Last night, in order to test that damn cross-chain bridge, I stayed up until three in the morning. Looking at the rows of green Success prompts in the terminal, I suddenly felt a sense of absurdity, like building a skyscraper in a wasteland. Vanar gives me this feeling; it’s like cramming a modern skyscraper into an undeveloped wilderness. In the past few days, I've gone through the high-performance public chains on the market again, from the congestion of Polygon to the complex subnet of Avalanche, each with its own maddening shortcomings. And Vanar, which has been rebranded from Virtua, seems to me like old wine in a new bottle. But when I actually started running data, that terrifyingly stable confirmation speed forced me to reevaluate its value.
We have to admit that the current AI public chain track is filled with bubbles; as long as it’s a project, it dares to claim to be an AI computing power layer, regardless of whether its pitiful TPS can handle even the most basic inference model. I initially had no hope for Vanar and was even prepared to mock its technical documentation on Twitter. But as I ran that Python script designed to test node pressure, things became a bit interesting. Vanar clearly borrowed Google Cloud's infrastructure to optimize the synchronization efficiency of global nodes. This approach will definitely score points against its decentralization; if one day Google goes crazy and cuts off the servers, whether this chain can still run is an unknown. But conversely, for enterprises like Disney and Nike, what they want is a sense of accountability and security, not absolute censorship resistance. Vanar has done this very commercially; it sacrificed some geek ideals for enterprise-level high availability.
However, the current state of Creator Pad indeed evokes mixed feelings. Its UI design is so simple that it feels almost unbelievable, encapsulating all complex on-chain interactions into easy click operations. But when you try to upload some non-standard format media files, it will throw you a fit. Once, I uploaded a GLB format 3D model, and it kept spinning without throwing an error or succeeding, just consuming time. This immature interaction can easily discourage many impatient developers. But I don’t deny it because I know that in software engineering, fixing bugs is the simplest task; the hardest part is architectural design. The underlying architecture of Vanar is clearly well thought out, as it has made specific indexing optimizations for the massive small files generated by AI, which is vividly reflected when I run batch generation scripts later.
Compared to Near Protocol, I have always felt that Near's sharding technology is currently the most elegant scaling solution, but its asynchronous contract call logic is simply a developer's nightmare; writing a simple cross-contract interaction can confuse people. Vanar doesn't have this intellectual burden; it simply and brutally uses high-performance nodes to bear the load. When I was running scripts, I specifically observed the gas cost consumption and was amazed to find that its cost prediction model is extremely accurate. On Ethereum L2, you often need to set a higher gas limit to prevent transaction failures, but on Vanar, you can set this buffer very small. For projects that need to cover gas fees for users, the savings over a year could amount to hundreds of thousands of dollars in profit.
The ecological desolation is currently the biggest flaw, just like a newly repaired highway with excellent road conditions but few vehicles. This is both a risk and an opportunity. The risk is that if there are no vehicles for a long time, the road becomes useless, while the opportunity lies in securing a toll booth position before traffic gets congested. What I see now is that they are desperately trying to attract Web2 creators and developers through low-threshold tools like Creator Pad. This strategy is clever; instead of competing with Ethereum for the existing DeFi gamblers, it's better to tap into the incremental market and attract newcomers who want to play with AI but don’t understand blockchain. I am optimistic about Vanar, not because it is perfect now, but because it has chosen a dirty and difficult path that no one else wants to take. It doesn’t talk about grand narratives; it focuses on how to get businesses to put their data up.
In this noisy world, those who understand the signals are always in the minority. At this crossroads of AI and blockchain integration, I can clearly see the sign that Vanar has erected. It points not to the moon but to the ground, to a solid, tangible surface capable of supporting a trillion-level AI economy in the future. Isn’t this more attractive than those ethereal moon landing plans? Those who care about short-term fluctuations will never understand the long-term vision of strategists; this is not just a story about a token, but about how we define the AI production relationship in the Web3 era. After all, in this industry, there are far too many pioneers who perish before dawn, while Vanar, well-prepared and having allied with powerful partners, may just be the one that survives in the end.