The latter will not make it through in the wrong environment. It is natural to compute on Vanar Chain.
The rationale is the squeeze canvas effectivity within Silicon Valley and reduce the cost per token to the fivedecimal position. At the same time, a lot of so-called AI public chains in the Web3 remain grounded in the inability to match with EVM in the past. It is chain ganging a sports car. I have observed in the recent past insofar dealing with a high frequency trading model is involved, that Gas fees on Arbitrum are simply spiraling out of control at the most inopportune time. Immediacy vs decentralization The problem with such a balance between immediacy and decentralization is that, in reality, AI agent data flow cannot be supported.
The atmosphere is different as it looks at Vanar buildings. Neutron layer is not a layer that just stores the layer between agents, it is a state synchronization layer. A typical blockchain was more similar to AWS than testnet work. This comes as an enormous reprieve to the Web2 developers due to the reason that they would not have to worry about the Gas optimization on the Solidity level.
Still, there are flaws. Documentation of the developers is low, the parameters definitions are vague and the debugging can be characterized as a game of guesses. The governmental adventurer lasts long and is difficult to the eye. Vanar can be readily scaled to smooth, AI-native interaction, however, without improvements to the infrastructure and documentation this even the most optimistic architecture turns into a castle in the air.