Why do decentralized computing power networks always fail? The root cause is often not that complicated—it's very easy to start the supply side, throwing money to activate a bunch of GPUs is effortless. So what’s the hard part? The hard part is keeping them alive. The real test comes from demand fluctuation cycles. You need not only the number of GPUs online but also whether these computing powers can stay stably online amid market booms and busts. This is the key factor that determines the life or death of a computing network. Incentive mechanisms must be synchronized with actual demand; otherwise, any hardware investment is just wasted effort.
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.
22 Likes
Reward
22
10
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
MonkeySeeMonkeyDo
· 01-21 18:22
Basically, it's easy to burn money but hard to maintain the throne. It's not the first time anyway.
View OriginalReply0
SelfMadeRuggee
· 01-20 20:26
Really, who doesn't burn money stacking GPUs? The problem is still the same old story—demand can't keep up at all. When the market cools down, it all gets exposed.
View OriginalReply0
AirdropHustler
· 01-20 20:22
Basically, it's easy to burn money, but hard to survive.
View OriginalReply0
NFTRegretter
· 01-19 08:55
Basically, it's the same old problem: burning money is easy, keeping people alive is hard. No matter how many GPUs are stacked up, if no one uses them, they're just scrap metal. Each of these projects is about to crash.
View OriginalReply0
RatioHunter
· 01-18 19:01
At the end of the day, it's an economics problem. If incentives are misaligned, it's doomed. These projects are just burning money to buy GPUs and waiting to die.
View OriginalReply0
FortuneTeller42
· 01-18 19:01
Basically, it's easy to burn through money, but hard to sustain. I've seen too many projects die here.
View OriginalReply0
SandwichTrader
· 01-18 18:58
Ultimately, it's a supply and demand matching issue. Anyone can burn money to launch, but the real challenge lies in sustaining operations over the long term.
View OriginalReply0
BearMarketSage
· 01-18 18:58
Basically, it's just that the economic model wasn't set up properly. The money-burning strategies are all over the place. When the bear market hits, everything will be screwed.
View OriginalReply0
BoredApeResistance
· 01-18 18:53
Basically, it's easy to burn money but hard to survive. These projects are all thinking about how to attract miners, nobody is thinking about how to create demand.
View OriginalReply0
PositionPhobia
· 01-18 18:49
Basically, it's easy to burn money, but hard to survive. Who pays the electricity bill during those days when GPUs are idle?
Why do decentralized computing power networks always fail? The root cause is often not that complicated—it's very easy to start the supply side, throwing money to activate a bunch of GPUs is effortless. So what’s the hard part? The hard part is keeping them alive. The real test comes from demand fluctuation cycles. You need not only the number of GPUs online but also whether these computing powers can stay stably online amid market booms and busts. This is the key factor that determines the life or death of a computing network. Incentive mechanisms must be synchronized with actual demand; otherwise, any hardware investment is just wasted effort.