> Consider that these entities may become self-managing at some point in the near future. Yes, like absolutely no other successful companies in the past decade

> Consider that these entities may become self-managing at some point in the near future. Yes, like absolutely no other successful companies in the past decade. Let's assume that. > If they need to pay for calls to other models, crypto-payments can be useful because they include identity and payment in one function. 1. Crypto has fees of it's own, many of which are often higher if you don't batch payments and scam miners. 2. These companies, if they become self-managing at some point, will not want to rely on a fragile third party to provide identity. 3. The real reason why companies pay per-call is to mitigate fraud. USD is good at this - crypto is not. There is no world in which crypto payments become attractive to anyone who wants to be paid by normal people. That world never manifested, and likely never will. > it is unfair to label all blockchains as scams. Many blockchain projects have legitimate use cases and are backed by reputable organizations. And Turing Pharmapseuticals endorsed Martin Shkreli. It's perfectly fair to judge bad apples for what they are - these systems have no safeguards for manipulation and no meaningful way to track fraudulent behavior. Almost every other modern, state-backed payment provider does. It's that simple. > including direct transactions between model hosting companies or any other parties involved in AI services. I don't think these platforms are going to want traffic from people who seek to pay "privately between participants". The loss of those customers is probably seen as a benefit.