents.

Instead, I believe that AI Agents that can genuinely create use cases in real life and truly make users willing to pay for services may have more hope. But these AI Agents are still quite small in scale, and their actual effects are not yet visible.

If the first two criteria are like building a nest, then this criterion is about whether it can attract the golden phoenix.

Even if the first two are done well, it is at most "doing one's part," while this one feels more like "waiting for fate"—this point cannot be grasped by any of the three projects. So it is difficult to judge, and we can only wait.

The above shares include both the advantages and disadvantages of these three projects. Overall, I am most optimistic about Virtual, followed by Creator.bid, and lastly Clanker. Nevertheless, all three have significant uncertainties, so I hold all three, and the final outcome will depend on future developments.

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。