Article source: Chain Observation
@0xzerebro officially announced the release of the ZerePy framework and standards, and many people focused on why there was no token issued without clear branding, falling into an illusion of creating a new ELIZA community myth. This question is quite thought-provoking, so let's discuss opinions:
1) For DAO organizations driven by masterless AI Agent applications like ai16z, the ELIZA framework standard represents a community cohesion and expectations for future open-source ecosystem development.
ELIZA, as a framework standard, is gaining influence among the GitHub developer community at a visible speed. It is backed by ai16z as a community token and has gained market consensus, but there are many accidental factors, and it is not the originally set development path. Therefore, how ai16z designs Tokenomics and clarifies the relationship between ai16z and ELIZA will be of utmost importance. However, there are still variables in how to integrate, which requires further observation.
2) The question arises, with subsequent projects like ARC and Swarms following the initial issuance of tokens via GitHub repo (IGO). This novel MEME-like issuance method itself is a community financing means, which is undeniable.
But whether the framework standard itself should issue tokens, and how to empower it after issuing tokens, has become the key issue. Currently, under the market's FOMO sentiment, issuing tokens seems to have become the standard practice, but without a judgment standard, there will be a period of Li Gui that issues tokens for the sake of issuing tokens, which is clearly undesirable.
3) The emergence of ZerePy serves as a good example. 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 as an open-source framework, allowing more single AI applications with Zerebro genes to emerge in the market.
For Zerebro, this is a way of commercial expansion that leverages open-source traffic and grows the ecosystem. Whether to issue a new framework token or authorize a MEME token is possible, but the specific choice depends on where Zerebro's market focus lies. Recklessly issuing a 'spinoff' is not wise for an ambitious single AI.
Unless the ZerePy ecosystem develops to a certain extent and shows signs of platformization, and the old Zerebro's Tokenomics cannot cater to ZerePy's incentive effectiveness, the significance of issuing tokens will become apparent. Until then, similar tokens can only be regarded as MEME.
Therefore, I believe that soon, the question of 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, and the focus is on the framework standard that enables blockchain operation. Issuing tokens is a necessity, but for ecosystems focused on single AI or other DAO organization types, 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 of initial GitHub issuance is indeed novel, but in the early stages, fraud will inevitably run rampant. It is essential to learn to identify the quality of GitHub repository code, analyze the feasibility of its commercial application vision, and assess the reliability of team members.
Regarding the endorsement of community MEME tokens by official entities, ELIZA has set a precedent. Whether similar projects will exist in the future is fundamentally uncertain, and whether ELIZA can truly be empowered has become an unknown variable. Seeing a framework standard and blindly buying in carries too great a speculative risk.