# Tokenomics Related Articles

HTX News Center provides the latest articles and in-depth analysis on "Tokenomics", covering market trends, project updates, tech developments, and regulatory policies in the crypto industry.

Behind the $TAO Crash: The Bittensor Internal Strife and the 'Impossible Trinity' of DeAI

The decentralized AI (DeAI) sector is facing a major crisis following a public conflict within Bittensor ($TAO), a leading DeAI project. Covenant AI, one of its top development teams, which recently successfully trained a 72-billion-parameter large language model, announced its exit from the Bittensor network. The team accused founder Jacob Steeves of having "absolute and dictatorial" control over the network, alleging he arbitrarily cut off token rewards to their subnet without transparent governance. This triggered a panic sell-off, causing $TAO’s price to drop 15-25% in a single day and wiping out hundreds of millions in market value. The incident has raised serious questions about the viability of decentralized AI, highlighting a fundamental tension—referred to as DeAI’s "impossible trilemma"—between model quality and scale, credible neutrality of decentralization, and Sybil-resistant incentive alignment. Covenant’s departure exposed the centralized reality beneath Bittensor’s decentralized facade: although the network relies on a Yuma consensus mechanism for reward distribution, key validator nodes are controlled by early investors and the founder, allowing unilateral intervention. The event underscores systemic governance risks that may deter high-quality developers and institutional participants, threatening the entire DeAI narrative centered around trustless, incentive-driven AI development.

marsbit2 days ago 08:59

Behind the $TAO Crash: The Bittensor Internal Strife and the 'Impossible Trinity' of DeAI

marsbit2 days ago 08:59

TAO is Elon Musk who invested in OpenAI, Subnet is Sam Altman

The article, titled "TAO is Elon Musk who invested in OpenAI, Subnet is Sam Altman," presents a critical analysis of the Bittensor (TAO) project. It argues that Bittensor functions as a decentralized AI marketplace where TAO tokens fund AI research via subnets. However, the author highlights a fundamental flaw: subnet operators have no obligation to return any value, such as AI models or profits, back to the TAO ecosystem or its token holders. This structure is likened to Elon Musk's early investment in the non-profit OpenAI, which later commercialized its technology without returning value to its initial benefactor. The bear case posits that Bittensor is essentially a wealth transfer from crypto speculators to AI researchers ("miners"). Subnets can use TAO incentives for development and then take their successful products elsewhere, leaving TAO holders with diluted tokens from inflation and no captured value. The lack of enforced equity or binding mechanisms means the project relies on a "hope" that subnet tokens maintain value. The optimistic perspective counters that two factors could create a successful, self-sustaining economy: 1) AI's perpetual and massive resource needs could incentivize subnets to stay for continued funding, and 2) crypto has a proven ability to aggregate resources through token incentives, as seen with Bitcoin and Ethereum. The conclusion states that investing in TAO is a bet on a博弈论 (game theory) miracle—that soft incentives alone will be enough to keep the best subnets within the ecosystem and create a flywheel effect. This outcome is possible but represents a highly skewed, low-probability success scenario amidst significant risks of failure.

marsbit04/13 14:01

TAO is Elon Musk who invested in OpenAI, Subnet is Sam Altman

marsbit04/13 14:01

Blockchain Games Defeated by Reality, Web3 Doesn't Believe in Dreams

The article "Chain Games Succumb to Reality, Web3 Doesn't Believe in Dreams" discusses the significant downturn in the perceived failure of blockchain gaming. It begins with Solana Foundation President Lily Liu declaring that "blockchain games are dead," a sentiment echoed by Meta's abandonment of its metaverse vision after an $80 billion investment, which shared core concepts with Web3 gaming like virtual worlds and digital asset ownership. Numerous high-profile blockchain games have shut down recently. Examples include "Pirate Nation," which closed after raising $33 million, and others like "Ember Sword," "Nyan Heroes," and "Symbiogenesis," all ceasing operations due to funding shortages or failed token economies. Even well-funded projects like "Wildcard," backed by $46 million from Paradigm, saw their tokens crash shortly after launch. A central issue is misaligned incentives: Web3 games were often funded by investors seeking returns, not players seeking quality gameplay. This led to capital structures driven by speculation rather than sustainable user engagement. Many studios, like Oxalis Games with "Moonfrost," eventually abandoned blockchain elements to release traditional games on platforms like Steam, leaving early investors and NFT holders with losses. Industry reports note a dramatic drop in investment, from peaks of $10 billion in 2022 to just $293 million in 2025, with scams and loss of trust becoming major concerns. Despite the downturn, some industry leaders remain optimistic. They argue for a reset focused on making blockchain invisible to users, prioritizing player retention metrics (like D1, D7, D30 rates) over token prices, using stablecoins for payments to reduce volatility, and leveraging AI to lower development costs. The consensus is that successful games must first meet traditional quality standards, with blockchain providing underlying utility like true asset ownership and open economies—not driving the core experience. The cycle of fundraise, token launch, and collapse may be ending, making way for more sustainable models.

marsbit03/31 13:26

Blockchain Games Defeated by Reality, Web3 Doesn't Believe in Dreams

marsbit03/31 13:26

IOSG Weekly Brief|$PUMP Valuation Breakdown: On-Chain Data Debunks "Wash Trading" Claims, Where Does the Real Discount Come From?

IOSG Weekly Brief: $PUMP Valuation Analysis - On-chain Data Debunks "Wash Trading" Claims, Reveals True Discount Sources Pump.fun, a leading permissionless Meme launchpad on Solana, has become one of the highest-revenue applications on any blockchain. Despite record-high revenues and a 100% revenue buyback policy that has retired 27% of the circulating supply in 8 months, its native token $PUMP trades at ~$0.0019, down ~80% from its all-time high. The report investigates whether this valuation gap is a pricing anomaly or a justified discount. The platform has expanded beyond its core launchpad to include PumpSwap (an AMM DEX), Pump Terminal (a professional trading terminal), and Pumplive (a live-streaming feature), with non-launchpad products now contributing 32.7% of total revenue. A key focus is debunking "wash trading" allegations. Correlation analysis between Launchpad and PumpSwap volumes shows a moderate positive relationship (r=0.579), inconsistent with systematic wash trading. Findings from a University of Pisa study, which analyzed 655,770 tokens, further support this: large, coordinated human buys—not bot activity—were the strongest predictor of a token's success ("graduation"). The ecosystem also recorded a net inflow of 16,000 SOL (~$32M) in one month, structurally incompatible with wash trading, which would result in net zero capital flow. The valuation discount is attributed to three factors: 1) Market skepticism about the sustainability of meme-driven revenues, 2) A lack of institutional coverage and research, and 3) Investor caution regarding long-term execution and vision beyond the meme narrative. The report concludes that while on-chain data validates the organic nature of its revenues, the market's perception and lack of institutional trust are the primary drivers of its current discounted valuation.

marsbit03/30 13:43

IOSG Weekly Brief|$PUMP Valuation Breakdown: On-Chain Data Debunks "Wash Trading" Claims, Where Does the Real Discount Come From?

marsbit03/30 13:43

活动图片