為什麼框架標準沒有代幣，以及 ELIZA 神話

作者：昊天@0xzerebro 正式宣布ZerePy框架和標準發布，很多人都把注意力轉移到為什麼沒有為未知品牌發行代幣

0xzerebro officially announced the release of ZerePy standards and frameworks, which has drawn attention to the absence of token issuance for several emerging brands, leading to speculation about a new ELIZA community. Here's a deeper analysis of this topic:

0xzerebro 正式宣布發布 ZerePy 標準和框架，引發了多個新興品牌代幣發行缺失的關注，引發了關於新 ELIZA 社群的猜測。以下是對主題的更深入分析：

1) For DAO organizations like ai16z that are driven by ownerless AI Agent applications, the ELIZA framework standard serves as a common ground and shared expectations for subsequent open-source ecological development.

1）對於像ai16z這樣由無主AI Agent應用驅動的DAO組織來說，ELIZA框架標準作為後續開源生態發展的共同基礎和共同期望。

Within the GitHub developer community, the influence of the ELIZA framework standard is rapidly expanding. It is endorsed by ai16z as a community token and has gained market consensus. This involves numerous coincidental factors and does not strictly adhere to the initially planned development path. Hence, it is crucial to observe how ai16z designs Tokenomics and defines the relationship between ai16z and ELIZA. However, this integration still involves variables and requires further observation.

在 GitHub 開發者社群內，ELIZA 框架標準的影響力正在迅速擴大。它被ai16z背書為社區代幣，並獲得了市場共識。這涉及諸多巧合因素，並沒有​​嚴格遵循最初規劃的發展路徑。因此，觀察ai16z如何設計Tokenomics並定義ai16z與ELIZA之間的關係至關重要。但這種整合仍有變數，需要進一步觀察。

2) Now, let's consider subsequent projects like ARC and Swarms, which have adopted the approach of first issuing tokens via GitHub repo (IGO). This novel MEME-based issuance method is inherently a form of community financing, which is understandable.

2）現在，讓我們考慮一下後續的項目，例如ARC和Swarms，它們都採用了首先透過GitHub repo（IGO）發行代幣的方式。這種新穎的基於MEME的發行方式本質上是一種社區融資的形式，這是可以理解的。

But, should the framework standard itself issue tokens, and how can it be empowered after issuing tokens? These questions become paramount. Currently, amidst the market's Fomo sentiment, issuing tokens seems to have become a standard practice. However, without clear judgment criteria, there will likely be a phase of issuing tokens for the sake of issuing tokens, which is evidently undesirable.

但是，框架標準本身是否該發行代幣，發行代幣後又該如何賦能呢？這些問題變得至關重要。目前，在市場Fomo情緒中，發行代幣似乎已成為一種標準做法。但如果沒有明確的判斷標準，很可能會出現為了發幣而發幣的階段，這顯然是不可取的。

3) The emergence of ZerePy is a prime example. In essence, the relationship between ZerePy and Zerebro is similar to that between OP Stack and Optimism. It will externalize Zerebro's successful experience in deploying single AI applications into an open-source foundational framework, enabling the market to observe more single AI applications carrying Zerebro genes.

3）ZerePy的出現就是一個很好的例子。本質上，ZerePy 和 Zerebro 之間的關係類似於 OP Stack 和 Optimism 之間的關係。它將把Zerebro將單一AI應用部署的成功經驗具體化到開源基礎框架中，使市場能夠觀察到更多承載Zerebro基因的單一AI應用。

For Zerebro, this is a method of generating open-source traffic and expanding its ecosystem commercially. It can choose to issue a new framework token or authorize a MEME token, depending on its market focus. An ambitious single AI should not recklessly issue "spin-off" tokens.

對於 Zerebro 來說，這是一種產生開源流量並擴展其商業生態系統的方法。它可以根據其市場重點選擇發行新的框架代幣或授權 MEME 代幣。一個雄心勃勃的單一人工智慧不應該魯莽地發行「衍生」代幣。

Unless the ZerePy ecosystem develops significantly, tending towards platformization, and the old Zerebro's Tokenomics cannot support ZerePy's incentive effectiveness, only then will the importance of issuing tokens become evident. Until then, similar tokens can only be considered MEME.

除非ZerePy生態系統顯著發展，趨於平台化，舊的Zerebro的Tokenomics無法支撐ZerePy的激勵有效性，否則發行代幣的重要性才會顯現出來。在此之前，類似的代幣只能被視為 MEME。

Therefore, I believe that soon, the question of whether to issue tokens for the framework standard will transform into an internal logic:

因此，我相信很快，是否為框架標準發行代幣的問題將轉化為內部邏輯：

For frameworks that fully consider Tokenomics effectiveness, need to leverage platform effects, and focus on achieving chain operations, issuing tokens is necessary. But, for ecosystemsを中心にsingle AI or other types of DAO organizations, whether the framework needs to issue tokens should be analyzed on a case-by-case basis.

對於充分考慮通證經濟有效性、需要發揮平台效應、專注於實現鏈上營運的框架來說，發行通證是必要的。但是，對於生態系を中心に單一AI或其他類型的DAO組織，框架是否需要發行代幣應具體情況具體分析。

Finally, a heads-up for friends: the "asset issuance" method of first issuing on GitHub is novel, but scams are bound to be rife in the early stages. Learning to evaluate the quality of GitHub repository code, analyzing the feasibility of its commercial application vision, and assessing the reliability of team members are all essential.

最後，給朋友提個醒：在GitHub上首發的「資產發行」方式雖新穎，但早期難免詐騙猖獗。學習評估GitHub儲存庫程式碼的品質、分析其商業應用願景的可行性以及評估團隊成員的可靠性都是必不可少的。

As for community MEME tokens being officially endorsed, ELIZA has set an example, but whether similar projects will exist in the future is inherently uncertain. Moreover, whether ELIZA can truly be empowered has become an unknown variable. Randomly encountering a framework standard and blindly buying into it, relying on speculative imagination, carries excessive risk.

至於社群MEME代幣被正式背書，ELIZA已經做出了榜樣，但未來是否會存在類似的項目本身就存在不確定性。而且，ELIZA能否真正賦能，也成為了未知的變數。隨機遇到一個框架標準，依靠投機想像盲目購買，風險過大。