Why has the 'big environment changed'? Essentially, the wave of AI Agents sweeping in is a major reshuffling of the past rigid Crypto system.
From infrastructure stacking -> AI Agent application pre-positioning?
In the past, delivering a public chain required a long cycle of 1-3 years of cultivation. After completing the roadmap and TGE, it was found that user and application ecosystems were difficult to match market expectations, leading to many infrastructures that deviated from actual market demands.
In the future, regardless of the project, first let AI Agent applications run on-chain, allowing the functionality, performance, and experience of AI Agents to speak for the technological foundation of the chain infrastructure. Use application pre-positioning to validate market demand, avoiding the situation of bringing solutions without practical applications.
From VC round financing -> Community MEME activation?
In the past, VC capital drove the emergence of top-tier projects. The information monopoly in the primary market has led to increasingly narrow profit margins in the secondary market, resulting in Western and Eastern capital not taking over from each other, leading to various issues such as VC and exchanges forming pools, and tokens being listed with high FDV and continuing to decline.
In the future, projects will be constructed in the form of open-source Public Goods, with no white paper in the short term, but with a GitHub open-source repository, no roadmap, but with visible product applications, directly financing in the secondary market, allowing AI Agents to autonomously manage assets, leveraging the continuous growth of asset pools and holders to bring greater imagination to the project. Early builders only need to continuously empower the project.
From chasing airdrops -> Partner co-building?
In the past, project parties would often offer a certain percentage of airdrops to gain early users and traffic. Users contributed gas and time to chase airdrops, but this created a 'witch community' culture of either profiting and fleeing or long-term being PUAed by project parties, with expectations unmet or empty companionship, resulting in inevitable contradictions and conflicts, a lose-lose situation.
In the future, project parties will open the market through MEME-style secondary methods, designing tokenomics suitable for continuous growth (LP fees, transaction taxes, reserved share releases, etc.). In this process, community users act as early investors and continuous co-builders of community consensus, and those who can profit from accompanying runs will essentially be worthwhile, achieving a win-win situation.
From CEX listing ending -> On-chain DEX domination?
In the past, most projects in the DEX phase had low liquidity and low user groups. Only through tokenomics design, continuous community reputation and growth, as well as resource 'mixing' could they seek tickets for CEX. Under heavy pressure, some projects would lie flat after TGE.
In the future, most projects will choose to continue building during the DEX phase. On-chain DEX will take on most of the market liquidity. Although the prosperity on-chain will present a 'chaotic era', high-quality projects have a greater chance of achieving 'grassroots counterattacks', without being buried under the discourse power of the old system's CEX, gradually tending towards DEX as the main focus, with CEX existing only as a supplement to liquidity.
From entrepreneurs 'not speaking human language' -> founders 'laughing and scolding'?
In the past, the market was highly competitive, with many projects existing, leading to a significant gap between top and bottom projects. After the founders of top projects succeeded, they often became abstract, engaging in charity, doing public welfare, and becoming very genuine.
Future projects that do not integrate with the community, do not stay at the forefront of the product, will generally find it difficult to emerge in the market and ecosystem. The new operational rules of the market will force founders to be at the forefront, 'laughing and scolding'. Although this may invite skepticism, a 'real' developer image is certainly better than a lofty 'entrepreneur', at least from the perspective of retail investors.
Note: The transformation and reshuffling mentioned above are not absolute, nor will they happen overnight. It is more likely to give rise to a mix of various models. In the early stages, problems are highly probable, but nonetheless, it represents a glimmer of hope for breaking the rigidity of the current system.
[Disclaimer] The market has risks, and investments should be made with caution. This article does not constitute investment advice, and users should consider whether any opinions, views, or conclusions in this article are suitable for their specific circumstances. Investing based on this is at one's own risk.