To a τ

328 posts

To a τ

To a τ

@Og_nonymous

Learning is key, the letter is τ

Katılım Mart 2009
553 Takip Edilen86 Takipçiler
τao τemplar
τao τemplar@TAOTemplar·
The proof that Bittensor is making progress getting rid of unproductive subnets will come in the form of subnet owners complaining. It happened for taoflow; many subnet owners complained, but it turned out to be great for the ecosystem.
English
6
2
50
1.8K
Lamida
Lamida@LamidaGlobal·
@TAOTemplar The first one to complain and loudest ones are the most fraudulent ones. - Elon
English
1
0
1
137
David
David@bOnemeaI404·
@itsdeaann You have very poor screen presence and come off as a whiney and petulant child during confrontation even when occasionally being right. It’s just the way it is Dean, you don’t have that je ne sais quoi. Be happy with what you have. Be grateful for it.
English
5
0
14
3.2K
Dean Withers
Dean Withers@itsdeaann·
I’m tired of just sitting on this info. 6 months ago CBS flew me out to DC for an in person debate over the Trump Administration, they paid for everything ranging from my travel expenses to a 4 person camera crew. The conversation was moderated by Maurice DuBois. As you could imagine, this debate didn’t go well for my MAGA opponent, and I was very effective at demonstrating the failures and wrongdoings of Trump & his administration, including things the mainstream media doesn’t want you to know. Coincidentally, it was filmed RIGHT before Bari Weiss took over. And in my opinion, it seems she canned the whole production to censor the truth. I have reached out to my contact at CBS multiple times over the course of the last 6 months to see what happened to the production, and haven’t gotten a response. @CBS, what’s going on???
English
1.3K
4.9K
52K
2.1M
Brian Cox
Brian Cox@ProfBrianCox·
Having lunch in Stavanger and was asked whether I work in Oil or IT. I must work on my look …..
English
139
38
1.8K
109.6K
biττensorism.eth
biττensorism.eth@bittensorism·
Bittensor is my bet on 100x’ing my capital.
English
4
3
84
2.7K
Distributed State
Distributed State@DistStateAndMe·
@steeve Can you please check your messages trying to get zig inference pilled
English
6
0
0
2.8K
Steeve Morin
Steeve Morin@steeve·
this is so fun, Zig on GPU is a match made in heaven like what do you mean defer syncThreads() and comptime BLOCK_M: usize !
Steeve Morin tweet media
English
9
5
164
14.1K
τao τemplar
τao τemplar@TAOTemplar·
My Bittensor TAO subnet research process using #sn55 @NiomeAI as the subject, looking at: * What they do * What miners do * Team * Revenue/plans to drive value to token * Red Flags NFA 1/6
English
5
3
31
3.5K
To a τ
To a τ@Og_nonymous·
@twistartups Once there was a lot less than 128 websites on the internet.
English
0
0
0
47
This Week in Startups
This Week in Startups@twistartups·
If you’ve bought into the BitTensor hype train, you may be surprised to know it’s not quite as decentralized as you think. In fact, there are only 128 subnets on the system, that means only 128 projects can utilize its infrastructure. While this adds credibility to those “lucky” 128, it certainly begs the question… “what’s decentralized here?” 🤔
English
11
3
37
5.4K
Taomaster9
Taomaster9@Scottyrice09·
You’ve only got $1000 Where are you parking it to grow?! 🙏 1. $tao subnets?! 2. Low mc project ? 3. Play the trading game? Got loads people asking me “Ricey ya into crypto but I’ve not got loads of spare cash” Let me know ya thoughts 🙌
English
13
1
18
2.8K
Warren Kinsella
Warren Kinsella@kinsellawarren·
I've been researching and writing about hate movements for 40 years. Antizionism is a classic hate movement.
English
2.2K
455
3.9K
358.9K
To a τ
To a τ@Og_nonymous·
Andy ττ@bittingthembits

$TAO Bons PONZI take. The work he didn't do. Claim: $328M in emissions vs $15M in revenue, economically bankrupt. This is wrong on the math, wrong on the mechanism, and wrong on what REVENUE even means in dTAO. Pull up taorevenue.com right now. Last 30 days alone: • 90,559 TAO ($22.4M) in on-chain inflow + burn • Annualized that's $270M flowing back to the protocol via inflows, buybacks, and burns • That's ONLY on-chain action. Off-chain revenue doesn't even count in this number Subnet owners are literally incentivized to buy back their own alpha with revenue, because more $TAO in the pool = more emissions. The mechanism itself is net $TAO flow from staking vs unstaking. To Build something that attracts and HOLDS stake CONVICTION. The design is behavioral incentivized real production. The mechanism is a closed economic loop, not a leak. Bons either doesn't understand dTAO or is pretending not to, not sure, hopefully many that don't understand it have another look. Claim: "Subnets aren't products, they exist to extract." Pull up taoflute.com. Look at the lines of code shipped per day per subnet. Real engineering. Real GitHub commits. Real models in production: • @AskVenice (1M+ paying users) trained Venice Uncensored 1.2 on @TargonCompute SN4 • @MacrocosmosAI just published ResBM 128x activation compression targeting a 70B distributed training run • @ridges_ai building autonomous software developers hitting top SWE-bench scores • @VantaTrading onboarded 5,500+ traders with zero marketing • @webuildscore raised vision accuracy to 95.8%, partnered with @PwC_France for enterprise physical AI • Templar trained Covenant-72B with 67.1 MMLU competitive with Llama 2 70B endorsed publicly by Jensen Huang and Chamath This is EXTRACTION? It's product-market fit being built in real time, on-chain, while the centralized AI world burns hundreds of billions in private. The macro context MANY ignore. This is what we should be talking about: • Big Tech capex on AI infrastructure in 2026: $660-690 billion • OpenAI infrastructure commitments alone: $1.4 trillion • Jensen Huang's estimate for total AI infra spend by end of decade: $3-4 trillion • Anthropic revenue scaled 100x in 2 years • 50% of all global VC in 2025 went to AI In the middle of the largest CLOSED UNVERIFIABLE capex buildout in human history, the open, permissionless, neutral substrate for AI compute and intelligence is supposedly worthless? Come On Be serious. The PONZI label gets thrown at every new monetary primitive in crypto: • Bitcoin was called a ponzi for 15 years • Ethereum was called a ponzi until ETFs hit • Solana was called a ponzi until institutional flows showed up • Now TAO is The Ponzi A ponzi has a central operator promising fixed returns, paying old investors with new money, and obscuring cashflows. But Bittensor has: • No central operator promising returns • Open-source emissions schedule on a 21M hard cap • Every reward, stake, burn, and buyback verifiable on-chain • Permissionless exit through AMM pools • A halving mechanism just like Bitcoin • Subnets that get pruned by the market when they fail That's not a ponzi. That's the most transparent capital allocation mechanism that has ever existed for AI. Grayscale didn't push their AI Fund $TAO allocation to 43% because they fell for a ponzi. Yuma didn't stake $691M into the network because they're confused. The real anti-crypto take is pretending every early-stage network has to look like a fully mature cash machine on day one or it is a scam. That is not how crypto works, networks work, OR markets work. Crypto deserves better. $TAO

QME
0
0
0
71
Justin Bons
Justin Bons@Justin_Bons·
Bittensor is a crypto-ponzi; unsustainable nonsense! TAO has no utility or PMF; it is all driven by token inflation: $328M worth of new tokens are printed annually, yet only $15M in annual revenue was generated! Subsidies from holders pay for subnets; economically bankrupt: 🧵 Token inflation is used to give people the illusion of low cost. As the truth is that creating AI models in a "decentralized" way is far more expensive. While offering no additional utility or benefits It is all theatre; subnets are not created as competitive products. They are created simply to exist & extract as much value out of TAO investors as possible Ponzinomics & Extraction: For example, the Pine Analytics data proved that unsubsidized inference on the Chutes subnet would cost up to 3.5x as much as centralized competitors such as Deepseek or TogetherAI! What makes it all so much worse is that token holders pay for these subnets through inflation. Yet, none of the revenue actually flows back to the token holders. The subnet owners get to keep 100% of the revenue! On top of 18% of emissions, just because... That is a borderline scam, extremely profitable for subnet operators, but setting up token investors for extreme loss when the system inevitably collapses As TAO has a 21M supply limit, which might be appealing to ignorant token investors. But also implies that the network will entirely collapse, as it is fundamentally unsustainable, just like BTC Inefficient & Expensive: The problems run even deeper than that, as is the case with most DePin projects that rely on subsidies rather than real-world value accrual: The reason why decentralized computing is so inefficient is that it requires verification & replication. Within a trustless environment, we cannot simply trust the work done by individual nodes. Instead, the work must be replicated multiple times over, introducing extreme inefficiencies. This is not so bad for simple TX's, but for serious, large computing tasks, this becomes a deal breaker This is why 41% of the rewards go to "validators" whose sole task is to verify that the work being done is legitimate! This only adds to the massive inefficiency already introduced by latency within a distributed network. There are several good reasons why AIs are trained in massive data centers with cards equipped with extremely low-latency, high-bandwidth connections. Something TAO is unable to directly compete with in technical & economic terms Product Theatre: In some cases, it is worth paying a premium for decentralization; one example of this is decentralized storage However, this is not the case for the training of AI's, as this is a one-off cost usually carried out by a centralized for-profit organization. As running the AI itself is much cheaper & even achievable by individuals on a single consumer-grade machine... So, what is the incentive for this centralized organization to use a more expensive method? That does not even result in a commercially viable product, due to the lack of scale... The answer is that there is no legitimate incentive! As there are only so many people they can fool into such a ponzinomic scheme, creating an upper bound on the size these subnets can grow to, which is nowhere near what large centralized AI companies can achieve today Conclusion: There is no future in such a bankrupt design! It is all theatre to extract as much as possible; subnets are not created as competitive products. They are created simply to exist & to extract as much value out of token investors as possible! There is much I did not cover in this critique, including "decentralization theatre", modularity, bad governance, perverse incentives & terrible UX. This critique was purely economic, which is bad enough to reject TAO on that basis alone! As value investors, we have to avoid such nonsense. It is not only dangerous from an investment perspective, but it also harms the industry as a whole. The more we prop up nonsense like this, the more difficult it will be for outsiders to take our industry seriously That is why we must speak out, as we care about crypto's ultimate goals. Financial freedom, censorship resistance, privacy & more Reject the nonsense, as the numbers & facts speak for themselves. Crypto already presents us with such a beautiful dream for the future; let's not spoil our opportunity by wasting our energy on half-baked ideas like TAO Crypto deserves better than that. So, help us spread this message far & wide. As the truth will set us free! 🔥
English
224
71
451
185.8K
To a τ
To a τ@Og_nonymous·
@CryptoAvex The equivalent of internet for AI in a not so far future
English
0
0
0
6
PantherCapital
PantherCapital@MikePantherCap·
@AlgodTrading Honest question why would capital allocate from ai stocks to ai crypto? So far we have seen ai stocks explode none of that capital come into crypto ai, why would it?
English
4
0
2
1.1K
Algod
Algod@AlgodTrading·
Most valuable companies are AI related, in crypto we dont have any ai projects in top 10 Dont overthink it, narrative alone will drive multiples in top 10
English
43
21
351
17.7K
To a τ
To a τ@Og_nonymous·
@ourcryptotalk Last resort: engagement farming 🤷🏼‍♂️
English
0
0
0
59
Our Crypto Talk
Our Crypto Talk@ourcryptotalk·
Bittensor isn't a PONZI SCHEME ! > A Ponzi pays old investors with new investor money in secret. On $TAO everything is on chain and anyone can look at it. > There is no central operator running the thing. Miners, validators, and subnet owners are all separate parties. > Nobody is promising returns and staking yields come from emissions, not from a founder telling you what you will earn. > The code is open source and you can read it, fork it, or audit it yourself. > Supply is capped at 21 million with Bitcoin-style halvings and a Ponzi needs endless new money, Bittensor has a fixed supply curve. > Chutes subnet has over 100,000 API users and processes billions of tokens so that is actual usage from actual people. > Targon is reportedly doing around $10M in ARR with some enterprise deals and the revenue is small compared to emissions but it exists. > PwC France is building on subnet 44 and consulting firms do not integrate with fraud. > Grayscale has filed for a TAO ETF. Asset managers go through legal review before filing, which is not something they do on a Ponzi. We could go on and on ! The biggest red flag in this take is "TAO has no utility" Are they really serious about this?
Justin Bons@Justin_Bons

Bittensor is a crypto-ponzi; unsustainable nonsense! TAO has no utility or PMF; it is all driven by token inflation: $328M worth of new tokens are printed annually, yet only $15M in annual revenue was generated! Subsidies from holders pay for subnets; economically bankrupt: 🧵 Token inflation is used to give people the illusion of low cost. As the truth is that creating AI models in a "decentralized" way is far more expensive. While offering no additional utility or benefits It is all theatre; subnets are not created as competitive products. They are created simply to exist & extract as much value out of TAO investors as possible Ponzinomics & Extraction: For example, the Pine Analytics data proved that unsubsidized inference on the Chutes subnet would cost up to 3.5x as much as centralized competitors such as Deepseek or TogetherAI! What makes it all so much worse is that token holders pay for these subnets through inflation. Yet, none of the revenue actually flows back to the token holders. The subnet owners get to keep 100% of the revenue! On top of 18% of emissions, just because... That is a borderline scam, extremely profitable for subnet operators, but setting up token investors for extreme loss when the system inevitably collapses As TAO has a 21M supply limit, which might be appealing to ignorant token investors. But also implies that the network will entirely collapse, as it is fundamentally unsustainable, just like BTC Inefficient & Expensive: The problems run even deeper than that, as is the case with most DePin projects that rely on subsidies rather than real-world value accrual: The reason why decentralized computing is so inefficient is that it requires verification & replication. Within a trustless environment, we cannot simply trust the work done by individual nodes. Instead, the work must be replicated multiple times over, introducing extreme inefficiencies. This is not so bad for simple TX's, but for serious, large computing tasks, this becomes a deal breaker This is why 41% of the rewards go to "validators" whose sole task is to verify that the work being done is legitimate! This only adds to the massive inefficiency already introduced by latency within a distributed network. There are several good reasons why AIs are trained in massive data centers with cards equipped with extremely low-latency, high-bandwidth connections. Something TAO is unable to directly compete with in technical & economic terms Product Theatre: In some cases, it is worth paying a premium for decentralization; one example of this is decentralized storage However, this is not the case for the training of AI's, as this is a one-off cost usually carried out by a centralized for-profit organization. As running the AI itself is much cheaper & even achievable by individuals on a single consumer-grade machine... So, what is the incentive for this centralized organization to use a more expensive method? That does not even result in a commercially viable product, due to the lack of scale... The answer is that there is no legitimate incentive! As there are only so many people they can fool into such a ponzinomic scheme, creating an upper bound on the size these subnets can grow to, which is nowhere near what large centralized AI companies can achieve today Conclusion: There is no future in such a bankrupt design! It is all theatre to extract as much as possible; subnets are not created as competitive products. They are created simply to exist & to extract as much value out of token investors as possible! There is much I did not cover in this critique, including "decentralization theatre", modularity, bad governance, perverse incentives & terrible UX. This critique was purely economic, which is bad enough to reject TAO on that basis alone! As value investors, we have to avoid such nonsense. It is not only dangerous from an investment perspective, but it also harms the industry as a whole. The more we prop up nonsense like this, the more difficult it will be for outsiders to take our industry seriously That is why we must speak out, as we care about crypto's ultimate goals. Financial freedom, censorship resistance, privacy & more Reject the nonsense, as the numbers & facts speak for themselves. Crypto already presents us with such a beautiful dream for the future; let's not spoil our opportunity by wasting our energy on half-baked ideas like TAO Crypto deserves better than that. So, help us spread this message far & wide. As the truth will set us free! 🔥

English
19
17
117
8.9K
Jesus Martinez
Jesus Martinez@JesusMartinez·
TAO would be at $400 right now w/o the Sam rug Crazy how a $10m sell can cause billions in damage Overblown IMO
English
44
13
360
12.7K
To a τ
To a τ@Og_nonymous·
@CryptoAvex Great post. I don´t get his harshness. Bittensor is no different from most tech giants in incubation, except in $TAO retail investors like us can participate at early stages and actually have a saying. Maybe that’s why 🙂
To a τ tweet media
English
1
0
1
161
Crypto Avex
Crypto Avex@CryptoAvex·
Hi Justin, Here is my detailed reply over your post on $TAO is a ponzi thread. I read your every word. Here’s where you are wrong.👇🏼 Claim 1: “$328M emissions vs $15M revenue = ponzi” Bitcoin generated $0 revenue for years. Ethereum’s early revenue didn’t justify its emissions either. Every L1 bootstraps with inflation. That’s not a ponzi, that’s protocol growth stage. The question is: does revenue trajectory justify the model? For $TAO, it does. Claim 2: “Chutes costs 3.5x more than Deepseek” Correct, today. But Deepseek is subsidized by Chinese state capital. Venice AI chose Bittensor ANYWAY. PwC France chose Bittensor ANYWAY. Why would sophisticated institutions pay MORE unless they’re getting something centralized providers can’t offer? Censorship resistance. Privacy. Unstoppable compute. Claim 3: “Subnet owners keep 100% revenue + 18% emissions = scam” This is literally how every startup ecosystem works. AWS builders keep their revenue too. App Store developers keep 70%. The emissions are venture capital in protocol form funding builders to create real products. BIT-0011 “Conviction Mechanism” literally just addressed operator accountability. Claim 4: “Validators taking 41% of rewards is inefficient” Validation IS the product in a trustless network. Ethereum validators take rewards too. You want decentralization without the cost of decentralization, that’s not how cryptography works. Claim 5: “No incentive for centralized orgs to use TAO” PwC France. SN44. 136 countries. 6-8 months legal due diligence. Venice AI Erik Voorhees. Subnet 4. Live right now. TAO Institute. Institutional-grade research. Launched this week. Grayscale ETF filing. Still active. You wrote this critique without doing complete homework !! The real conclusion: Every criticism in this thread applies equally to Ethereum in 2017. Low revenue. High inflation. Unproven utility. “Theatre.” ETH went from $8 → $4,800. You are not wrong about the risks. But you are just early on the wrong side. I am not here to fool anyone. I am here because I have done the work. And the work says: $TAO is early, not broken. 💎 Thank you for your attention to this matter! Regards, @CryptoAvex
Justin Bons@Justin_Bons

Bittensor is a crypto-ponzi; unsustainable nonsense! TAO has no utility or PMF; it is all driven by token inflation: $328M worth of new tokens are printed annually, yet only $15M in annual revenue was generated! Subsidies from holders pay for subnets; economically bankrupt: 🧵 Token inflation is used to give people the illusion of low cost. As the truth is that creating AI models in a "decentralized" way is far more expensive. While offering no additional utility or benefits It is all theatre; subnets are not created as competitive products. They are created simply to exist & extract as much value out of TAO investors as possible Ponzinomics & Extraction: For example, the Pine Analytics data proved that unsubsidized inference on the Chutes subnet would cost up to 3.5x as much as centralized competitors such as Deepseek or TogetherAI! What makes it all so much worse is that token holders pay for these subnets through inflation. Yet, none of the revenue actually flows back to the token holders. The subnet owners get to keep 100% of the revenue! On top of 18% of emissions, just because... That is a borderline scam, extremely profitable for subnet operators, but setting up token investors for extreme loss when the system inevitably collapses As TAO has a 21M supply limit, which might be appealing to ignorant token investors. But also implies that the network will entirely collapse, as it is fundamentally unsustainable, just like BTC Inefficient & Expensive: The problems run even deeper than that, as is the case with most DePin projects that rely on subsidies rather than real-world value accrual: The reason why decentralized computing is so inefficient is that it requires verification & replication. Within a trustless environment, we cannot simply trust the work done by individual nodes. Instead, the work must be replicated multiple times over, introducing extreme inefficiencies. This is not so bad for simple TX's, but for serious, large computing tasks, this becomes a deal breaker This is why 41% of the rewards go to "validators" whose sole task is to verify that the work being done is legitimate! This only adds to the massive inefficiency already introduced by latency within a distributed network. There are several good reasons why AIs are trained in massive data centers with cards equipped with extremely low-latency, high-bandwidth connections. Something TAO is unable to directly compete with in technical & economic terms Product Theatre: In some cases, it is worth paying a premium for decentralization; one example of this is decentralized storage However, this is not the case for the training of AI's, as this is a one-off cost usually carried out by a centralized for-profit organization. As running the AI itself is much cheaper & even achievable by individuals on a single consumer-grade machine... So, what is the incentive for this centralized organization to use a more expensive method? That does not even result in a commercially viable product, due to the lack of scale... The answer is that there is no legitimate incentive! As there are only so many people they can fool into such a ponzinomic scheme, creating an upper bound on the size these subnets can grow to, which is nowhere near what large centralized AI companies can achieve today Conclusion: There is no future in such a bankrupt design! It is all theatre to extract as much as possible; subnets are not created as competitive products. They are created simply to exist & to extract as much value out of token investors as possible! There is much I did not cover in this critique, including "decentralization theatre", modularity, bad governance, perverse incentives & terrible UX. This critique was purely economic, which is bad enough to reject TAO on that basis alone! As value investors, we have to avoid such nonsense. It is not only dangerous from an investment perspective, but it also harms the industry as a whole. The more we prop up nonsense like this, the more difficult it will be for outsiders to take our industry seriously That is why we must speak out, as we care about crypto's ultimate goals. Financial freedom, censorship resistance, privacy & more Reject the nonsense, as the numbers & facts speak for themselves. Crypto already presents us with such a beautiful dream for the future; let's not spoil our opportunity by wasting our energy on half-baked ideas like TAO Crypto deserves better than that. So, help us spread this message far & wide. As the truth will set us free! 🔥

English
44
53
284
33K
To a τ
To a τ@Og_nonymous·
@Justin_Bons Why so harsh? Bittensor is no different from most tech giants in their early years, except in $TAO retail investors like me can participate at a very early stage, and actually have a saying. Imagine if Bittensor becomes the equivalent of internet for AI.
To a τ tweet media
English
1
0
4
357
Harry (𝜏,𝜏)
Harry (𝜏,𝜏)@princeharry_za·
The amount op people having to defend Bittensor $TAO for not being a scam makes me wonder.
GIF
Michaël van de Poppe@CryptoMichNL

The past few weeks, people have been calling $TAO a scam and a rugpull. Completely low credits to a great protocol in the AI <> #Crypto sector. Sure, things can go wrong, and things can go to zero, especially in the tech industry. However, given the constant growth of the subnets and the ecosystem as whole, the resilience and fast response after the event took place. It's actually showing more strength than I would have expected it to do.

English
8
1
9
1.8K