Some thoughts after the TOKEN2049 Singapore event, finally on my way home after a long journey.

Unexpectedly, I met a product lead from Pi Network during the event. I want to clarify one thing from the outset: I am not someone with an in-depth understanding of Pi Network. I am writing this only from the perspective of a relative newcomer, and I sincerely welcome corrections or different views from those who have followed the project for a long time.

I only began seriously researching Pi Network about a month ago. However, the name Nicolas Kokkalis was not entirely unfamiliar to me.

I first encountered Nicolas about eight years ago, when I happened to attend a small group discussion where he introduced StarX, the incubator he was leading at the time. To be honest, StarX itself did not leave a particularly deep impression on me. But I remember Nicolas. He struck me as someone with an exceptionally deep understanding of distributed systems—arguably one of the strongest people in that field at Stanford.

Later, I briefly spoke with him at a gathering with mutual acquaintances. It was nothing particularly significant, but I remembered people describing him as a fairly calm and reserved person: someone who rarely spoke publicly and was far more comfortable with research than with public-facing work.

For me, that was more or less where the story ended. I continued researching AI systems, while he continued on his own path.

Until recently.

When I began exploring concepts such as free mining, decentralized finance, and community-owned digital infrastructure, surprisingly, quite a few people told me, “You should look into what Nicolas has built.”

I have never minded learning from others, regardless of their age, background, or industry. So I spent about a week researching his project, particularly from the perspective of the lessons we might draw for the decentralized AI infrastructure we are building.

I found the issues to be far more complex than I had imagined.

Building technology is difficult. Building technology for millions of users is much more difficult. And building something in which millions of people place their financial expectations, emotions, and personal hopes is an entirely different matter.

Social media makes everything even more complicated.

Perhaps that is also why I somewhat understand why Nicolas seems to prefer research over continuous public communication. I respect that.

Recently, he has found himself at the center of a great deal of criticism, particularly surrounding the decline in the PI price. Some people believe he is deliberately suppressing the token’s price, or that he should personally be held responsible for the market’s performance.

I see it somewhat differently.

Before Amazon became what it is today, it went through periods when its very survival was in serious doubt. Tesla also went through similarly difficult periods. If every difficult chapter were reduced entirely to the stock price—if every founder were judged solely by short-term market performance—some of the companies we now consider transformative might never have survived long enough to realize their ambitions.

That does not mean founders should be exempt from criticism. Nor does it mean that price, tokenomics, transparency, or execution are unimportant. They absolutely matter.

But price and vision are not always the same thing.

What I find interesting about Nicolas’s original idea is its ambition: to make digital currency accessible without requiring people to start with substantial capital or navigate the traditional barriers associated with accessing digital assets, while ultimately pursuing a monetary network that relies less on traditional financial intermediaries.