AI projects are quick to present “huge computing power demand” as a conclusion, but I’d rather ask: Who is paying, and are they buying computing resources or results delivered on time? The former shows that someone needs resources; the latter is closer to product demand. In either case, we need to look at payment, delivery, and repeat purchases. At this point, there’s no material linking these three tokens to customers, revenue, utilization, or progress toward a formal product, so it’s too early to conclude which demand has been validated.
Over the rolling 24-hour period: $TAO +0.04%; $RENDER -1.08%; $FET -4.24%. These are changes in the respective spot prices, not orders, revenue, or computing power utilization. The prices moving in different directions also doesn’t tell us which network has more real customers.
The supply and demand of computing power is one equation: Can resources be matched to tasks, and can the paying party accept the cost? Network incentives are another: Who funds the rewards, what service are they tied to, and will providers stay if the incentives are reduced? Someone providing resources doesn’t mean someone will keep buying them, and successfully running a task once only proves that particular delivery was feasible. Subsidies can attract supply, but they can’t pay the customer’s bill.
Token value also needs to be examined separately: Must services be paid for with the token? Where do the fees go? What practical function does the token serve? Even if someone uses an AI product, its value won’t automatically flow to the token. And growth in a company’s AI business certainly doesn’t directly translate into demand for these tokens. I’m interested in AI, but more than the labels a project uses, I want to see an account that can be verified: Who paid, what did they get, and will they buy again?
Over the rolling 24-hour period: $TAO +0.04%; $RENDER -1.08%; $FET -4.24%. These are changes in the respective spot prices, not orders, revenue, or computing power utilization. The prices moving in different directions also doesn’t tell us which network has more real customers.
The supply and demand of computing power is one equation: Can resources be matched to tasks, and can the paying party accept the cost? Network incentives are another: Who funds the rewards, what service are they tied to, and will providers stay if the incentives are reduced? Someone providing resources doesn’t mean someone will keep buying them, and successfully running a task once only proves that particular delivery was feasible. Subsidies can attract supply, but they can’t pay the customer’s bill.
Token value also needs to be examined separately: Must services be paid for with the token? Where do the fees go? What practical function does the token serve? Even if someone uses an AI product, its value won’t automatically flow to the token. And growth in a company’s AI business certainly doesn’t directly translate into demand for these tokens. I’m interested in AI, but more than the labels a project uses, I want to see an account that can be verified: Who paid, what did they get, and will they buy again?
