Sharp Review AO Issue 1

As a deeply disappointed @aoTheComputer ecosystem user, this issue is aimed at the project parties on the AO ecosystem:

1. The project doesn't have any data yet, but is already thinking about issuing tokens to make a quick profit.
Many ecological projects nowadays can't even provide basic product data and user retention, yet they are eager to issue tokens.

A project ≠ a coin. At the very least, a project should first demonstrate real application scenarios and validate market demand before considering tokenization. However, the reality is that many teams, as soon as they launch, rush to issue a token that has no value support at all, even turning into a meaningless "air coin."

Even more outrageous is that @RandAOToken has launched a test coin, but requires users to spend AO to buy it. It is completely opaque whether the test coins purchased will be mapped to the mainnet tokens in the future. Isn't this a disguised ICO?

2. The trend of meaningless involution is prevalent.
The AO ecosystem is still in its early stages, with even the basic infrastructure not being established. Real user scenarios and incremental users have not yet emerged, yet absurd "involution" has already appeared.

Wallet projects are emerging one after another, each emphasizing that they are "more user-friendly," but apart from changing the UI or adding a small feature, there are almost no substantial breakthroughs. The result is that the user experience has not seen much improvement, and the choices are even more confusing.

The same situation also occurs with "wrapped tokens". Recently, @usevento $vAR is about to launch, but aside from creating complexity and fragmentation of liquidity, it provides no real help to users and developers. This meaningless duplication not only wastes resources but also erodes the trust of early users.

3. The greatest harm to the ecosystem: not following the mainstream
Many people in the ecosystem believe that what a new ecosystem needs most is patience, long-termism, and solid construction, rather than impatience and a desire for quick results.

❌ One-sided and foolish!

In the cryptocurrency market, while long-termism is indeed important, what truly determines the popularity and traffic of a project is the mainstream gameplay.

When the entire crypto community is chasing airdrops, you need to provide the expected airdrop.
When crypto enters the KOL-driven traffic economy, you need to have mouth-to-mouth activities.

The problem with the AO ecosystem is that it neither captures the mainstream narrative nor provides real use cases. The result is that it gains neither the trust of developers nor the attention of speculators.

In contrast to the previously good projects in the Arweave ecosystem, @starpowerworld has been listed on Binance Alpha, and @irys_xyz has made it to the Kaito hot list, indicating that it is indeed possible to "break out of the circle." However, the project teams on the AO side are generally still stuck in a phase of self-satisfaction and closed-door development.

4. Written at the end

If we continue to be obsessed with meaningless token issuance and internal competition, the result will only be user loss and developer disappointment.
If we do not conform to mainstream gameplay, the AO ecosystem will only remain in the self-comforting illusion of "long-termism."

If AO wants to come out, it must:
First generate the data, then discuss issuing tokens;
First solve the problem, then engage in internal competition;
First embrace the mainstream, then talk about long-termism.

Otherwise, AO is likely to be just a temporary hype, ultimately resulting in a mess.
@samecwilliams @kylewmi