const

don’t lose the plot. dtao was meant to eliminate apathy, not your ability to believe in the mission. it was designed to curb oligarchic voting and stop emissions from bleeding into scammy or stagnant subnets, projects that, over time, could have brought the entire network down. but in doing so, it may have also watered down the market’s willingness to believe in something greater than just buybacks. in trying to fix one failure mode, we risk tipping into another: short-term thinking that rewards extractive behavior over innovation. some have forgotten that utility and novelty are core to the network’s long-term resilience. yes, revenue potential is a critical indicator for success and to be clear, we at @metanova_labs launched a subnet with the goal of fast-tracking the development of the most asymmetric real-world assets possible but day 1 revenue is not the only signal that matters. if we lose the conviction that carried tao through its early days (before revenue, before attention) we risk undermining the network’s core values and edge. people didn’t buy $tao because of #bittensor’s business model, they bought tao because they believed in something. the church of rao and its missionaries congregated based on conviction and that conviction accounts for the token’s appreciation. dtao has successfully forced many pre-existing subnets to find PMF. but if it’s also meant to be a launchpad, a way to bootstrap new decentralized tech that can outperform centralized incumbents we need a better frameworks for evaluating both a subnet’s likelihood of success and its contribution to the ecosystem’s resilience. this includes: - vision - if you’re not using bittensor to do something novel or even entirely new, you’re doing it wrong. tokenized incentives should be leveraged to coordinate and fund the development of visionary ideas. - decentralization as edge - does it tackle a problem that benefits from decentralization? building on bittensor should be an edge not a compromise competitiveness - can it outperform closed alternatives based on use-case specific quality or efficiency metrics? - revenue (yes!) - at a pace equal to or faster than centralized competitors - iteration - subnets should be shipping constantly. miners are incentivized to improve their approaches to remain competitive, subnets must too. - integration - is the subnet working with other subnets? collab > silo. tao up, alpha up. make the pie bigger and everyone wins. - external engagement - can the subnet appeal to other crypto communities, new capital will be key (still waiting on the bridge of my dreams and need teams that can gather new people at the other side of the bridge. - vibes - attention is real capital and makes TAM exponentially larger. culture matters. - comms - is it legible to non-experts? is it more than just a hype machine? many are disappointed with recent market moves and we should continue to refine dtao’s design but don’t forget that it was built to reward patience and conviction.

@DeanBuilds22 Up 30% on investment in 4 days which is pretty wild. You need to be smart about this though and train for non stationary distributions + use time series foundation models with RL and a genetic algorithm.