Comparison of the three AI ecosystems of BAS

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

This is also a question that I have been observing and thinking about during this period.

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

But objectively, I think all three of them are under a lot of pressure. This pressure is not coming from Web 3, but from traditional Web 2.

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

But looking at the current results, AI can produce such applications on its own without the need for Crypto----------a considerable number of AI applications developed by startup teams in Web 2 have generated substantial cash flow, leading VCs to invest round after round, with major companies acquiring one after another.

These AI applications don't need Crypto at all.

In contrast, regarding the AI Agents incubated in the crypto ecosystem, whether it is Virtual, Creator.bid, or Clanker, can we name any specific AI Agent that has generated substantial profits and cash flow up to now?

I thought about it carefully, but I couldn't come up with anything. All I could think of were AI Agents that are popular but not profitable, well-known and highly regarded, but what about profitability? What about cash flow? I know nothing.

There may be some, but I estimate that the profits and cash flow generated are hardly comparable to the competitors in Web 2. Moreover, even if there are, they are likely mostly generated through transaction fees, with very little coming from actual user payments for services.

I remember that some time ago, there was an AI Agent participating in crowdfunding on Virtual that was already profitable in Web 2. It aimed to expand its user base and hoped to extend its reach into Web 3, which is why it initiated crowdfunding on Virtual. Essentially, it is still a Web 2 AI Agent.

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

This situation cannot help but make one break out in a cold sweat.

Nevertheless, is it possible for the AI + Crypto track to produce AI applications that can generate profit and cash flow?

I have always believed there is.

Recently, the CEO of Teda made a statement believing that AI Agents cannot apply for bank accounts, while the permissionless feature of crypto assets perfectly meets the needs of AI. He also believes that within 15 years, there will be 1 trillion AI Agents using crypto assets for transactions globally.

I completely agree with this point of view, and I shared similar views in my earlier articles.

In my opinion, the core of this perspective is that blockchain technology can expand the scale of AI applications to an immeasurable extent, thereby generating immeasurable profits and cash flow.

Based on this viewpoint, I judge that the criteria for the three projects, Virtual, Creator.bid, and Clanker, are three:

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

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

Thirdly, do the projects have AI Agents that can generate profit and produce cash flow.

Let's first look at the first standard.

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

Currently, among the three ecosystems of Virtual, Creator.bid, and Clanker, only Virtual's ACP is making efforts in this direction, while the other two ecosystems do not show this trend at the moment.

So from this standard, among these three ecosystems, the one I am most optimistic about is Virtual.

Now let's look at the second standard.

If profitable AI Agents do not emerge in batches in the AI + Crypto space, and only a few AI Agents can achieve substantial profits and cash flow, it will ultimately become difficult to create a thriving ecosystem. This will only temporarily boost the platform token. Once the excitement fades, things will return to calm.

From this standard, among these three ecosystems, Virtual goes without saying, this is its direction of effort.

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 much impact they can have.

Additionally, Creator.bid seems to serve the Bittensor ecosystem, so whether this ecosystem can ultimately succeed likely depends on Bittensor. The Bittensor team has been operating for quite some time, and during this period, it doesn't seem to have any particularly outstanding features, so it's difficult to judge what the future holds.

Clanker, on the other hand, feels more like a geek club of mixed elements. The projects inside include both AI Agents and some miscellaneous tokens, with a theme that is not very focused and rather scattered. The participants are filled with idealism, showcasing avant-garde creations and bold ideas, but they seem somewhat disconnected from reality, making it difficult to spread to ordinary players. Such an ecosystem is likely to struggle with growth in scale, or rather, it may not be able to grow rapidly compared to Virtual and Creator.bid.

Therefore, from this standard, the only ones I am relatively optimistic about are Virtual and Creator.bid. Among these two, I am more optimistic about Virtual.

Finally, we look at the third standard.

In the AI + Crypto sector, the real breakthrough 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 powerful 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 Agents that show this potential?

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

However, I always maintain a cautious attitude towards this type of AI Agents, and I have not participated in the new offerings of some of the top AI Agents.

I actually think that some AI Agents that can genuinely create use cases in real life and truly make users willing to pay for services may have more hope. However, the current scale of these AI Agents is still very small, and the actual effects are not yet visible.

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

Even if the first two are done well, it is at most "doing what one can"; the last one is more like "leaving it to fate"----- this point cannot be grasped by any of the three projects. So it cannot be judged, only waited for.

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 can only be seen based on future developments.