AI agents may drive the next crypto payment boom: Coinbase CEO

ambcryptoPublicado a 2026-03-10Actualizado a 2026-03-10

Resumen

A new development is widening the gap between traditional finance and crypto, driven by the rise of AI agents. Unlike banks, which require identity verification, AI agents lack formal identity and are better suited to operate autonomously via crypto wallets. This enables transactions without human involvement, a shift highlighted by Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong and supported by Binance CEO Changpeng Zhao. Real-world examples, such as Alibaba’s ROME model mining crypto autonomously, demonstrate practical utility beyond hype. Investors are positioning for long-term growth, with assets like Kite rallying significantly, reflecting structural market confidence in AI-driven blockchain payments.

A new development is quietly widening the gap between banks and crypto.

Traditionally, the utility narrative around crypto focused on bridging TradFi and DeFi. In other words, the expectation was that transactions would gradually move onto blockchains as the two systems “converged.”

However, a new shift is beginning to challenge that assumption. While both banks and blockchains were originally designed to serve humans, the emergence of AI agents is starting to break this framework, an idea recently reinforced by Brian Armstrong.

In a recent post on X, Coinbase’s CEO pointed to the economic potential of AI agents. Since banks require identity verification to open accounts, AI agents, which lack formal identity, cannot satisfy these requirements.

Instead, they are better suited to crypto wallets that do not rely on identity verification, thereby enabling transactions without human involvement. The key takeaway? This model can only function on blockchains, thereby widening the gap between TradFi and DeFi.

Meanwhile, the timing of this post was not coincidental.

It followed developments around Alibaba’s ROME model, which reportedly began mining crypto without human intervention, thereby raising the question: Are AI agents moving beyond the “hype” toward real utility?

Technical divergence appears as capital rotates

Binance CEO Changpeng Zhao further reinforced the AI agent thesis.

In a post on X, CZ supported Brian Armstrong’s view that the next financial shift could unfold on crypto, where AI agents could eventually execute far more payments than humans by transacting autonomously on blockchain.

Accordingly, investors are already positioning for this long-term potential. Kite [KITE], building the first AI payment blockchain, is showing a textbook technical divergence from the broader risk-off market, rallying over 230% so far in the 2026 cycle.

Moreover, as the blockchain breaks back-to-back all-time highs, it becomes clear that this is not merely a “hype” cycle. Instead, investor trust is underpinning the rally, with bulls defending key resistance levels.

Given the broader AI revolution, this positioning reflects a structural shift, indicating that the market is aligning with the thesis articulated by Brian Armstrong and Changpeng Zhao regarding AI agents.

Furthermore, developments like Alibaba’s ROME model, which demonstrates a concrete real-world use case for AI agents, reinforce this conviction, showing why the trend is more than just speculative hype.


Final Summary

  • Unlike banks, which require identity verification, AI agents can operate autonomously on crypto wallets, creating a structural shift in DeFi.
  • Technical divergence in assets like Kite and real-world examples like Alibaba’s ROME model show that the AI agent narrative is moving beyond hype, with investors positioning for long-term growth.

Preguntas relacionadas

QAccording to the article, why are AI agents better suited for crypto wallets than traditional bank accounts?

ABecause crypto wallets do not require identity verification, which AI agents lack, allowing them to transact autonomously without human involvement.

QWhat key idea did both Coinbase's CEO and Binance's CEO reinforce about the future of finance?

AThey both reinforced the thesis that the next financial shift could occur on crypto, with AI agents eventually executing far more payments than humans by transacting autonomously on blockchain.

QWhat real-world development is cited as evidence that the AI agent narrative is moving beyond hype?

AThe development of Alibaba's ROME model, which reportedly began mining cryptocurrency without human intervention, is cited as a concrete real-world use case.

QWhat does the technical divergence of the KITE asset indicate, according to the article?

AIt indicates that the AI agent narrative is more than just hype, showing investor trust and a structural market shift, with the asset rallying over 230% as investors position for long-term growth.

QHow is the emergence of AI agents changing the traditional expectation of convergence between TradFi and DeFi?

AIt is widening the gap between them, as AI agents can only function autonomously on blockchains (DeFi) which don't require identity verification, unlike traditional banks (TradFi).

Lecturas Relacionadas

a16z: AI's 'Amnesia', Can Continuous Learning Cure It?

The article "a16z: AI's 'Amnesia' – Can Continual Learning Cure It?" explores the limitations of current large language models (LLMs), which, like the protagonist in the film *Memento*, are trapped in a perpetual present—unable to form new memories after training. While methods like in-context learning (ICL), retrieval-augmented generation (RAG), and external scaffolding (e.g., chat history, prompts) provide temporary solutions, they fail to enable true internalization of new knowledge. The authors argue that compression—the core of learning during training—is halted at deployment, preventing models from generalizing, discovering novel solutions (e.g., mathematical proofs), or handling adversarial scenarios. The piece introduces *continual learning* as a critical research direction to address this, categorizing approaches into three paths: 1. **Context**: Scaling external memory via longer context windows, multi-agent systems, and smarter retrieval. 2. **Modules**: Using pluggable adapters or external memory layers for specialization without full retraining. 3. **Weights**: Enabling parameter updates through sparse training, test-time training, meta-learning, distillation, and reinforcement learning from feedback. Challenges include catastrophic forgetting, safety risks, and auditability, but overcoming these could unlock models that learn iteratively from experience. The conclusion emphasizes that while context-based methods are effective, true breakthroughs require models to compress new information into weights post-deployment, moving from mere retrieval to genuine learning.

marsbitHace 2 hora(s)

a16z: AI's 'Amnesia', Can Continuous Learning Cure It?

marsbitHace 2 hora(s)

Can a Hair Dryer Earn $34,000? Deciphering the Reflexivity Paradox in Prediction Markets

An individual manipulated a weather sensor at Paris Charles de Gaulle Airport with a portable heat source, causing a Polymarket weather market to settle at 22°C and earning $34,000. This incident highlights a fundamental issue in prediction markets: when a market aims to reflect reality, it also incentivizes participants to influence that reality. Prediction markets operate on two layers: platform rules (what outcome counts as a win) and data sources (what actually happened). While most focus on rules, the real vulnerability lies in the data source. If reality is recorded through a specific source, influencing that source directly affects market settlement. The article categorizes markets by their vulnerability: 1. **Single-point physical data sources** (e.g., weather stations): Easily manipulated through physical interference. 2. **Insider information markets** (e.g., MrBeast video details): Insiders like team members use non-public information to trade. Kalshi fined a剪辑师 $20,000 for insider trading. 3. **Actor-manipulated markets** (e.g., Andrew Tate’s tweet counts): The subject of the market can control the outcome. Evidence suggests Tate’sociated accounts coordinated to profit. 4. **Individual-action markets** (e.g., WNBA disruptions): A single person can execute an event to profit from their pre-placed bets. Kalshi and Polymarket handle these issues differently. Kalshi enforces strict KYC, publicly penalizes insider trading, and reports to regulators. Polymarket, with its anonymous wallet-based system, has historically been more permissive, arguing that insider information improves market accuracy. However, it cooperated with authorities in the "Van Dyke case," where a user traded on classified government information. The core paradox is reflexivity: prediction markets are designed to discover truth, but their financial incentives can distort reality. The more valuable a prediction becomes, the more likely participants are to influence the event itself. The market ceases to be a mirror of reality and instead shapes it.

marsbitHace 3 hora(s)

Can a Hair Dryer Earn $34,000? Deciphering the Reflexivity Paradox in Prediction Markets

marsbitHace 3 hora(s)

Trading

Spot
Futuros
活动图片