Author: Haotian
@0xzerebro officially announced the ZerePy framework and standard, and many people have again focused their attention on why not to issue tokens openly, and have fallen into the imagination of creating a new ELIZA community myth. This issue is actually quite confusing, let's talk about the views:
1) For DAO organizations driven by applications of AI agents like ai16z, the ELIZA framework standard represents a community cohesion and the expected development of the subsequent open-source ecosystem.
The influence of the ELIZA framework standard in the Github developer community is growing at a visible speed, and as a community token it has been endorsed by the ai16z official, while also gaining market consensus, with many accidental factors, and not the initially set development path. So how ai16z designs the Tokenomics and clarifies the relationship between ai16z and ELIZA will be the key. But how to integrate it still has variables, and further observation is needed;
2) The problem is that the subsequent projects such as ARC and Swarms have all taken the route of initial token issuance on Github repo (IGO), and this novel MEME-style issuance method itself is a means of community financing, which is understandable.
But as for the framework standard itself, whether it should issue tokens, and how to empower it after issuing tokens, becomes the key. Currently, under the market Fomo sentiment, issuing tokens seems to have become a standard configuration, but if there is no judgment standard, there will be a series of imitations appearing just for the sake of issuing tokens, which is obviously undesirable;
3) The result of the appearance of ZerePy is just right, in essence, the relationship between zerePy and Zerebro is similar to the relationship between OP Stack and Optimism, it will release the successful deployment experience of Zerebro in monolithic AI applications in the form of open-source basic framework to the outside world, so that the market can see more Zerebro-based monolithic AI applications.
For Zerebro, this is a way of open-source traffic introduction and commercialization expansion to grow 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 is, and to hastily issue a "spin-off" for an ambitious monolithic AI is not wise.
Unless the ZerePy ecosystem develops to a certain extent, showing a trend of platformization, and the old Zerebro's Tokenomics cannot take care of the incentive efficiency of ZerePy, then the meaning of issuing tokens will be revealed. Before that, similar tokens can only be seen as MEME.
So, I believe that soon, whether the framework standard should issue tokens will evolve into an internal logic:
For the framework standard that fully considers Tokenomics efficiency, needs to rely on platform effects, and focuses on the realization of chain-based operation, issuing tokens is a necessity, while for the ecosystem focused on monolithic AI or other DAO organization types, whether the framework needs to issue tokens needs to be analyzed case by case.
Finally, I'd like to remind my friends that the "asset issuance" method of the first Github issuance is indeed very novel, but in the early stage, fraud must be rampant, learn to discern the quality of the Github repository code, analyze the feasibility of its business application landing vision, and the reliability of the team members are essential.
As for the official endorsement of community MEME coins, ELIZA has set a precedent, but whether there will be similar projects in the future is fundamentally uncertain, let alone whether ELIZA can be truly empowered now, and blindly buy in whenever you see a framework standard, the risk of speculating based on imagination is too great.
