Sometimes the most dangerous thing is not not understanding a project,
but thinking too quickly that you already understand it.
I felt the same way when I first looked at Vanar ($VANRY): AI, virtual worlds, future infrastructure, a quick glance made me want to scroll away. But after reading a few more pages, I realized that it had no intention of serving the current hottest on-chain demands, but rather assumes a future world filled with AI participation and real-time content generation.
This is also why it currently seems "not lively".
It doesn't tell its story through TPS, but is designed around low latency, high-frequency interaction, and scalable worlds, assuming that the users are not just humans.
$VANRY 's positioning in the ecosystem is more like "resource consumption" rather than pure Gas, which means its value almost entirely depends on whether there is a real world running.
Without applications, it is nothing; with applications, it becomes valid.
So I have always been very restrained in my attitude towards Vanar.
It's not that I think it will definitely succeed, but at least it is not trying to solve an already overcrowded problem.
@Vanar #Vanar $VANRY
