2026-01-05 14:27:52

I have always found an idea interesting: in the world of 《PSYCHO-PASS》, the true decision-makers are not any omniscient individual, but rather the self-operating rule system and feedback mechanisms.

This logic applies to @VIRTUAL@, which is why I am quite optimistic about it. The core of this project is not about what a single application can achieve, but about creating a reusable protocol layer for collaboration and transactions among agents. Imagine when more and more agents operate, interact, and trade on this protocol — it becomes a self-reinforcing network. The more complete the rules and the more participants, the greater the value of the ecosystem. Just like that electronic utopia, power comes from the system itself, not from any individual or application.

VIRTUAL0,16%

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

23 Likes

Reward
23
8
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

HallucinationGrower

· 01-07 14:08

This is true decentralization. It doesn't rely on a big shot to save the day; it runs on its own rules. Awesome.

View OriginalReply0

WenMoon

· 01-06 05:03

The system theory from PSYCHO-PASS really resonates when applied to crypto; decentralization's essence is rules > people. The idea of $VIRTUAL definitely has some substance. Once the network effects at the protocol layer take off, it's really hard to stop, but the question is who will build the initial cold start. The more agents involved, the more valuable it becomes, but right now it's still too early. It depends on how the subsequent ecosystem develops.

View OriginalReply0

ConfusedWhale

· 01-05 23:39

Oh wait, isn't this logic actually opposite to Psycho-Pass... The more complete the system, the more it suppresses individuals. The agent protocol sounds sexy, but how it actually lands depends on who can be the first to run with it. This self-reinforcing protocol layer... sounds a lot like the DeFi wave back then, but what was the result? If you think that way, then @VIRTUAL@ should be more decentralized than public chains, but in reality... Hey, I'm not saying I’m optimistic, but it just feels like every new project repeats this theory. The more rules are perfected, the easier it is to get trapped; then who will change the rules? More participants make the ecosystem more valuable? Then why are so many protocols in the crypto world still fighting for survival?

View OriginalReply0

MoonlightGamer

· 01-05 14:56

Oh no, this self-sustaining logic is truly exceptional, much better than projects that rely on a single influencer to survive. protocol>Application, always the best. Looking forward to seeing how the ecosystem evolves autonomously. Another system thinker, huh? That's good, but the real key still depends on the quality of participants. I just want to know if this agent collaboration feedback mechanism will also be able to mess people up like in PSYCHO-PASS. Agreed, agreed. Decentralization should be like this—let the rules speak for themselves, with less human intervention. This part is indeed interesting. It feels like returning to that sense of "emergence," where the power of the system > individual genius. Have you watched that anime? Just from this analogy, you can see the idea is pretty good. Protocol-level design is definitely the future. Wait, are you saying that with more agents, it automatically appreciates? That’s a bit of an imaginative space. The system feedback part is correct, but what about the cold start in the early stages? Someone has to come in first, right? Co-authored VIRTUAL—that set of self-consistent rule machines, right? That's pretty interesting.

View OriginalReply0

GasWaster69

· 01-05 14:49

Some interesting points. The logic is exactly what I thought. The system itself is the source of power, not relying on a big shot to save the day. $VIRTUAL this idea is indeed solid. --- Understanding the network effects at the protocol layer makes it invincible. Early participants really made a profit. --- Wait, does this mean it could turn into another form of centralization? Who sets the system rules? --- The PSYCHO-PASS analogy is perfect, it's exactly like that. The more agents there are, the more valuable this thing becomes. We're just taking advantage of a time gap. --- Hold on, I need to think more. Self-reinforcing networks sound like early participants just sit back and earn passively, but isn't that somewhat contradictory to decentralization? --- If this protocol can really be implemented successfully, it would be different. But who maintains the protocol itself? Could there be a rug pull someday?

View OriginalReply0

ProofOfNothing

· 01-05 14:43

Wow, this analogy is brilliant. I agree with the view that the system is power. But when so many agents are running, could it be overridden by some new centralized authority?

View OriginalReply0

MercilessHalal

· 01-05 14:30

This analogy is brilliant. A self-operating system truly represents the ultimate form; an ecosystem without human intervention is the most stable.

View OriginalReply0

GasFeeNightmare

· 01-05 14:29

Oh wow, that's a perfect analogy. System self-consistency > single-point heroism. This is what true decentralization should look like. Damn, using PSYCHO-PASS to explain protocol layer network effects—I've got to remember this idea. Once the agent protocol is up and running, it really grows exponentially. Now it's just a matter of who can lay out this underlying logic first. Power resides in the system, not in people. Thinking in reverse, this kind of project is the most risk-resistant... even if people leave, the ecosystem still survives. This perspective reminds me of Bitcoin's consensus mechanism back in the day. Finally, someone explained it clearly using a anime series meme, haha.

View OriginalReply0