@0xzerebro officials recently announced the release of the ZerePy framework and standards, and many people have started to wonder why not directly issue tokens, as if constructing a community myth similar to ELIZA. This question is actually quite interesting, so let's discuss our views:
1) Firstly, DAO organizations like ai16z rely on ownerless AI Agents to drive the community. The framework standards of ELIZA actually represent the cohesion of the community and the expectations for the future development of the open-source ecosystem.
ELIZA's influence in the GitHub developer community is growing at a visibly rapid pace; it is endorsed by ai16z officials, and the market has consistent expectations for it. There are many accidental factors involved, and it is not entirely following the original setup.
Thus, how ai16z designs Tokenomics and clarifies the relationship between ai16z and ELIZA is crucial. However, these remain uncertain and require further observation.
2) The question arises: next, projects like ARC and Swarms have also chosen to issue tokens for the first time through GitHub repos (IGO), which is a novel method and itself a means of community financing, and there is no problem with that.
But the question is, should the framework standard issue tokens at all? If tokens are issued, how to empower them becomes the key. Currently, market sentiment is high, and issuing tokens seems to have become the norm. However, without clear standards, we may see some projects that are 'issuing tokens just for the sake of issuing tokens,' which is clearly inadvisable.
3) The emergence of ZerePy actually provides us with a sample. Essentially, the relationship between ZerePy and Zerebro is similar to that of OP Stack and Optimism; it will convert Zerebro's successful experiences in AI applications into an open-source framework, allowing more AI applications with Zerebro genes to emerge.
For Zerebro, this is a commercialization method for open-source traffic and ecosystem expansion. As for whether to issue a new framework token or authorize a MEME token, that is possible, but the choice ultimately depends on Zerebro's market focus. If 'sub-tokens' are rashly split off, it would not be wise for a project focused on standalone AI.
Unless ZerePy's ecosystem develops to a certain scale, even showing trends of platformization, and the old Zerebro Tokenomics cannot meet the incentive needs of ZerePy, only then does issuing tokens make sense. Otherwise, similar tokens can only be considered as MEME.
Therefore, I believe that whether the framework standard issues tokens will ultimately evolve into an internal logic:
For those frameworks that need to rely on platform effects and focus on blockchain operations, issuing tokens may be necessary. However, for ecosystems of standalone AI or other types of DAO organizations, whether the framework needs to issue a token must be analyzed on a case-by-case basis.
Finally, a reminder: although issuing tokens for the first time through GitHub (IGO) is a novel approach, the risk of fraud is quite high in the early stages. Everyone must learn to discern the code quality of GitHub repositories, analyze the commercialization vision of projects, and most importantly, assess the reliability of the team.
As for the endorsement of community MEME coins by officials, ELIZA has already set a precedent, but whether similar projects will follow is currently uncertain. Moreover, whether ELIZA can truly empower is still an unknown. Blindly following the framework standards to purchase, relying entirely on speculation and imagination, poses too great a risk.
