Highly Based

@YStan__ Indeed. But the fact that it is only temporary until they have their POW chain makes it less of a risk, when also accounting for who the peole are.

Fair point, reputation matters, and I’m not saying the team will rug. My point is different. Reputation is not the same as on-chain protection. If holders still need to "trust the team," then the risk exists until those powers are removed, limited, or controlled by transparent mechanisms ☕️

🚩 $TIG is getting a ton of hype as the next big AI/compute narrative play, but idk why nobody is talking about the obvious red flags. Creator can still change the contract (upgradeable = potential rug risk, fee tweaks, minting etc.). Huge pumps + insider selling vibes. DYOR heavy before FOMOing in. What am I missing? 👀

@Crypto_Moe84 @Tradernaber 🫡

@Highlygraded_ you are welcome brother - check @Tradernaber - he is a great elliot wave friend

$USDT.D No time to explain

@Crypto_Moe84 Fair enough dude thanks for being honest

@Highlygraded_ i'm the wrong person to ask about Elliot waves🤝 i'm just an expert in drawing simple lines

@SheffC_eth @tigfoundation Fill the wick

@tigfoundation is the sleeping giant. a unicorn priced like a meme. on Base. at $1. every AI breakthrough of the last decade was algorithmic. transformers. attention. MoE. compute is downstream. GPUs are downstream. the algorithm is the moat. $TIG owns the open market for them. - already surpassed academic SOTA in Quadratic Knapsack. published. - Vehicle Routing designed by the man who built the global VRP benchmarks. - PhDs across global academia signed it. ex-ARM engineers built the licensing layer — same model that turned ARM into $150B. - Neural Network Optimizer live. Adam is 10+ years old. $200B+ AI training spend. 5% gain = $10B saved = hundreds of millions in royalties. from one challenge. ten more loaded. reputations that take 20 years to earn and 20 seconds to lose chose this one. you don't miss generational trades. you decline them. the names are signed. the math is public. TIG is on the table. the silence in 2027 will be yours, not the market's.

@MarkHudson1111 @GriftReport Have you actually ever been to Agadir?

@GriftReport Why on earth are some people thinking it's safe for women to go to a stinking third world Muslim shit hole? I pray she Is safe but unfortunately, I fear the worst

MISSING IN MOROCCO 31-year-old British travel influencer Rachel Kerr from Dunblane in Scotland has gone missing in Agadir Morocco, she was on a work trip and checked out of the Caribbean Village Agador hotel on April 25, her phone has been switched off ever since and the family has not heard from her for three days, cousin Claire Hill appealed for anyone who saw her or has contact with her contacts in Morocco to come forward, the family says they are extremely concerned for her welfare and even the smallest detail could help, This is so sad, really hope they find her

@kudosrecords been 6 weeks and still you haven't replied - how can you run a business and willfully ignore when the product doesn't get delivered after a sale

@kudosrecords Your profile doesnt accept dm's

@Highlygraded_ Hi - wanna send us a DM and we’ll take a look into it. Thanks!

@kudosrecords I paid for a digital album on your site and paid with Paypal - the money was charged but the checkout page failed. I've been trying to contact you via email for a couple weeks....

@PineAnalytics So Bitcoin is worthless becuase it's subsidies outweigh its revenue by something like 2000x The perpetual subsidies are the point of Bittensor, like they are and will continue to be (for another 100yrs) for bitcoin

@MilkRoad The whole point of bittensor is the subsidies. Yes it does reduce, but TAO price likely also goes up. If TAO price goes up, then numerous subnets can continue to offer more competetive and SOTA models for various AI commodoties. The revenue will come for non open source items

Pine Analytic's just made the bear case for Bittensor. (You might want to save this one). Here's a condensed summary of their thesis: → $TAO trades at $275 with a $2.6B market cap. → Grayscale filed an S-1 for a NYSE-listed ETF. → Jensen Huang gave it a public endorsement. → It has Bitcoin-style tokenomics with a 21M hard cap. None of that is being disputed by @PineAnalytics. The question is whether the network can generate enough real revenue to justify the valuation. Starting with how the money flows... Bittensor has four player classes: 1. Subnet owners build AI marketplaces (18% of TAO emissions). 2. Miners do the AI grunt work (41%). 3. Validators grade the miners (41%). 4. Stakers dump TAO into liquidity pools. TAO is the entry ticket for everything. Mining, staking, subnet tokens, services. All roads lead to TAO. The supply side? Completely transparent. Emissions, halving schedules, staking ratios - all onchain. The demand side? Crickets. No dashboard tracking real revenue by subnet. AI work happens offchain (inference requests, compute jobs, training calls) none of it touches the blockchain. This isn't a bug they're fixing - it's baked in. So what does demand actually look like? Chutes is the biggest subnet. 14.4% of all emissions. It sells serverless AI inference at prices "85% below AWS." The usage numbers look great: - 400,000+ users - 5M+ daily requests - 9.1 trillion tokens processed But those cheap prices aren't from efficiency. They're from subsidy. Chutes receives roughly 518 TAO/day - about $142,000 ($52M annualized). Estimated actual revenue? $1.3M to $2.4M/year. For every $1 customers pay, the network kicks in $22 to $40 in emissions. Kill the subsidy and do the math. 101B tokens/day, $142K in daily costs. That's ~$1.41 per million tokens. Market rate? Together ai charges $0.88. DeepSeek runs $0.40–$0.80. Smaller models go as low as $0.18. Without the subsidy, Chutes isn't 85% cheaper - it's 1.6x to 3.5x MORE expensive than centralized options. The cost advantage doesn't shrink, but actually flips completely. "But this is the Uber playbook! Subsidize early, raise prices later!" Except Uber built switching costs during the subsidy period. Driver networks. Proprietary platforms. Enterprise integrations. Bittensor subnets build none of that. The models are open source. The APIs are standard. Users can bounce to any provider serving the same weights with zero friction. When the subsidy shrinks, nothing keeps anyone around. One more thing on Chutes: the team behind it (Rayon Labs) also runs two other subnets. Together they command nearly 24% of total emissions. One team. Almost a quarter of the network's incentive pie. What about the rest? Targon is the highest-revenue subnet. Run by Manifold Labs ($10.5M Series A). Enterprise GPU compute. ~$10.4M annualized revenue against a $48M valuation - a 4.6x revenue multiple. The most grounded number in the ecosystem. But it's a projection, not audited. Templar built Covenant-72B, a 72B parameter model trained on 1.1 trillion tokens. $98M market cap. Zero external revenue. Paid products "in motion" but nothing shipped. The remaining 120+ subnets? Either no revenue, pre-product, or just farming emissions. The big picture, as @PineAnalytics sees it: Total identifiable revenue across the ENTIRE network: roughly $3M–$15M annually. A single subnet's emission subsidy ($52M for Chutes) exceeds the upper bound of what the whole network earns from actual customers. Against a $2.6B market cap, that's a 175x–200x revenue multiple. Against FDV of $5.8B, roughly 400x. For context: CoreWeave and Lambda were valued at 15x–25x revenue. High-growth SaaS rarely sustains above 50x. Bittensor's implied multiple is 4x–10x higher than the most aggressive comp in crypto OR traditional infra. The market is pricing TAO on supply scarcity, institutional catalysts, and AI vibes - not economic productivity. Now the squeeze. Subnets are getting crushed from both directions. From above: Self-hosting. Every model on Bittensor is open source. Weights are on Hugging Face. One H100 serves a 70B model for $40–$50/day. Tools like vLLM and Ollama make local deployment trivial. Any org with volume is already cheaper running it themselves. From below: Hyperscalers. Microsoft, Google, Amazon, and Meta spent over $200B on AI capex in 2025. First-priority hardware. Purpose-built data centers. Enterprise relationships already in place. Bittensor's entire annual incentive budget ($360M) is less than Microsoft's weekly AI infra spend. Then there's the moat problem. If a subnet builds something valuable, the underlying model and methodology are public by design. Covenant-72B is Apache licensed. Any competitor can copy the approach without touching the TAO economy. The community says the incentive mechanism IS the moat. But that only works if emissions stay large enough to attract compute. And they shrink with every halving. So what is TAO actually pricing? At $2.6B, it's not priced on demand fundamentals. $3M-15M in annual revenue doesn't support that under any framework. The market is pricing: Bitcoin-like scarcity. The Grayscale ETF catalyst. AI sector rotation. Long-term optionality on decentralized AI. Legitimate speculative factors. Also entirely supply-side and sentiment-driven. A TAO position based on scarcity and narrative? Might do great regardless of demand economics. A TAO position based on Bittensor becoming a real AI services network? That requires evidence that doesn't exist yet - and faces structural headwinds that might prevent it from showing up. Know which thesis you're holding. (P.S. Read the full article below 👇)

@SullyMichaelvan Your level of ignorance cannot be quantified

How in the actual fuck have people not learned their lesson with this garbage yet? It's like VCs are still living back in 2017 when Bitcoin was $6k and DentaCoin was gonna be the blockchain for dentists.

If you had to buy one $TAO or $RENDER what will u pick?

@AltcoinMami Fair, but look at the $TAO chart vs $Render Looks like it could totally dominate

I'm going to be brutally honest. my AI has pointed out that $render could become a subnet on Bittensor. It has actually already begun (see screenshot). However, I hold both because I think $render has positioned itself very uniquely with enterprise level partnerships.

@DepecheNode_ Why does it have to be the same?

It would be the shortest and shallowest bear market in crypto history Lower for longer unfortunately

@TheJerzWay In order to maintain the Spainish digital nomad visa (for the following year) you have to spend >180 days in Spain that year. If you spend > 180 days in Spain in that year you fall under Spainish tax residency. Unless I am missing something?

Forbes just published "10 Countries Offering Digital Nomad Visas in 2026." 50+ countries now have them. But there's a massive problem with the digital nomad visa narrative. Let me explain. 🧵

@JosephJacks_ @bittensor Genuinely laughed a lot at this. You nailed it 😂

The only thing holding back @Bittensor from being ranked as a top 5 cryptocurrency by market cap is that 95% of crypto holders are degenerate idiots. This changes the moment the financial mainstream realizes there are only two tokens that represent freedom from enslavement.

@DamiDefi Where is that TAO revenue stat from? Chutes, Targon and Celium are some of the top earning subenets and only do about 20-30m revenue per year

Top 10 AI Coins by Q1 2026 Revenue. Who's actually generating real money? $TAO: $43.2M $VIRTUAL: $2.87M $LINK: $2.1M $RENDER: $1.2M $IO: $0.9M $AKT: $0.74M $FET: $0.6M $PHA: $0.4M $ICP: $0.3M $NEAR: $0.15M This is the most important chart in AI crypto right now. Price follows revenue. Always has. Always will. Are you holding the right ones?

I see many saying that Trump has an incentive to save markets due to midterms Trump is the frontman, acting on behalf of the military industrial complex - they don't care about mid terms, they have their candidates either way They will keep purusing their agenda/war regardless

@ArdiNSC Liquidity & macro cycles run over multiple decades and can have sequential repeating periods (~ 4 yrs) - but that doesnt mean over the course of 60 ~ years its always 4 years - sometimes its 3, 4, or 5 It just so happens Bitcoin has existed within a 4 yr cycle streak so far

If you say you believe $BTC follows the 4-year cycle, people on CT treat you like you're saying some absurd shit. 2013 top. 2017 top. 2021 top. 2025 top. Four cycles. Four tops. Every single one roughly 4 years apart. 100% hit rate across the entire history of the asset. Yet somehow believing in the thing that has never failed is the controversial opinion. And believing it'll suddenly break for a reason that's never caused a deviation before is the rational one. "But this time is different"..