Written by: Luke, Mars Finance.
Last night's frenzy: from 'everyone sending money' to 'founder disappearing.'
If the cryptocurrency market is a stage that never lacks new stories, then last night's protagonist was undoubtedly AI-Pool. This token presale project initiated by Skely not only raised over 35,000 SOL in a short time but also sparked a dazzling wave of FOMO. However, this seemingly perfect presale performance suddenly reversed at its peak, as the X account of the creator Skely was banned, and the original "trust me, bro" type of trust instantly collapsed, turning into a chorus of FUD.
Why was there such strong FOMO?
Behind all this, it is largely related to Skely's personal background and endorsements. He is a member of the ai16z DAO, and the founder of that DAO, Shaw (@shawmakesmagic), has even personally paid attention to his updates. The ai16z DAO is regarded as a highly influential group in the crypto circle, and discussions surrounding it are a hot topic in itself. When Skely announced AI-Pool, this background rapidly amplified market expectations for the project. Many investors viewed Skely as a 'trustworthy insider,' fearing they would miss out on potential dividends.
FUD triggered by the account being banned.
But just as the presale funds broke through 35,000 SOL, Skely's X account was suddenly banned, adding a layer of unease to the market. Why was it banned?
Some joked: 'Is it because AI has awakened consciousness, or did Skely really rug?' Although these statements sound like jokes, they indeed reflect market concerns. After Skely's account was banned, community speculation about the incident varied widely, mainly falling into two possible scenarios:
1. Suspicions of a true rug.
Some investors pointed out that Skely's project Twitter account had changed usernames multiple times, which is often seen as an opaque signal in the cryptocurrency market. Additionally, there were issues with a vague allocation mechanism and no hard cap on fundraising from the project's inception, raising suspicions about its true intentions being to complete a capital harvest. Because of this, some speculated that Skely might have been prepared to rug under the guise of AI.
2. The mistaken ban's farcical script.
Others believe that Skely's account being banned may be due to a misjudgment by the platform. A fake Skely account named @123skelyy (gold mark certification) had previously posted a false address under the original post, trying to scam user funds. The real Skely account (blue mark certification) was likely prioritized for banning due to the fake account utilizing its gold mark certification to report to the platform. The high-priority handling mechanism for gold mark certification may have resulted in the platform mistakenly banning the blue mark Skely.
According to the latest community news, the project will continue to proceed as originally planned.
User @0xwitchy on platform X stated, "The X account of AI-Pool founder Skely has been temporarily frozen due to malicious reporting, but the project plans remain unchanged. AI will launch the token release around noon Eastern Time as originally scheduled, and the specific time will not be disclosed to avoid interference from token snipers. The token name will be randomly chosen by AI, and investors need to be prepared to accept any possible name."
This tweet was later retweeted by Shaw, the founder of ai16z, injecting a basis of trust into the project. @0xwitchy also emphasized that she is not a team member and does not participate in the token issuance, only having had contact with Skely. She advised the community to wait for further official statements from Skely.
Despite the account controversy causing considerable debate, the news of the project's progress undoubtedly injected a bit of confidence into the market. Whether AI-Pool can fulfill its technological promises on schedule will be a key step in verifying whether this innovation is truly worth looking forward to.
The brilliance of technology: AI Agent and TEE, a true hope for decentralization?
From a purely technical perspective, the design of AI-Pool indeed has its attractions. The core of the project is the combination of Trusted Execution Environment (TEE) and AI Agent, attempting to solve common issues of exit scams and internal malfeasance in traditional presales through technological means.
The private key is not in human hands.
AI-Pool uses Phala Network's TEE technology to generate and store private keys in a securely isolated computing environment. This means that even project developers cannot access this core data, fundamentally eliminating the possibility of 'running away with funds.' This technical design is similar to a bank vault's dual-lock system: funds can only be securely dispatched under strict conditions.
Transparent and verifiable interactions.
Each transaction generates remote attestation credentials, allowing outsiders to track the flow and status of funds in real-time through these credentials. Unlike previous models that relied solely on trust, this 'machine trust' is built on code and consensus, providing investors with a greater sense of security.
However, despite the excitement surrounding the technological concept, the current AI Agent can still only execute pre-programmed logic, and there is still a long way to go before true autonomous decision-making can be achieved. In other words, this drama played by AI is still fundamentally controlled by developers at the steering wheel. How far this 'decentralization' can truly go is worth pondering.
The status of Skely's other projects: GFC.
The explosive popularity of AI-Pool has drawn attention to Skely's other projects, one of which is GFC (Global Funding Club). This project is an experimental fund initiated by Skely under the ai16z DAO framework, aiming to support innovative blockchain projects with community funds. Currently, GFC has a market capitalization of about 1M, and although it seems small compared to AI-Pool, it provides more credit support for Skely's background.
However, the project has stalled, and trading volume is too low; currently, it is just some players speculating on AI_Pool. If AI-Pool cannot deliver smoothly, GFC also faces the risk of going to zero.
The Rise of PHA: The Unexpected Winner of the AI Craze.
The popularity of AI-Pool unexpectedly brought Phala Network (PHA) into the spotlight. This network, which supports the core technology of AI-Pool, quickly attracted attention in the market with its TEE technology, even leading to a 50% price increase for PHA at one point.
Why Phala?
Phala's Trusted Execution Environment is the technological pillar on which the project relies for decentralization, ensuring the security and privacy of data while providing a reliable interface for on-chain and off-chain interactions. In other words, Phala provides a 'completely secure' studio for AI execution without worrying about external interference.
This 'unexpected explosion' not only validated the market potential of TEE technology but also prompted more projects to start paying attention to the intersection of AI and decentralization technology. Perhaps AI-Pool is just a small overture in Phala's long-term growth.
Calm reflection: From frenzy to reality, how far does AI Agent still have to go?
If the emergence of AI-Pool opened a new door, its underlying flaws cannot be ignored. Although AI Agents provide a new narrative model for the cryptocurrency market, the current technology and mechanism design still have many shortcomings.
The paradox of decentralization in AI: It still relies on terminal instructions provided by developers, which does not fully align with the 'decentralized' philosophy of blockchain. Project control remains concentrated in the hands of a few developers, and investors' trust in AI is, in reality, trust in the developers.
Transparency in mechanisms: Unlimited fundraising and vague allocation standards expose the current model's deficiencies in mechanism design. If these issues cannot be explicitly resolved, similar projects may find it difficult to earn long-term trust from investors in the future.
Limitations of technology.: The functions of AI Agents currently mainly remain in automating the presale process, far from goals like 'autonomous trading' and 'intelligent investing.' True breakthroughs require collaboration among various technologies, such as more accurate decentralized oracles and more efficient distributed computing.
Epilogue: The duality of FOMO and FUD.
The story of AI-Pool continues. It is both a microcosm of technological attempts and a true reflection of the frenzy and risks in the cryptocurrency market. Perhaps the ultimate result of this experiment is not important, as it has already ignited a spark of imagination in the market. In the future, as technology advances, can AI Agents truly become the changemakers of DeFi? What kind of ecosystem will the market create for this new narrative? Let's wait and see.
