IrfanPK
فتح تداول
مُتداول بمُعدّل مرتفع
1.3 سنوات
2.9K+ تتابع
1.8K+ المتابعون
4.9K+ إعجاب
412 تمّت مُشاركتها
منشورات
الحافظة الاستثمارية
الكل
اقتباسات
Live
عرض الترجمة
Plasma: A Foundational Idea That Changed How Ethereum Thinks About Scaling
When Ethereum began attracting real-world usage through DeFi platforms, NFT marketplaces, and decentralized applications, the network faced a serious challenge. Transactions slowed down, gas fees increased, and congestion became common during peak activity. It became clear that Ethereum, in its original form, could not efficiently handle mass adoption without some form of scaling solution.
Among the earliest and most influential ideas proposed to solve this problem was Plasma.
Plasma was not simply an attempt to make Ethereum faster. It introduced a new way of thinking about how blockchains can scale without overloading the main network. Instead of increasing Ethereum’s workload, Plasma focused on reducing it.
The Core Concept Behind Plasma
Plasma is a Layer 2 framework that creates smaller chains, known as child chains, which operate alongside Ethereum. These chains process transactions independently and only communicate essential information back to the main chain.
Rather than recording every transaction on Ethereum, child chains periodically submit summarized proofs. This allows Ethereum to verify the correctness of activity without handling every individual transaction.
The outcome is a system where users benefit from faster and cheaper transactions while Ethereum continues to provide security and final settlement.
Why This Approach Was Important
Before Plasma, scaling discussions mostly revolved around increasing Ethereum’s capacity. Plasma shifted the focus toward a more efficient idea: reducing how much Ethereum needs to do.
This approach makes Ethereum lighter and more manageable. The main chain becomes a security and settlement layer, while routine transaction activity happens elsewhere.
Security Without Blind Trust
A common concern with off-chain activity is trust. If transactions are happening outside Ethereum, how can users be sure their funds are safe?
Plasma addresses this with a built-in exit mechanism. If a user detects suspicious behavior on a child chain, they can withdraw their assets back to Ethereum. This ensures that users never have to rely entirely on the child chain operators.
Ethereum remains the ultimate authority, protecting user funds even when transactions occur off-chain.
Ideal Use Cases for Plasma
Plasma’s design is particularly suitable for applications that generate large volumes of simple transactions, such as:
Blockchain-based games with frequent actions
NFT platforms with continuous trading activity
Micropayment systems where users make many small transfers
These activities do not require every action to be permanently stored on Ethereum. By moving them to child chains, Plasma reduces congestion and improves the user experience.
Data Efficiency and Network Relief
Because only summarized data is sent to Ethereum, Plasma significantly reduces the amount of information the main chain must process and store. This improves overall network efficiency and lowers the burden on Ethereum nodes.
This idea of data efficiency later became a key principle in many other Layer 2 solutions.
Challenges That Sparked Further Innovation
While Plasma introduced powerful concepts, it also revealed challenges. The exit process could become complex during periods of heavy usage. Users needed access to transaction data to exit safely, which raised concerns about data availability.
These challenges encouraged the development of new Layer 2 technologies like Optimistic Rollups and ZK Rollups, which built upon Plasma’s ideas while addressing its limitations.
Plasma’s Lasting Impact on Ethereum Scaling
Even though newer scaling methods have become popular, many of the ideas they use were first explored through Plasma:
Moving execution off the main chain
Keeping Ethereum as the security anchor
Reducing on-chain data
Allowing users to exit safely without trust
Plasma helped shape the direction of Ethereum’s Layer 2 ecosystem.
Why Plasma Still Matters Today
Understanding Plasma is important for anyone interested in how Ethereum scaling evolved. It represents one of the earliest serious attempts to rethink how blockchain networks can handle growth intelligently.
@Plasma showed that scalability is not just about making a blockchain bigger or faster. It is about designing systems that distribute workload in a smarter way while preserving security.
@Plasma $XPL
Among the earliest and most influential ideas proposed to solve this problem was Plasma.
Plasma was not simply an attempt to make Ethereum faster. It introduced a new way of thinking about how blockchains can scale without overloading the main network. Instead of increasing Ethereum’s workload, Plasma focused on reducing it.
The Core Concept Behind Plasma
Plasma is a Layer 2 framework that creates smaller chains, known as child chains, which operate alongside Ethereum. These chains process transactions independently and only communicate essential information back to the main chain.
Rather than recording every transaction on Ethereum, child chains periodically submit summarized proofs. This allows Ethereum to verify the correctness of activity without handling every individual transaction.
The outcome is a system where users benefit from faster and cheaper transactions while Ethereum continues to provide security and final settlement.
Why This Approach Was Important
Before Plasma, scaling discussions mostly revolved around increasing Ethereum’s capacity. Plasma shifted the focus toward a more efficient idea: reducing how much Ethereum needs to do.
This approach makes Ethereum lighter and more manageable. The main chain becomes a security and settlement layer, while routine transaction activity happens elsewhere.
Security Without Blind Trust
A common concern with off-chain activity is trust. If transactions are happening outside Ethereum, how can users be sure their funds are safe?
Plasma addresses this with a built-in exit mechanism. If a user detects suspicious behavior on a child chain, they can withdraw their assets back to Ethereum. This ensures that users never have to rely entirely on the child chain operators.
Ethereum remains the ultimate authority, protecting user funds even when transactions occur off-chain.
Ideal Use Cases for Plasma
Plasma’s design is particularly suitable for applications that generate large volumes of simple transactions, such as:
Blockchain-based games with frequent actions
NFT platforms with continuous trading activity
Micropayment systems where users make many small transfers
These activities do not require every action to be permanently stored on Ethereum. By moving them to child chains, Plasma reduces congestion and improves the user experience.
Data Efficiency and Network Relief
Because only summarized data is sent to Ethereum, Plasma significantly reduces the amount of information the main chain must process and store. This improves overall network efficiency and lowers the burden on Ethereum nodes.
This idea of data efficiency later became a key principle in many other Layer 2 solutions.
Challenges That Sparked Further Innovation
While Plasma introduced powerful concepts, it also revealed challenges. The exit process could become complex during periods of heavy usage. Users needed access to transaction data to exit safely, which raised concerns about data availability.
These challenges encouraged the development of new Layer 2 technologies like Optimistic Rollups and ZK Rollups, which built upon Plasma’s ideas while addressing its limitations.
Plasma’s Lasting Impact on Ethereum Scaling
Even though newer scaling methods have become popular, many of the ideas they use were first explored through Plasma:
Moving execution off the main chain
Keeping Ethereum as the security anchor
Reducing on-chain data
Allowing users to exit safely without trust
Plasma helped shape the direction of Ethereum’s Layer 2 ecosystem.
Why Plasma Still Matters Today
Understanding Plasma is important for anyone interested in how Ethereum scaling evolved. It represents one of the earliest serious attempts to rethink how blockchain networks can handle growth intelligently.
@Plasma showed that scalability is not just about making a blockchain bigger or faster. It is about designing systems that distribute workload in a smarter way while preserving security.
@Plasma $XPL
عرض الترجمة
@Vanar stands out because it looks at blockchain from a future angle rather than a present one. While most networks are still focused on improving transaction speed and lowering fees for users, Vanar’s attention is on something deeper: how blockchain will function when AI systems begin interacting with it regularly.
This is not about adding AI tools to an existing chain. It is about shaping infrastructure so intelligence can operate naturally within it.
AI systems behave very differently from humans. They don’t need wallet dashboards or manual confirmations. They rely on memory to store context, reasoning to make decisions, automation to execute actions, and reliable settlement to move value. These needs require a different type of blockchain design.
Vanar addresses this through components like myNeutron, Kayon, and Flows. Together, they show how memory, reasoning, and automation can live directly at the infrastructure layer rather than being external services. This allows intelligent systems to function on-chain without constant human involvement.
Another important part of this approach is reach. By making its technology accessible across chains such as Base, Vanar ensures that these AI-ready capabilities are not limited to one ecosystem. This opens more room for practical usage and interaction.
In this structure, VANRY is closely connected to real activity happening inside the network. As intelligent processes use memory, reasoning, automation, and settlement, value moves through the system. This links the token to actual usage rather than just market attention.
Vanar’s direction shows how blockchain may evolve as AI becomes a more active participant.
#vanar $VANRY
This is not about adding AI tools to an existing chain. It is about shaping infrastructure so intelligence can operate naturally within it.
AI systems behave very differently from humans. They don’t need wallet dashboards or manual confirmations. They rely on memory to store context, reasoning to make decisions, automation to execute actions, and reliable settlement to move value. These needs require a different type of blockchain design.
Vanar addresses this through components like myNeutron, Kayon, and Flows. Together, they show how memory, reasoning, and automation can live directly at the infrastructure layer rather than being external services. This allows intelligent systems to function on-chain without constant human involvement.
Another important part of this approach is reach. By making its technology accessible across chains such as Base, Vanar ensures that these AI-ready capabilities are not limited to one ecosystem. This opens more room for practical usage and interaction.
In this structure, VANRY is closely connected to real activity happening inside the network. As intelligent processes use memory, reasoning, automation, and settlement, value moves through the system. This links the token to actual usage rather than just market attention.
Vanar’s direction shows how blockchain may evolve as AI becomes a more active participant.
#vanar $VANRY
الأرباح والخسائر من تداول اليوم
+$0.01
+0.33%
فانار تشين: إعداد بنية تحتية للبلوكشين من أجل مستقبل يقوده الذكاء الاصطناعي
على مدى سنوات، كانت محادثات البلوكشين تدور حول السرعة، والرسوم المنخفضة، والقابلية للتوسع. كل شبكة جديدة تدعي أنها أسرع من السابقة، وأرخص من المنافسة، وأكثر كفاءة في التعامل مع المعاملات. لكن فانار تشين تتعامل مع المشكلة من اتجاه مختلف تماماً.
بدلاً من السؤال عن كيفية جعل المعاملات أسرع للبشر، يسأل فانار سؤالاً أكثر تطوراً: ماذا يحدث عندما تصبح أنظمة الذكاء الاصطناعي المستخدمين الرئيسيين لشبكات البلوكشين؟
هذا التحول في التفكير يغير كل شيء حول كيفية تصميم البنية التحتية.
بدلاً من السؤال عن كيفية جعل المعاملات أسرع للبشر، يسأل فانار سؤالاً أكثر تطوراً: ماذا يحدث عندما تصبح أنظمة الذكاء الاصطناعي المستخدمين الرئيسيين لشبكات البلوكشين؟
هذا التحول في التفكير يغير كل شيء حول كيفية تصميم البنية التحتية.
عرض الترجمة
yes your right 👍
AI agents don’t chase trends. They need infrastructure that works every second without surprises. Variable fees and unstable execution break automation fast. Vanar focuses on consistency over noise which is why it feels built for long term AI use. $VANRY
#vanar @Vanar
#vanar @Vanar
عرض الترجمة
it's fast my friend
AI Agents Will Change Blockchains More Than Humans Ever Did
Most blockchains today are still designed around a simple assumption: humans are the primary users. Wallets interfaces confirmations and signatures all exist for people clicking buttons.
That assumption is starting to break.
AI agents do not behave like humans. They do not wait. They do not hesitate. They do not open wallets or check gas prices. They operate continuously and expect the system beneath them to be stable predictable and boring.
This is where many AI narratives quietly fall apart.
We talk about autonomous agents but run them on infrastructure that requires constant human babysitting. Variable fees network congestion and unpredictable execution turn autonomy into a partial illusion.
If AI agents are going to matter the infrastructure has to change.
Why payments are not a side feature for AI
For humans a payment delay is annoying. For AI it is a failure.
Agents rely on predictable settlement to function properly. They need to know the cost of an action before taking it. They need certainty that execution will not suddenly become expensive or delayed.
Most chains treat fees as a market driven mechanism. That works when humans are choosing when to transact. It works poorly when software is expected to act automatically.
Unpredictable costs break automation.
This is why fixed fee models and stable settlement are more important for AI than raw throughput. Speed helps but consistency matters more.
Designing for machine behavior
When infrastructure is designed for machines rather than people the priorities change.
You optimize for reliability instead of excitement. You value boring consistency over flashy performance. You reduce variables instead of adding them.
Vanar appears to be built with this mindset.
Rather than pushing wallet experiences it focuses on making the underlying system predictable enough for agents to operate without supervision. Fixed fees fast confirmation and simple settlement rules create an environment where automation can run safely.
This may not look exciting to users but it matters deeply to software.
The link between memory and payments
Payments alone are not enough.
An AI agent that can pay but cannot remember is still limited. Memory gives payments meaning. It allows an agent to connect past outcomes with future spending decisions.
When an agent remembers what actions were costly or inefficient it can adjust behavior. Over time this turns payment activity into learning.
Without memory payments remain mechanical.
By combining persistent context with predictable settlement infrastructure becomes something an agent can reason about rather than react to.
Why this matters for real world use
The closer AI gets to real economic activity the less tolerance there is for uncertainty.
Machine to machine payments energy usage micro transactions and automated services all require infrastructure that behaves the same way every time. Human intuition cannot patch over instability.
This is where many experimental systems fail. They work in controlled demos but collapse under continuous use.
Infrastructure that supports AI agents has to assume scale from the beginning not as an upgrade.
A different growth curve
Projects focused on AI agents and payments often grow quietly.
There are no viral moments in predictable infrastructure. The value shows up gradually as systems continue to function while others break.
This can make such projects easy to overlook in fast moving markets. But long term usage tends to reward reliability rather than novelty.
When agents begin to manage more value and more processes the chains they choose will not be the loudest ones. They will be the most stable ones.
Preparing for non human users
The most important shift happening in Web3 may not be about new assets or faster chains. It may be about changing who the user is.
When AI agents become primary users infrastructure must evolve to meet their needs. Memory predictable payments and stable execution stop being features and start being requirements.
Chains that prepare for this transition early gain an advantage that is difficult to retrofit later.
This kind of preparation does not always attract attention. But when the environment changes it becomes obvious who planned ahead.
Vanar feels positioned for a future where machines transact more often than humans.
That future may arrive quietly but once it does the infrastructure behind it will matter more than any narrative.
#vanar @Vanar $VANRY
That assumption is starting to break.
AI agents do not behave like humans. They do not wait. They do not hesitate. They do not open wallets or check gas prices. They operate continuously and expect the system beneath them to be stable predictable and boring.
This is where many AI narratives quietly fall apart.
We talk about autonomous agents but run them on infrastructure that requires constant human babysitting. Variable fees network congestion and unpredictable execution turn autonomy into a partial illusion.
If AI agents are going to matter the infrastructure has to change.
Why payments are not a side feature for AI
For humans a payment delay is annoying. For AI it is a failure.
Agents rely on predictable settlement to function properly. They need to know the cost of an action before taking it. They need certainty that execution will not suddenly become expensive or delayed.
Most chains treat fees as a market driven mechanism. That works when humans are choosing when to transact. It works poorly when software is expected to act automatically.
Unpredictable costs break automation.
This is why fixed fee models and stable settlement are more important for AI than raw throughput. Speed helps but consistency matters more.
Designing for machine behavior
When infrastructure is designed for machines rather than people the priorities change.
You optimize for reliability instead of excitement. You value boring consistency over flashy performance. You reduce variables instead of adding them.
Vanar appears to be built with this mindset.
Rather than pushing wallet experiences it focuses on making the underlying system predictable enough for agents to operate without supervision. Fixed fees fast confirmation and simple settlement rules create an environment where automation can run safely.
This may not look exciting to users but it matters deeply to software.
The link between memory and payments
Payments alone are not enough.
An AI agent that can pay but cannot remember is still limited. Memory gives payments meaning. It allows an agent to connect past outcomes with future spending decisions.
When an agent remembers what actions were costly or inefficient it can adjust behavior. Over time this turns payment activity into learning.
Without memory payments remain mechanical.
By combining persistent context with predictable settlement infrastructure becomes something an agent can reason about rather than react to.
Why this matters for real world use
The closer AI gets to real economic activity the less tolerance there is for uncertainty.
Machine to machine payments energy usage micro transactions and automated services all require infrastructure that behaves the same way every time. Human intuition cannot patch over instability.
This is where many experimental systems fail. They work in controlled demos but collapse under continuous use.
Infrastructure that supports AI agents has to assume scale from the beginning not as an upgrade.
A different growth curve
Projects focused on AI agents and payments often grow quietly.
There are no viral moments in predictable infrastructure. The value shows up gradually as systems continue to function while others break.
This can make such projects easy to overlook in fast moving markets. But long term usage tends to reward reliability rather than novelty.
When agents begin to manage more value and more processes the chains they choose will not be the loudest ones. They will be the most stable ones.
Preparing for non human users
The most important shift happening in Web3 may not be about new assets or faster chains. It may be about changing who the user is.
When AI agents become primary users infrastructure must evolve to meet their needs. Memory predictable payments and stable execution stop being features and start being requirements.
Chains that prepare for this transition early gain an advantage that is difficult to retrofit later.
This kind of preparation does not always attract attention. But when the environment changes it becomes obvious who planned ahead.
Vanar feels positioned for a future where machines transact more often than humans.
That future may arrive quietly but once it does the infrastructure behind it will matter more than any narrative.
#vanar @Vanar $VANRY
عرض الترجمة
I think it's go to the better feature
Markets usually overvalue excitement and undervalue stability. Plasma looks priced like a narrative project, not a system meant to sit underneath daily money movement. That gap is where long-term asymmetry usually hides. $XPL #Plasma @Plasma
عرض الترجمة
yes your right 👍
Why Plasma Doesn’t Chase Users and Why That Might Actually Work
Most crypto networks spend their early days trying to look busy. Incentives everywhere, dashboards flashing activity, daily announcements to remind you they exist.
Plasma feels like it’s doing the opposite.
There’s a sense that it’s not in a hurry to prove itself to everyone. It doesn’t over optimize for attention. Instead, it seems built with the assumption that usage will come only if the system behaves correctly under real pressure.
That mindset shows up in how Plasma talks about adoption. Not in terms of wallets created or short term volume, but in terms of whether the system can support repeatable, boring activity. The kind of usage that doesn’t spike, doesn’t trend, but doesn’t break either.
This approach is uncomfortable in crypto because it delays gratification. You don’t get instant fireworks. You get slow validation.
But that’s usually how real infrastructure grows. Roads don’t go viral. Payment rails don’t need daily hype. They need to work the same way tomorrow as they did yesterday.
Plasma seems designed with that patience baked in. It’s not trying to convince users to stay. It’s trying to make leaving unnecessary.
If it succeeds, adoption won’t feel like a moment. It’ll feel like inertia.
@Plasma #Plasma $XPL
Plasma feels like it’s doing the opposite.
There’s a sense that it’s not in a hurry to prove itself to everyone. It doesn’t over optimize for attention. Instead, it seems built with the assumption that usage will come only if the system behaves correctly under real pressure.
That mindset shows up in how Plasma talks about adoption. Not in terms of wallets created or short term volume, but in terms of whether the system can support repeatable, boring activity. The kind of usage that doesn’t spike, doesn’t trend, but doesn’t break either.
This approach is uncomfortable in crypto because it delays gratification. You don’t get instant fireworks. You get slow validation.
But that’s usually how real infrastructure grows. Roads don’t go viral. Payment rails don’t need daily hype. They need to work the same way tomorrow as they did yesterday.
Plasma seems designed with that patience baked in. It’s not trying to convince users to stay. It’s trying to make leaving unnecessary.
If it succeeds, adoption won’t feel like a moment. It’ll feel like inertia.
@Plasma #Plasma $XPL
@Plasma وفكرة التفاعل الخفيف الوزن مع البلوكشين
تتركز معظم المناقشات حول توسيع إيثريوم على السرعة والرسوم. ومع ذلك، قدّمت بلازما فكرة أكثر هدوءًا ولكنها أكثر عملية: ليس كل تفاعل مع البلوكشين يحتاج إلى العيش على السلسلة الرئيسية.
فكر في عدد الإجراءات التي يقوم بها المستخدمون في التطبيقات اللامركزية، والألعاب، ومنصات NFT، أو تطبيقات الدفع. هذه الإجراءات متكررة، ومتكررة، وغالبًا ما تكون ذات قيمة صغيرة. إن تسجيل كل واحدة من هذه مباشرة على إيثريوم يخلق ضغطًا غير ضروري على الشبكة. كانت نهج بلازما هو نقل هذا النشاط الروتيني إلى سلاسل فرعية متصلة مع إبقاء إيثريوم على علم فقط عندما يكون ذلك ضروريًا.
هذا ينشئ نظامًا حيث لم تعد السلسلة الرئيسية مثقلة بالإجراءات الصغيرة. بدلاً من ذلك، تصبح طبقة أمان وتسوية، بينما تحدث الأنشطة اليومية في مكان آخر في بيئة أكثر كفاءة.
بالنسبة للمستخدمين، يترجم هذا إلى تفاعل أكثر سلاسة. تشعر المعاملات بأنها أسرع، وتبقى الرسوم منخفضة، وتصبح التجربة أقرب إلى التطبيقات التقليدية بدلاً من تأكيدات البلوكشين البطيئة. بالنسبة للمطورين، تفتح بلازما إمكانية بناء منصات ذات نشاط عالي دون القلق باستمرار بشأن ارتفاع أسعار الغاز والازدحام.
ما يجعل هذا النهج مثيرًا للاهتمام هو أنه يغير كيفية تعريفنا للقدرة على التوسع. بدلاً من السؤال، "كيف يمكن لإيثريوم التعامل مع المزيد من المعاملات؟" تسأل بلازما، "كيف يمكن لإيثريوم تجنب التعامل مع المعاملات التي لا تحتاج إلى أن تكون موجودة؟"
هذا العقلية مفيدة بشكل خاص للتطبيقات ذات التفاعل الثقيل مع المستخدم مثل الألعاب، والمدفوعات الصغيرة، وأنظمة الولاء، وتداول NFT. تستفيد هذه المنصات من السرعة وانخفاض التكلفة ولكنها لا تزال تتطلب طبقة الثقة الخاصة بإيثريوم في الخلفية.
نموذج بلازما يظهر أن القدرة على التوسع في بعض الأحيان تتعلق بتقليل الحمل، وليس زيادة السعة. من خلال إبقاء إيثريوم مركزة على الأمان والتسوية النهائية، يصبح النظام البيئي بشكل عام أكثر توازنًا وكفاءة وسهولة في الاستخدام دون المساس بالثقة.
#plasma $XPL #CZAMAonBinanceSquare
تتركز معظم المناقشات حول توسيع إيثريوم على السرعة والرسوم. ومع ذلك، قدّمت بلازما فكرة أكثر هدوءًا ولكنها أكثر عملية: ليس كل تفاعل مع البلوكشين يحتاج إلى العيش على السلسلة الرئيسية.
فكر في عدد الإجراءات التي يقوم بها المستخدمون في التطبيقات اللامركزية، والألعاب، ومنصات NFT، أو تطبيقات الدفع. هذه الإجراءات متكررة، ومتكررة، وغالبًا ما تكون ذات قيمة صغيرة. إن تسجيل كل واحدة من هذه مباشرة على إيثريوم يخلق ضغطًا غير ضروري على الشبكة. كانت نهج بلازما هو نقل هذا النشاط الروتيني إلى سلاسل فرعية متصلة مع إبقاء إيثريوم على علم فقط عندما يكون ذلك ضروريًا.
هذا ينشئ نظامًا حيث لم تعد السلسلة الرئيسية مثقلة بالإجراءات الصغيرة. بدلاً من ذلك، تصبح طبقة أمان وتسوية، بينما تحدث الأنشطة اليومية في مكان آخر في بيئة أكثر كفاءة.
بالنسبة للمستخدمين، يترجم هذا إلى تفاعل أكثر سلاسة. تشعر المعاملات بأنها أسرع، وتبقى الرسوم منخفضة، وتصبح التجربة أقرب إلى التطبيقات التقليدية بدلاً من تأكيدات البلوكشين البطيئة. بالنسبة للمطورين، تفتح بلازما إمكانية بناء منصات ذات نشاط عالي دون القلق باستمرار بشأن ارتفاع أسعار الغاز والازدحام.
ما يجعل هذا النهج مثيرًا للاهتمام هو أنه يغير كيفية تعريفنا للقدرة على التوسع. بدلاً من السؤال، "كيف يمكن لإيثريوم التعامل مع المزيد من المعاملات؟" تسأل بلازما، "كيف يمكن لإيثريوم تجنب التعامل مع المعاملات التي لا تحتاج إلى أن تكون موجودة؟"
هذا العقلية مفيدة بشكل خاص للتطبيقات ذات التفاعل الثقيل مع المستخدم مثل الألعاب، والمدفوعات الصغيرة، وأنظمة الولاء، وتداول NFT. تستفيد هذه المنصات من السرعة وانخفاض التكلفة ولكنها لا تزال تتطلب طبقة الثقة الخاصة بإيثريوم في الخلفية.
نموذج بلازما يظهر أن القدرة على التوسع في بعض الأحيان تتعلق بتقليل الحمل، وليس زيادة السعة. من خلال إبقاء إيثريوم مركزة على الأمان والتسوية النهائية، يصبح النظام البيئي بشكل عام أكثر توازنًا وكفاءة وسهولة في الاستخدام دون المساس بالثقة.
#plasma $XPL #CZAMAonBinanceSquare
الأرباح والخسائر من تداول اليوم
+$0.06
+0.24%
كيف قدمت بلازما طريقة أكثر ذكاءً لتوسيع إيثريوم دون المساومة على الأمان
عندما بدأت إيثريوم في الحصول على اعتماد حقيقي من خلال التمويل اللامركزي، والرموز غير القابلة للاستبدال، والتطبيقات اللامركزية، أصبح من المستحيل تجاهل قضية واحدة: قابلية التوسع. كانت المعاملات بطيئة خلال ذروة النشاط، وأصبحت رسوم الغاز غير متوقعة، وغالبًا ما شعرت الشبكة بالازدحام. تم اقتراح العديد من الحلول مع مرور الوقت، ولكن واحدة من الأفكار الأولى والأكثر تأثيرًا كانت بلازما.
@Plasma لم يكن مجرد محاولة أخرى لجعل إيثريوم أسرع. بل قدم طريقة مختلفة للتفكير في قابلية توسيع البلوكشين. بدلاً من إجبار إيثريوم على معالجة كل معاملة، اقترحت بلازما تقليل عبء العمل على إيثريوم من خلال نقل معظم الأنشطة بعيدًا عن السلسلة الرئيسية مع الحفاظ على إيثريوم كطبقة الأمان النهائية.
@Plasma لم يكن مجرد محاولة أخرى لجعل إيثريوم أسرع. بل قدم طريقة مختلفة للتفكير في قابلية توسيع البلوكشين. بدلاً من إجبار إيثريوم على معالجة كل معاملة، اقترحت بلازما تقليل عبء العمل على إيثريوم من خلال نقل معظم الأنشطة بعيدًا عن السلسلة الرئيسية مع الحفاظ على إيثريوم كطبقة الأمان النهائية.
@Vanar يبني بهدوء من أجل مستقبل لا تزال معظم سلاسل الكتل غير مستعدة له بعد. بينما لا تزال العديد من الشبكات تتنافس على السرعة والرسوم وعدد المعاملات، فإن اتجاه فانار مبني على فرضية مختلفة: الموجة التالية من النشاط على السلسلة لن تأتي من البشر، بل من أنظمة الذكاء الاصطناعي التي تعمل بشكل مستقل.
هذا يغير كيف يجب أن نفكر في بنية سلاسل الكتل.
أنظمة الذكاء الاصطناعي لا تستخدم المحافظ بالطريقة التي يفعلها البشر. لا تضغط على الأزرار، أو تؤكد النوافذ المنبثقة، أو توقع المعاملات يدويًا. ما تحتاجه هو ذاكرة للاحتفاظ بالسياق، ومنطق لشرح القرارات، وأتمتة لتنفيذ الإجراءات بشكل آمن، وتسوية موثوقة لنقل القيمة عبر الشبكات. هذه متطلبات أعمق من مجرد TPS عالية أو رسوم غاز منخفضة.
يعكس فانار هذا النهج الذي يركز على الذكاء الاصطناعي من خلال مكونات عملية حقيقية. يقدم myNeutron ذاكرة دلالية على مستوى البنية التحتية، مما يسمح للذكاء الاصطناعي بتخزين واسترجاع المعلومات مع مرور الوقت. يركز Kayon على المنطق وقابلية الشرح، مما يجعل من الممكن فهم سبب اتخاذ إجراء معين. يحول Flows الذكاء إلى تنفيذ آلي دون تدخل بشري مستمر.
هنا يصبح $VANRY مهمًا. الرمز ليس مجرد جزء من الحوكمة أو المضاربة. إنه يقع داخل النشاط الذي يحدث عبر هذه المجموعة الذكية. مع استخدام الذاكرة والمنطق والأتمتة، تتدفق القيمة عبر الشبكة.
فانار لا تحاول متابعة الاتجاهات. إنها تضع نفسها في موقف حول كيفية تطور استخدام سلاسل الكتل مع تزايد نشاط الذكاء الاصطناعي على السلسلة.
#vanar $VANRY
هذا يغير كيف يجب أن نفكر في بنية سلاسل الكتل.
أنظمة الذكاء الاصطناعي لا تستخدم المحافظ بالطريقة التي يفعلها البشر. لا تضغط على الأزرار، أو تؤكد النوافذ المنبثقة، أو توقع المعاملات يدويًا. ما تحتاجه هو ذاكرة للاحتفاظ بالسياق، ومنطق لشرح القرارات، وأتمتة لتنفيذ الإجراءات بشكل آمن، وتسوية موثوقة لنقل القيمة عبر الشبكات. هذه متطلبات أعمق من مجرد TPS عالية أو رسوم غاز منخفضة.
يعكس فانار هذا النهج الذي يركز على الذكاء الاصطناعي من خلال مكونات عملية حقيقية. يقدم myNeutron ذاكرة دلالية على مستوى البنية التحتية، مما يسمح للذكاء الاصطناعي بتخزين واسترجاع المعلومات مع مرور الوقت. يركز Kayon على المنطق وقابلية الشرح، مما يجعل من الممكن فهم سبب اتخاذ إجراء معين. يحول Flows الذكاء إلى تنفيذ آلي دون تدخل بشري مستمر.
هنا يصبح $VANRY مهمًا. الرمز ليس مجرد جزء من الحوكمة أو المضاربة. إنه يقع داخل النشاط الذي يحدث عبر هذه المجموعة الذكية. مع استخدام الذاكرة والمنطق والأتمتة، تتدفق القيمة عبر الشبكة.
فانار لا تحاول متابعة الاتجاهات. إنها تضع نفسها في موقف حول كيفية تطور استخدام سلاسل الكتل مع تزايد نشاط الذكاء الاصطناعي على السلسلة.
#vanar $VANRY
الأرباح والخسائر من تداول اليوم
+$0.07
+0.28%
عرض الترجمة
Vanar Chain: Why AI-First Infrastructure Changes How We Should Look at Blockchains
Most blockchains today still operate on an old assumption: humans are the primary users. Wallets, dashboards, signatures, confirmations — the entire experience is designed around people manually interacting with the network.
@Vanar challenges that assumption.
It starts from a different reality: in the near future, a large portion of on-chain activity will be performed by AI agents, not humans. And when that happens, the requirements from blockchain infrastructure change completely.
This is where the idea of AI-first infrastructure becomes important.
AI-First vs AI-Added: A Practical Difference
A lot of projects today talk about AI. They integrate AI tools, launch AI features, or announce AI partnerships. But these are usually additions to systems that were never built for intelligence in the first place.
That is AI-added infrastructure.
Vanar represents AI-first thinking. Instead of asking how AI can fit into existing blockchain design, it asks: What does AI actually need from the chain to operate independently and reliably?
AI does not care about wallet interfaces. It does not need fancy dashboards. It does not operate by clicking buttons. AI systems require something deeper from infrastructure.
They need memory. They need reasoning. They need automation. And they need seamless settlement of value.
Vanar’s architecture reflects these needs at a foundational level.
What AI-Ready Really Means
In Web3, scalability is often reduced to TPS and gas fees. But for AI systems, speed alone is not enough.
AI-ready infrastructure must provide:
Persistent memory so AI can store and recall context over time
Reasoning layers so decisions can be explained and verified
Automation frameworks so actions can be executed safely without manual input
Settlement rails so value can move globally without friction
These are not optional features. They are structural requirements.
Vanar demonstrates this through real products, not theory.
myNeutron shows that semantic memory and persistent AI context can exist directly at the infrastructure layer
Kayon proves that reasoning and explainability can live natively on-chain
Flows shows how intelligence can be translated into safe, automated execution
This is what AI-readiness looks like when it is built into the chain itself.
Why Cross-Chain Expansion Matters
AI systems are not limited by ecosystems. They need access to users, liquidity, and applications wherever they exist.
By making its technology available cross-chain, starting with Base, Vanar extends its AI-first capabilities beyond a single environment. This is important because it expands where these intelligent functions can be used.
It also increases the real usage surface for VANRY, allowing activity to grow across multiple networks rather than remaining confined to one.
Why New L1 Chains May Struggle in the AI Era
The Web3 space already has many fast and cheap Layer 1 blockchains. The problem is not lack of performance. The problem is lack of infrastructure that is ready for AI-driven activity.
Launching another generic L1 with higher TPS does not address this shift. Those chains are still designed around human interaction.
Vanar’s focus highlights that the future competition is not about speed, but about readiness for intelligent systems that operate differently from humans.
How VANRY Connects to Real Usage
Across myNeutron, Kayon, and Flows, one thing remains consistent: VANRY underpins the activity happening inside this intelligent stack.
As AI stores memory, processes reasoning, and executes automated actions, value flows through the network. This ties the token directly to usage rather than narratives.
Why Payments Complete the Picture
AI agents do not use traditional wallet UX. They require reliable, compliant settlement rails to transact automatically.
This is why payments are a core part of Vanar’s direction. Without settlement, AI-first infrastructure remains incomplete. $VANRY plays a role in enabling real economic activity between intelligent systems.
A Shift from Narratives to Readiness
In a market often driven by trends and short-term stories, Vanar’s positioning is different. It focuses on building infrastructure that matches how blockchain usage is likely to evolve with AI.
This leaves significant room for growth, because the broader market is still early in understanding what AI-ready blockchain infrastructure actually requires.
#Vanar is not trying to add AI as a feature.
It is building blockchain in a way that makes AI a natural participant.
And $VANRY sits at the center of that design.
@Vanar challenges that assumption.
It starts from a different reality: in the near future, a large portion of on-chain activity will be performed by AI agents, not humans. And when that happens, the requirements from blockchain infrastructure change completely.
This is where the idea of AI-first infrastructure becomes important.
AI-First vs AI-Added: A Practical Difference
A lot of projects today talk about AI. They integrate AI tools, launch AI features, or announce AI partnerships. But these are usually additions to systems that were never built for intelligence in the first place.
That is AI-added infrastructure.
Vanar represents AI-first thinking. Instead of asking how AI can fit into existing blockchain design, it asks: What does AI actually need from the chain to operate independently and reliably?
AI does not care about wallet interfaces. It does not need fancy dashboards. It does not operate by clicking buttons. AI systems require something deeper from infrastructure.
They need memory. They need reasoning. They need automation. And they need seamless settlement of value.
Vanar’s architecture reflects these needs at a foundational level.
What AI-Ready Really Means
In Web3, scalability is often reduced to TPS and gas fees. But for AI systems, speed alone is not enough.
AI-ready infrastructure must provide:
Persistent memory so AI can store and recall context over time
Reasoning layers so decisions can be explained and verified
Automation frameworks so actions can be executed safely without manual input
Settlement rails so value can move globally without friction
These are not optional features. They are structural requirements.
Vanar demonstrates this through real products, not theory.
myNeutron shows that semantic memory and persistent AI context can exist directly at the infrastructure layer
Kayon proves that reasoning and explainability can live natively on-chain
Flows shows how intelligence can be translated into safe, automated execution
This is what AI-readiness looks like when it is built into the chain itself.
Why Cross-Chain Expansion Matters
AI systems are not limited by ecosystems. They need access to users, liquidity, and applications wherever they exist.
By making its technology available cross-chain, starting with Base, Vanar extends its AI-first capabilities beyond a single environment. This is important because it expands where these intelligent functions can be used.
It also increases the real usage surface for VANRY, allowing activity to grow across multiple networks rather than remaining confined to one.
Why New L1 Chains May Struggle in the AI Era
The Web3 space already has many fast and cheap Layer 1 blockchains. The problem is not lack of performance. The problem is lack of infrastructure that is ready for AI-driven activity.
Launching another generic L1 with higher TPS does not address this shift. Those chains are still designed around human interaction.
Vanar’s focus highlights that the future competition is not about speed, but about readiness for intelligent systems that operate differently from humans.
How VANRY Connects to Real Usage
Across myNeutron, Kayon, and Flows, one thing remains consistent: VANRY underpins the activity happening inside this intelligent stack.
As AI stores memory, processes reasoning, and executes automated actions, value flows through the network. This ties the token directly to usage rather than narratives.
Why Payments Complete the Picture
AI agents do not use traditional wallet UX. They require reliable, compliant settlement rails to transact automatically.
This is why payments are a core part of Vanar’s direction. Without settlement, AI-first infrastructure remains incomplete. $VANRY plays a role in enabling real economic activity between intelligent systems.
A Shift from Narratives to Readiness
In a market often driven by trends and short-term stories, Vanar’s positioning is different. It focuses on building infrastructure that matches how blockchain usage is likely to evolve with AI.
This leaves significant room for growth, because the broader market is still early in understanding what AI-ready blockchain infrastructure actually requires.
#Vanar is not trying to add AI as a feature.
It is building blockchain in a way that makes AI a natural participant.
And $VANRY sits at the center of that design.
عرض الترجمة
yes it's great 👍
الذكاء الاصطناعي لا يفشل في سلسلة بسبب السرعة. إنه يفشل لأنه ينسى.
بدون ذاكرة، لا يمكن للوكلاء التعلم أو التحسين.
فانار تبني بنية تحتية للذكاء الاصطناعي حيث يكون السياق، والتفكير، والمدفوعات أصلية.
هذه هي الجاهزية، وليست ضجة.
$VANRY #vanar @Vanar
بدون ذاكرة، لا يمكن للوكلاء التعلم أو التحسين.
فانار تبني بنية تحتية للذكاء الاصطناعي حيث يكون السياق، والتفكير، والمدفوعات أصلية.
هذه هي الجاهزية، وليست ضجة.
$VANRY #vanar @Vanar
عرض الترجمة
one of the best project
AI on Web3 Feels Early Because the Infrastructure Is
Something feels off about the way AI is being discussed in Web3 right now.
We talk as if intelligent agents are already here, ready to trade, manage assets, or interact with the real world. But under the surface, most blockchains are still designed for one thing only: humans clicking buttons.
That mismatch matters.
AI agents don’t behave like users. They don’t open wallets, refresh dashboards, or approve transactions manually. They operate continuously. They rely on past context. They need predictable execution and settlement.
Most chains were never built for that.
This is why a lot of “AI on chain” activity feels shallow. The agents look impressive in demos, but reset constantly. No memory. No learning curve. No accumulation of experience.
Without continuity, intelligence can’t mature.
Infrastructure that assumes agents exist
What stands out about Vanar is not a single feature, but an assumption baked into the design: AI agents are expected to be real participants in the system.
That assumption changes everything.
Instead of treating memory as off chain storage or a convenience layer, Vanar treats it as infrastructure. With myNeutron, context and semantic memory can persist. Past interactions matter. History informs behavior.
This alone pushes AI beyond simple execution.
From memory to reasoning to action
Memory is only useful if it leads somewhere.
That’s where reasoning and explainability come in. Kayon focuses on making decisions understandable and traceable. This is crucial if AI is going to interact with money, governance, or real-world systems. Blind automation isn’t innovation. Controlled intelligence is.
Flows then connect intelligence to action. Not reckless automation, but structured execution under defined rules. This is the difference between AI doing things and AI doing the right things.
Why payments complete the picture
There’s another part many people overlook: settlement.
AI agents don’t tolerate uncertainty well. Variable fees, congestion based pricing, and unpredictable execution are friction points. Fixed, low-cost payments and real settlement rails are not luxuries for AI. They’re requirements.
This is why payments are central to AI first infrastructure, not an add-on.
Readiness over attention
Right now, $VANRY isn’t dominating headlines. And that’s okay.
Readiness often looks unexciting until it becomes necessary. The market has plenty of fast chains and plenty of narratives. What it lacks are systems designed for how AI will actually operate.
Vanar isn’t optimizing for today’s noise. It’s preparing for a future where agents are persistent, autonomous, and economically active.
When AI moves from experiments to production, infrastructure built around memory, reasoning, automation, and payments won’t feel early anymore.
It will feel obvious.
#vanar @Vanar $VANRY
We talk as if intelligent agents are already here, ready to trade, manage assets, or interact with the real world. But under the surface, most blockchains are still designed for one thing only: humans clicking buttons.
That mismatch matters.
AI agents don’t behave like users. They don’t open wallets, refresh dashboards, or approve transactions manually. They operate continuously. They rely on past context. They need predictable execution and settlement.
Most chains were never built for that.
This is why a lot of “AI on chain” activity feels shallow. The agents look impressive in demos, but reset constantly. No memory. No learning curve. No accumulation of experience.
Without continuity, intelligence can’t mature.
Infrastructure that assumes agents exist
What stands out about Vanar is not a single feature, but an assumption baked into the design: AI agents are expected to be real participants in the system.
That assumption changes everything.
Instead of treating memory as off chain storage or a convenience layer, Vanar treats it as infrastructure. With myNeutron, context and semantic memory can persist. Past interactions matter. History informs behavior.
This alone pushes AI beyond simple execution.
From memory to reasoning to action
Memory is only useful if it leads somewhere.
That’s where reasoning and explainability come in. Kayon focuses on making decisions understandable and traceable. This is crucial if AI is going to interact with money, governance, or real-world systems. Blind automation isn’t innovation. Controlled intelligence is.
Flows then connect intelligence to action. Not reckless automation, but structured execution under defined rules. This is the difference between AI doing things and AI doing the right things.
Why payments complete the picture
There’s another part many people overlook: settlement.
AI agents don’t tolerate uncertainty well. Variable fees, congestion based pricing, and unpredictable execution are friction points. Fixed, low-cost payments and real settlement rails are not luxuries for AI. They’re requirements.
This is why payments are central to AI first infrastructure, not an add-on.
Readiness over attention
Right now, $VANRY isn’t dominating headlines. And that’s okay.
Readiness often looks unexciting until it becomes necessary. The market has plenty of fast chains and plenty of narratives. What it lacks are systems designed for how AI will actually operate.
Vanar isn’t optimizing for today’s noise. It’s preparing for a future where agents are persistent, autonomous, and economically active.
When AI moves from experiments to production, infrastructure built around memory, reasoning, automation, and payments won’t feel early anymore.
It will feel obvious.
#vanar @Vanar $VANRY
عرض الترجمة
yes your right u
Banks train people to ask for permission to earn. Protocols are starting to flip that logic. Plasma feels like part of that shift, where value grows by design instead of by approval. That mindset change alone is powerful. $XPL @Plasma #Plasma
عرض الترجمة
great information
What Changes When Your Digital Dollar Stops Sitting Still
I had a strange thought recently while looking at my bank balance. The number was the same as yesterday, and it would probably be the same tomorrow. No growth, no movement, just slowly losing value without making a sound.
That is how money has worked for most people for a long time. You store it, and time quietly works against you. To make it grow, you usually need permission, paperwork, or minimum balances that feel designed to keep people out.
What makes Plasma interesting is that it seems to question this assumption. Why should holding digital dollars feel passive? Why should value only grow if you actively lock it somewhere or chase yield strategies?
By connecting stablecoins with institutional grade yield systems, Plasma hints at a different idea. A place where holding value is not the same as letting it decay. Where returns are not a separate activity but part of the environment itself.
This changes the psychology of money. When assets grow by default, people behave differently. They stop rushing. They stop forcing moves just to stay ahead of inflation. The system becomes calmer, not more aggressive.
$XPL lives inside this shift. Its relevance increases as the network becomes more than a transfer layer and starts acting like a financial environment. Not loud, not speculative, just quietly productive.
If this model works, the question will no longer be how fast money moves, but how intelligently it lives while waiting.
#Plasma $XPL @Plasma
That is how money has worked for most people for a long time. You store it, and time quietly works against you. To make it grow, you usually need permission, paperwork, or minimum balances that feel designed to keep people out.
What makes Plasma interesting is that it seems to question this assumption. Why should holding digital dollars feel passive? Why should value only grow if you actively lock it somewhere or chase yield strategies?
By connecting stablecoins with institutional grade yield systems, Plasma hints at a different idea. A place where holding value is not the same as letting it decay. Where returns are not a separate activity but part of the environment itself.
This changes the psychology of money. When assets grow by default, people behave differently. They stop rushing. They stop forcing moves just to stay ahead of inflation. The system becomes calmer, not more aggressive.
$XPL lives inside this shift. Its relevance increases as the network becomes more than a transfer layer and starts acting like a financial environment. Not loud, not speculative, just quietly productive.
If this model works, the question will no longer be how fast money moves, but how intelligently it lives while waiting.
#Plasma $XPL @Plasma
توسيع الإيثيريوم دون التضحية بالأمان
الإيثيريوم قوي، ولكن مع نمو DeFi وNFTs وdApps، بدأت الشبكة تواجه الازدحام ورسوم الغاز العالية. تم تقديم Plasma لحل هذه المشكلة من خلال إنشاء سلاسل فرعية تتعامل مع المعاملات خارج سلسلة الإيثيريوم الرئيسية. يتم إرسال الملخصات الأساسية فقط مرة أخرى إلى الإيثيريوم، مما يحافظ على أمانه مع تقليل الازدحام.
الميزة الرئيسية لـ Plasma هي السرعة دون المساس بالثقة. يمكن للمستخدمين إجراء معاملات بسرعة وبتكلفة أقل، مع الاستمرار في الحصول على خيار العودة إلى الإيثيريوم إذا حدث أي شيء مريب. يجعل هذا الأمر مثاليًا لتطبيقات المعاملات العالية مثل الألعاب والمدفوعات الصغيرة وأسواق NFT.
كما قدمت Plasma فكرة فصل التنفيذ عن الأمان: تقوم السلاسل الفرعية بمعالجة المعاملات بكفاءة، ويقوم الإيثيريوم بالتحقق منها. حتى اليوم، تستلهم العديد من حلول Layer 2 من هيكل Plasma، مما يظهر أن التوسع الذكي ليس مجرد سرعة، بل يتعلق بتصميم النظام من أجل الكفاءة والأمان معًا.
#plasma $XPL
@Plasma
الإيثيريوم قوي، ولكن مع نمو DeFi وNFTs وdApps، بدأت الشبكة تواجه الازدحام ورسوم الغاز العالية. تم تقديم Plasma لحل هذه المشكلة من خلال إنشاء سلاسل فرعية تتعامل مع المعاملات خارج سلسلة الإيثيريوم الرئيسية. يتم إرسال الملخصات الأساسية فقط مرة أخرى إلى الإيثيريوم، مما يحافظ على أمانه مع تقليل الازدحام.
الميزة الرئيسية لـ Plasma هي السرعة دون المساس بالثقة. يمكن للمستخدمين إجراء معاملات بسرعة وبتكلفة أقل، مع الاستمرار في الحصول على خيار العودة إلى الإيثيريوم إذا حدث أي شيء مريب. يجعل هذا الأمر مثاليًا لتطبيقات المعاملات العالية مثل الألعاب والمدفوعات الصغيرة وأسواق NFT.
كما قدمت Plasma فكرة فصل التنفيذ عن الأمان: تقوم السلاسل الفرعية بمعالجة المعاملات بكفاءة، ويقوم الإيثيريوم بالتحقق منها. حتى اليوم، تستلهم العديد من حلول Layer 2 من هيكل Plasma، مما يظهر أن التوسع الذكي ليس مجرد سرعة، بل يتعلق بتصميم النظام من أجل الكفاءة والأمان معًا.
#plasma $XPL
@Plasma
عرض الترجمة
@Vanar Chain is not trying to be just another fast blockchain. Its focus is on preparing infrastructure for a future where AI systems, not humans, will be the main actors on-chain. That changes everything about how a network should be designed.
AI does not care about wallet UX, flashy dashboards, or marketing narratives. It needs memory to store context, reasoning to justify actions, automation to execute tasks safely, and settlement rails to move value without friction. This is where Vanar’s direction becomes different from most chains that are still focused on TPS and low fees as their main selling points.
Products like myNeutron, Kayon, and Flows show how memory, reasoning, and automation can live directly at the infrastructure layer. And with $VANRY powering activity across this stack, the token is connected to real usage rather than hype.
#vanar $VANRY
AI does not care about wallet UX, flashy dashboards, or marketing narratives. It needs memory to store context, reasoning to justify actions, automation to execute tasks safely, and settlement rails to move value without friction. This is where Vanar’s direction becomes different from most chains that are still focused on TPS and low fees as their main selling points.
Products like myNeutron, Kayon, and Flows show how memory, reasoning, and automation can live directly at the infrastructure layer. And with $VANRY powering activity across this stack, the token is connected to real usage rather than hype.
#vanar $VANRY
سلسلة فانا والتحول نحو بنية تحتية مدعومة بالذكاء الاصطناعي
تم تصميم معظم سلاسل الكتل اليوم لعالم يقوم فيه البشر بالنقر على الأزرار، وتوقيع المعاملات، ونقل الرموز من محفظة إلى أخرى. تبدأ سلسلة فانا من افتراض مختلف: الموجة التالية من النشاط على السلسلة لن يقودها البشر، بل وكلاء الذكاء الاصطناعي الذين يحتاجون إلى الذاكرة، والتفكير، والأتمتة، والتسوية الموثوقة.
هذه هي النقطة التي تصبح فيها فكرة البنية التحتية المدعومة بالذكاء الاصطناعي مهمة. تتحدث العديد من الشبكات الآن عن إضافة ميزات الذكاء الاصطناعي، لكنها تحاول إدخال الذكاء في أنظمة لم تُصمم لهذا الغرض من الأساس. تتناول فانا هذا من الاتجاه المعاكس. تم تشكيل هيكلها بناءً على ما تتطلبه أنظمة الذكاء الاصطناعي فعليًا لتعمل بشكل أصلي على السلسلة.
هذه هي النقطة التي تصبح فيها فكرة البنية التحتية المدعومة بالذكاء الاصطناعي مهمة. تتحدث العديد من الشبكات الآن عن إضافة ميزات الذكاء الاصطناعي، لكنها تحاول إدخال الذكاء في أنظمة لم تُصمم لهذا الغرض من الأساس. تتناول فانا هذا من الاتجاه المعاكس. تم تشكيل هيكلها بناءً على ما تتطلبه أنظمة الذكاء الاصطناعي فعليًا لتعمل بشكل أصلي على السلسلة.
الفكرة الأساسية لبلازما: توسيع الإيثيريوم دون إضعاف أمانه
عندما يتحدث الناس عن مشكلة توسيع الإيثيريوم، فإنهم عادة ما يركزون على السرعة ورسوم الغاز. لكن بلازما اقتربت من القضية من منظور هيكلي أكثر. بدلاً من محاولة جعل الإيثيريوم يعالج المزيد من المعاملات مباشرة، اقترحت بلازما تقليل مقدار العمل الذي يحتاج الإيثيريوم إلى القيام به في المقام الأول.
@Plasma هو إطار عمل من الطبقة الثانية مصمم لنقل معظم أنشطة المعاملات بعيدًا عن السلسلة الرئيسية للإيثيريوم مع الحفاظ على الإيثيريوم كطبقة الأمان النهائية. قد يبدو هذه الفكرة بسيطة اليوم، ولكن عندما تم تقديم بلازما لأول مرة، غيرت الطريقة التي يفكر بها المطورون حول قابلية توسيع البلوكتشين.
@Plasma هو إطار عمل من الطبقة الثانية مصمم لنقل معظم أنشطة المعاملات بعيدًا عن السلسلة الرئيسية للإيثيريوم مع الحفاظ على الإيثيريوم كطبقة الأمان النهائية. قد يبدو هذه الفكرة بسيطة اليوم، ولكن عندما تم تقديم بلازما لأول مرة، غيرت الطريقة التي يفكر بها المطورون حول قابلية توسيع البلوكتشين.
عرض الترجمة
good and informative
الذكاء الاصطناعي على البلوكشين ليس فاشلاً لأنه بطيء
إنه يفشل لأنه ينسى
لا أعتقد أن معظم الناس يدركون ذلك بعد، لكن الذكاء الاصطناعي على السلسلة اليوم لديه عيب خطير لا يمكن لأي قدر من الضجة إصلاحه.
إنه ينسى كل شيء.
يتم التعامل مع كل تفاعل كما لو كان المرة الأولى. كل قرار معزول. لا توجد ذاكرة، لا يوجد منحنى تعلم، لا توجد استمرارية. هذا ليس ذكاء. هذا أتمتة تتظاهر بأنها ذكية.
الذكاء الحقيقي يتراكم. ينمو البشر لأن الخبرات تتجمع مع مرور الوقت. الأخطاء تهم. العادات تهم. السياق يهم.
لا أعتقد أن معظم الناس يدركون ذلك بعد، لكن الذكاء الاصطناعي على السلسلة اليوم لديه عيب خطير لا يمكن لأي قدر من الضجة إصلاحه.
إنه ينسى كل شيء.
يتم التعامل مع كل تفاعل كما لو كان المرة الأولى. كل قرار معزول. لا توجد ذاكرة، لا يوجد منحنى تعلم، لا توجد استمرارية. هذا ليس ذكاء. هذا أتمتة تتظاهر بأنها ذكية.
الذكاء الحقيقي يتراكم. ينمو البشر لأن الخبرات تتجمع مع مرور الوقت. الأخطاء تهم. العادات تهم. السياق يهم.
سجّل الدخول لاستكشاف المزيد من المُحتوى