# Subnet Articoli collegati

Il Centro Notizie HTX fornisce gli articoli più recenti e le analisi più approfondite su "Subnet", coprendo tendenze di mercato, aggiornamenti sui progetti, sviluppi tecnologici e politiche normative nel settore crypto.

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.

marsbit04/15 08:59

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

marsbit04/15 08:59

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

The article presents a critical analysis of Bittensor (TAO), a decentralized AI marketplace, comparing its economic model to Elon Musk's early investment in OpenAI, where funders have no guaranteed return. TAO acts as a funding layer, distributing tokens to subnet operators (akin to labs or researchers) based on their subnet token performance. However, subnets are under no obligation to return any value—such as AI models, data, or services—back to the TAO ecosystem. This creates a risk of value extraction, where developers may use TAO incentives for research and then commercialize成果 independently. The bear case highlights the lack of binding mechanisms, potential capital drain through token inflation, and competition from well-funded centralized AI giants. The optimistic view argues that continuous resource needs may naturally retain subnets within Bittensor, leveraging crypto’s ability to aggregate resources at scale, similar to Bitcoin’s success with computation. Ultimately, investing in TAO is a speculative bet on a coordination miracle—where incentives align to keep valuable AI projects within the ecosystem—rather than a traditional equity-like claim on output. The outcome distribution is highly skewed: most scenarios lead to niche use or value leakage, while a few could result in TAO becoming a foundational decentralized AI asset.

marsbit04/14 10:45

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

marsbit04/14 10:45

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

Bittensor, Firmly Ranked First in AI: Technology Evolving, Users Fleeing?

Bittensor (TAO) remains the dominant leader in the AI crypto sector with a market cap of $3.43B, accounting for nearly 20% of the total market. Its core innovation is the "Proof of Intelligence" mechanism, which directly rewards high-quality AI model outputs, differentiating it from competitors focused solely on compute or applications. The project demonstrated strong fundamentals with $43M in real Q1 2026 revenue (non-token incentivized), translating to a P/S ratio of ~20x, which is considered reasonable. A major technical breakthrough came from subnet Templar (SN3), which successfully trained the Covenant-72B model in a fully decentralized manner. This achievement, praised by AI leaders and compared to "modern Folding@home" by NVIDIA's CEO, validated decentralized training at scale using novel solutions like SparseLoCo for communication efficiency and Gauntlet for incentive alignment. The dTAO mechanism further amplified growth, allowing subnets to issue their own tokens backed by TAO. This created a leveraged feedback loop, driving the total subnet ecosystem to a $1.47B market cap. However, risks include heavy reliance on token subsidies masking true service costs, a lack of commercial moat leading to user attrition if subsidies decrease, and potential overvaluation if reported revenue includes internal ecosystem transactions rather than purely external demand.

marsbit04/11 00:15

Bittensor, Firmly Ranked First in AI: Technology Evolving, Users Fleeing?

marsbit04/11 00:15

Covenant AI accuses Bittensor of ‘centralized control with decentralized branding’ amid exit

Covenant AI, a major subnet on the Bittensor network, has exited, citing concerns over centralization. In a statement on X, the team accused Bittensor’s leadership of exercising centralized control while maintaining a decentralized brand. They claimed key decisions, such as suspending subnet emissions and removing community control, were influenced by a centralized authority. Additionally, they alleged the network deprecated infrastructure and applied economic pressure through token sales. This exit has generated uncertainty, highlighting ongoing tensions between decentralization ideals and operational realities in AI-driven crypto networks.

ambcrypto04/10 08:26

Covenant AI accuses Bittensor of ‘centralized control with decentralized branding’ amid exit

ambcrypto04/10 08:26

Why is Covenant AI Fleeing Bittensor?

Covenant AI announced its exit from the Bittensor network, accusing co-founder Jacob Steeves (Const) of centralized control and governance abuses. The team claimed Steeves unilaterally suspended subnet emissions, revoked community management permissions, deprecated infrastructure without due process, and exerted economic pressure through token sales. Covenant AI highlighted its achievement in developing Covenant-72B—a 72-billion-parameter language model trained collaboratively by over 70 contributors on consumer hardware—as proof that decentralized AI training is viable. However, they argued that Bittensor’s governance is effectively controlled by a small group, with Steeves retaining ultimate authority, contradicting the network’s promised decentralized and permissionless nature. The incident sparked community debate, with some critics pointing to Covenant AI founder Sam Dare’s prior sale of 37,000 $TAO tokens. Meanwhile, $TAO’s price dipped amid the controversy. Covenant AI reaffirmed its commitment to decentralized AI and will continue its mission independently, emphasizing that true decentralization cannot coexist with centralized control.

marsbit04/10 03:44

Why is Covenant AI Fleeing Bittensor?

marsbit04/10 03:44

The TAO Subnet Team Praised by Jensen Huang Has Parted Ways with the Founder Amidst a Fallout

Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang recently praised the decentralized AI project Bittensor (TAO) during a podcast, specifically highlighting a 72-billion-parameter Llama model trained collaboratively by a subnet team called Covenant AI. This endorsement initially boosted TAO's price, but the situation deteriorated rapidly when Covenant AI's founder, Sam Dare, publicly announced the team's departure from the Bittensor network. Covenant AI accused Bittensor and its key figure, Jacob Steeves (known as Const), of centralization and abuse of power, contradicting Bittensor’s decentralized ethos. The team claimed that Const exercised unilateral control by halting subnet emissions, removing administrative rights, discarding infrastructure, and using token sales to pressure the team. They argued that Bittensor’s governance is effectively centralized under Const, despite claims of distributed control. As a result, Covenant AI decided to leave, intending to continue its work on decentralized AI training elsewhere. The exit has sparked significant concern within the Bittensor community, raising doubts about the network’s decentralization narrative, technical future, and token value. TAO’s price fell sharply following the news. Const responded vaguely on social media, suggesting the event would push Bittensor toward more decentralized, “headless” subnets, but has not addressed the specific allegations in detail. The incident has damaged Bittensor’s reputation while raising Covenant AI’s profile.

Odaily星球日报04/10 03:08

The TAO Subnet Team Praised by Jensen Huang Has Parted Ways with the Founder Amidst a Fallout

Odaily星球日报04/10 03:08

Grayscale raises TAO exposure from 31% to 43% in latest rebalance – Here’s why

Grayscale has significantly increased its exposure to Bittensor (TAO) in its AI-focused cryptocurrency portfolio, raising TAO's allocation from 31.35% to 43.06% in its latest rebalancing. This move highlights a strong vote of confidence in the AI token, as no other assets were added or removed from the fund. Other holdings like NEAR, FIL, GRT, and IP saw reduced weights, while RENDER posted a slight increase. The growing subnet economy within the Bittensor ecosystem—comprising 128 independent AI-focused networks—strengthens its utility narrative. For instance, Targon Compute, one of its subnets, reportedly generated $105,000 in revenue over the past week, indicating strong growth potential. At the time of writing, TAO was trading at $321.74, up 3.70% daily, with its mid-March uptrend still intact. However, it faces consolidation near the $330–$360 resistance zone. While the RSI suggests bullish momentum, the MACD shows signs of weakness. Grayscale has also filed with the SEC for a Bittensor-based investment product, proposing a trust that would hold TAO directly and potentially convert into an ETF if approved.

ambcrypto04/07 08:10

Grayscale raises TAO exposure from 31% to 43% in latest rebalance – Here’s why

ambcrypto04/07 08:10

Bittensor Goes Left, Virtuals Goes Right: Two Flywheel Paradigms of AI Crypto Projects

The article compares two AI crypto project models: Bittensor's subnet ecosystem and Virtuals' agent-based system. Bittensor uses TAO emissions to incentivize subnets, which compete for daily TAO rewards. Subnets require significant capital to launch (e.g., 871 TAO for a subnet slot) and focus on infrastructure like decentralized computing and AI research. Its ecosystem has high entry barriers, complex onboarding, and targets technical users. Virtuals employs a pump.fun-like model where agent tokens gain value through trading volume, enabling rapid capital accumulation during speculative cycles. It has low entry costs for teams, supports quick iteration via a 60-day trial program, and excels at retail distribution due to its Base chain integration and consumer-friendly concepts. Both models share a liquidity flywheel: demand for subnet tokens boosts TAO, while demand for agent tokens boosts VIRTUAL. Bittensor is infrastructure-oriented with high funding potential, while Virtuals is application-focused, leveraging market momentum for consumer AI agents.

marsbit03/26 09:25

Bittensor Goes Left, Virtuals Goes Right: Two Flywheel Paradigms of AI Crypto Projects

marsbit03/26 09:25

Why analysts believe Bittensor’s ‘income desert’ could trigger TAO rerating

Pine Analytics warns that Bittensor's native token TAO, despite recent significant price appreciation, faces a fundamental risk due to its economic model. The analysis indicates that many of Bittensor's AI subnets, like the top subnet Chutes (SN64), are heavily subsidized by token emissions rather than genuine user demand. Without these subsidies, their services would be 1.6-3.5x more expensive than centralized competitors, completely inverting their cost advantage. The report projects that when emissions halve (estimated late 2026 or 2027), the network will face a critical challenge: either prices for AI services must double, miners will leave due to lower rewards, or the gap between subsidy and actual revenue will widen. This "income desert" scenario, with no verifiable demand data available, could trigger a major reassessment (rerating) of TAO's value as users seek cheaper alternatives and participants exit the network. Despite this bearish fundamental outlook, TAO's market sentiment had recovered to neutral at the time of writing following a substantial short-term price increase.

ambcrypto03/25 05:02

Why analysts believe Bittensor’s ‘income desert’ could trigger TAO rerating

ambcrypto03/25 05:02

活动图片

Industry News

Project Updates