Article source: On-chain view
@0xzerebro officially announced the release of the ZerePy framework and standards, and many people focused on why there is no token issue from an unknown brand, falling into a fantasy of creating a new ELIZA community myth. This question is actually quite intriguing, so let’s discuss it.
1) For a DAO organization driven by a masterless AI Agent application like ai16z, the ELIZA framework standard represents a community cohesion and expectations for the subsequent development of an open-source ecosystem.
ELIZA's influence as a framework standard in the GitHub developer community is growing at a visible speed. It has been officially endorsed by ai16z as a community token, and it has also gained unanimous market expectations, with many incidental factors that were not part of the originally set development route. Therefore, how ai16z designs Tokenomics in the future and clarifies the relationship between ai16z and ELIZA will be of utmost importance. However, there are still variables in how to integrate them, which needs further observation.
2) The question arises: subsequent projects like ARC, Swarms, etc., have all taken the route of issuing tokens via GitHub repo for the first time (IGO). This novel MEME-based issuance method itself is a means of community financing, which is indisputable.
However, whether the framework standard itself should issue tokens, and how to empower after issuing tokens has become the key point. Currently, under the market's FOMO sentiment, issuing tokens seems to have become a standard practice, but if there is no judgment standard, there will be a period of issuing tokens for the sake of issuing tokens, which is obviously not desirable.
3) The emergence of ZerePy serves as a model. Essentially, the relationship between zerePy and Zerebro is similar to that between OP Stack and Optimism. It will share Zerebro's successful deployment experience in single AI applications in the form of an open-source framework, allowing the market to see more single AI applications with Zerebro's genes.
For Zerebro, this is a commercial expansion method for open-source traffic generation and ecosystem monetization. The possibility of issuing a new framework token or authorizing a MEME token exists, but the specific choice depends on Zerebro's market focus. Recklessly issuing a 'splitting plate' is not wise for an ambitious single AI.
Unless the ZerePy ecosystem develops to a certain extent and shows a trend towards platformization, and the old Zerebro's Tokenomics cannot accommodate ZerePy's incentive effectiveness, then the significance of issuing tokens will become apparent. Before that, similar tokens can only be regarded as MEME.
Therefore, I believe that soon, whether the framework standard should issue tokens will evolve into an internal logic.
To fully consider the effectiveness of Tokenomics, it is necessary to leverage platform effects, with the focus on realizing the framework standards for chain operations on the platform. Issuing tokens becomes a necessity, while for ecosystems focused on single AI or other types of DAO organizations, whether the framework needs to issue tokens must be analyzed on a case-by-case basis.
Finally, a reminder for friends: the 'asset issuance' method from the first GitHub release is indeed novel, but in the early stages, scams are bound to run rampant. It is essential to learn how to identify the quality of GitHub repository code, analyze the feasibility of its outlined commercial application vision, and assess the reliability of team members.
Regarding the endorsement of community MEME tokens by the official, ELIZA has set a precedent. Whether similar projects will exist in the future is fundamentally uncertain. Moreover, whether ELIZA can truly be empowered has become an unknown variable. Simply seeing a framework standard and blindly buying in carries too much speculative risk.