Seeing many people skeptical about ICP, which is normal—long-term, there are really only two important things: whether people are using it, and whether it's transparent. But the narrative of "no one uses it / Ponzi scheme / operated by scammers" doesn't actually match how ICP works in practice.

First, let's talk about the core mechanism. ICP is an open on-chain computing network, where canisters (smart contracts) run deterministically on it, directly serve web pages, and pay for resource consumption with cycles—these cycles are converted from real ICP tokens, and users burn exactly what they use, with full on-chain traceability. This is fundamentally different from a Ponzi scheme. Ponzi schemes rely on new entrants' money to pay old holders; ICP's core logic is pay-per-computation, with tokens converted into cycles and then consumed. This is actual utility, not circular payments.

Regarding concerns about "infinite supply," I understand. ICP doesn't have a fixed hard cap, but its issuance rules are transparent, rule-based, and there is a destruction mechanism linked to demand. What truly affects the supply are the security budget and actual computational consumption—this mindset is much healthier than simply thinking "a hard cap is good, no cap is a scam." This is actually the core logic of ICP tokenomics: token supply isn't a fixed number game, but dynamically balanced with the network's actual usage and security costs.

The price performance in 2021 was indeed brutal, but that was happening across the entire market. Price volatility doesn't equal protocol fraud. If you really want to assess the fundamentals, instead of looking at market sentiment, look at these: chain-key cross-chain integration, passkey identity solutions, on-chain web capabilities, verifiable execution of functions that are already live, and real usage data. These are the things worth paying attention to.