Staring blankly at the codebase at four in the morning, this feeling has occurred too many times in this past bull market, only this time the subject has changed to Vanar. To figure out whether these so-called AI public chains on the market are genuinely doing work or just making big promises, I forced myself to turn over every project I could find like a compulsive patient. To be honest, this process was quite nauseating. The more you see, the more you discover a pathological inertia in this circle. As soon as GPT updates a feature, ten so-called dog projects claiming to perfectly solve the AI computing power problem can pop up in the crypto space. When I first clicked on the Creator Pad link, I actually had a sarcastic mindset, intending to find a few bugs to criticize and then go to sleep. But after trying it, not only did I not sleep, but I also ended up staring at the screen all night.
We need to clarify one thing first: what the widely shouted AI-Ready actually is. The mainstream narrative in the market now treats AI as a gimmick, as if just launching a token with NPCs on the chain that can chat a bit makes it an AI blockchain. This is simply nonsense. True AI-Ready has never been about showing off to human users. It is meant for machines. In the future on-chain world, 90% of active addresses may not be real people, but various AI agents. The high-frequency trading, data exchanges, and model calls between these intelligent agents are the ultimate test for infrastructure. You let an AI use Ethereum? That would be abuse. A transaction confirmation takes seconds, and Gas fees are based on luck; this is entirely unworkable for AI programs requiring millisecond-level responsiveness and deterministic costs.
This is the first strange feeling I had while tinkering with the Vanar Creator Pad. I tried to create a simple NFT collection, and the whole process was so smooth that I felt a bit uncomfortable. There were no heart-stopping signature pop-ups, no anxiety of staring at a loading progress bar. For a moment, I thought I was using some SaaS platform from Web2. This sense of unawareness is precisely the most terrifying competitive edge. We have been PUA'd by the current public chains for too long, always feeling that something that isn't difficult to use can't be blockchain. But for AI developers wanting to access Web3, they don't need to understand what Gas mechanisms or nonce management are; they just need an API, a stable operating environment. I was a bit surprised that Vanar managed to de-blockchainize this layer so much. But it's not without its drawbacks. When I uploaded large files, the Creator Pad actually froze once. The interface showed that the upload was successful, but the on-chain data did not refresh for a long time. I was pretty upset, thinking it was indeed a half-finished product. But I didn't rush to close it; instead, I checked their browser console and found it was a local node synchronization delay issue. Interestingly, when I mentioned it in their tech community, I initially thought it would sink like other projects, or be drowned out by those bot promoters. However, within ten minutes, someone with a developer title came out to explain that this was due to a bug in the load balancing configuration of the testnet and told me they were fixing it. This human touch in a circle full of air actually made me feel a long-lost sense of reassurance.
Now let's take a look at the competitors. I put effort into comparing this area. For example, Fetch.ai, the concept is indeed ahead of its time, with autonomous agents and machine learning, but that tech stack is too closed. You have to learn their specialized language and logic, which has a ridiculously high migration cost for general developers today. Then there's Solana, which is indeed fast, but that approach of sacrificing stability for speed makes me hesitant to put crucial AI model assets on it. What if it goes down one day? Would my AI agents just brain-dead on-chain for hours? Vanar's strategy seems quite cunning, or rather pragmatic. It is fully compatible with EVM, meaning existing Ethereum developers and Solidity code can almost be seamlessly migrated. It doesn't attempt to reinvent the wheel but rather polishes the existing wheels to make them more suitable for running on highways.
Here, I must mention the Google Cloud collaboration that I initially scoffed at. I delved deeply into their node architecture and found that this matter is not simple. Many public chains' so-called collaborations are just about buying some cloud services and issuing a press release. But Vanar seems to have integrated Google's underlying security capabilities and global node network into its consensus layer. What does this mean? It means that under the guise of decentralization, it possesses Web2-level anti-attack capabilities and stability. You might say this is not geeky enough, not Crypto Native enough. But think about it, do those truly large AI companies, whether OpenAI or Anthropic, care if your node is in some unknown basement on this planet? No, they care about SLA, compliance, and security. Vanar's hybrid approach precisely leaves a backdoor for these giants.
This brings us to the core question: why is holding VANRY considered participating in infrastructure rather than simple speculation? Speculation is about betting on size, betting on whether the next hot spot is this or that. But infrastructure is about betting on trends. If you believe that AI will definitely combine with blockchain in the future, and that data rights and micro-payments are essential for the AI economy, then you need to find the project that resembles a shovel the most. Now it seems that Render is a shovel, but it only handles rendering; Arweave is a shovel, but it only handles storage. What Vanar wants to do is to be the road paver. It does not produce AI; it simply smooths the road so that AI can run. This positioning may not see tenfold increases like MEME coins in a bull market, but in a bear market or during industry reshuffling, it can survive. I also discovered a very interesting detail in the testnet regarding fee predictions. For ordinary EVM chains, Gas fees fluctuate dynamically, which is a disaster for AI. Because AI agents need to calculate ROI before executing tasks. If costs are uncontrollable, then the AI's decision-making logic will collapse. Vanar seems to have implemented a mechanism at the base level that keeps fee fluctuations within a very small range. This machine-friendly design may not be prominently stated in the white paper, but those who understand code can see the nuances at a glance. This indicates that the project team is genuinely considering how to use AI rather than how to fool retail investors.
Of course, Vanar is not perfect either. Besides the stuttering bug I encountered earlier, its ecosystem is indeed a bit desolate right now. If you take a spin, aside from the official demos, there aren't many third-party major applications running. But this is like a newly repaired highway: the road conditions are excellent, but there are few cars. This is both a risk and an opportunity. The risk is that if there are always no cars, the road becomes useless; the opportunity is that before the cars congest, you can take a spot at the toll booth. What I see now is that they are desperately trying to attract Web2 creators and developers through low-barrier tools like the Creator Pad. This move is very clever; rather than competing with Ethereum for those old DeFi gamblers in the existing market, why not dig for newcomers who want to play with AI but don't understand blockchain in the incremental market? Writing this, I actually feel quite emotional. In the crypto circle, we always overestimate changes in a year and underestimate transformations in ten years. Everyone is focused on the ups and downs of K-lines, but very few are willing to read a line of code or try a rough beta product. What impressed me most about Vanar is not how disruptive its technology is, but that it is trying to bridge the huge gap between Web2 and Web3. It does not decentralize for the sake of decentralization; it seeks the optimal solution in compromise. This pragmatism is simply an anomaly in a market full of fundamentalism and speculative bubbles. After all, in this industry, those who survive the longest are never the fastest, but those who are rooted the deepest.
