In evaluating AI-focused blockchain projects, I've come to a crucial realization: flashy marketing and impressive demos matter far less than the actual infrastructure quality beneath the surface.
Too many people, myself included initially, get captivated by what an AI model can do on the surface. But real value lies deeper. The distinction is simple yet powerful—stop assessing these as mere AI projects. Start viewing them as AI infrastructure plays.
When you flip that lens, everything changes. You stop chasing hype and start asking the right questions: How solid is the backbone? Can it scale? Is the architecture battle-tested? Does it solve real constraints?
This shift in perspective separates the projects with staying power from the ones that fade when hype cycles cool.
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
17 Likes
Reward
17
7
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
MetaReckt
· 14h ago
Wow, this is the plain truth. I’ve watched a ton of those flashy demos before, but now looking directly at TPS and Node architecture, everything else is just fluff.
View OriginalReply0
YieldWhisperer
· 12-21 21:50
That's right, but to be honest, most people can't see this layer at all. They're all focused on the flashy demo, who the hell cares about the infrastructure?
View OriginalReply0
ProofOfNothing
· 12-21 21:48
Ngl, infrastructure is the way to go; no matter how fancy the demo is, it all comes down to whether the underlying system can hold up.
View OriginalReply0
SerumSurfer
· 12-21 21:47
This statement is on point; I'm tired of those PPT revolutionaries... Projects that can truly withstand the test don't need constant marketing every day.
View OriginalReply0
AirdropLicker
· 12-21 21:42
You're absolutely right, someone should have burst that bubble long ago. The few AI + blockchain games I followed last year have all turned into scamcoins, and now I realize it was all part of the PPT financing scheme. The infrastructure is where the real money is; otherwise, no matter how flashy the presentation is, it won't save a bad architecture.
View OriginalReply0
FortuneTeller42
· 12-21 21:36
It's deeper; this is the right way to evaluate a project. I've fallen into pitfalls before, focusing only on the demo effect, but the underlying structure was a complete mess.
View OriginalReply0
airdrop_huntress
· 12-21 21:27
Indeed, now 90% of those AI coin projects are PPT, and there are very few that can actually run.
In evaluating AI-focused blockchain projects, I've come to a crucial realization: flashy marketing and impressive demos matter far less than the actual infrastructure quality beneath the surface.
Too many people, myself included initially, get captivated by what an AI model can do on the surface. But real value lies deeper. The distinction is simple yet powerful—stop assessing these as mere AI projects. Start viewing them as AI infrastructure plays.
When you flip that lens, everything changes. You stop chasing hype and start asking the right questions: How solid is the backbone? Can it scale? Is the architecture battle-tested? Does it solve real constraints?
This shift in perspective separates the projects with staying power from the ones that fade when hype cycles cool.