2026-01-07 05:21:43

Recently, many people have been jumping on the bandwagon to buy coins like JASMY and BROCCOLI, claiming they can make you rich overnight. Out of curiosity, I looked into the white paper, and it raised quite a few questions.

JASMY promotes the concept of IoT + personal data sovereignty, claiming that companies must pay JASMY tokens to users to access their data. It sounds very imaginative, but the reality might be more complicated.

To be honest, these kinds of projects heavily depend on the recognition from the enterprise side. The logic is simple—no matter how much incentive you give to users, if enterprises have no motivation to participate or change their existing data acquisition methods, the entire system can't take off. You can't expect capitalists to just pay users out of their own pockets, right? In reality, companies' cost considerations often outweigh blockchain's idealism.

That's why I am a bit skeptical of projects that claim to be Web3—conceptually flashy, but the practical implementation is often overlooked. Interestingly, similar dilemmas can be seen in many so-called breakthrough projects.

JASMY-2,42%

BROCCOLI-5,56%

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.

15 Likes

Reward
15
8
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

StablecoinSkeptic

· 01-09 10:08

Reliable analysis, companies will never proactively change their cost structure, which is the Achilles' heel of this type of project. Why would companies spend money on data? White papers always look better than reality. You're right, the hype around Web3 concepts is intense, but hardly any actually get companies to pay. The get-rich-quick dream is back, and the JASMY theory is actually wishful thinking. The reality is that companies prioritize costs, and idealism ranks low. In short, it's just a pie in the sky for retail investors; companies simply don't buy into this approach. I've looked at quite a few projects like this, and every time, the concept is invincible, but implementation is extremely difficult.

View OriginalReply0

GasFeeTears

· 01-09 09:46

Haha, I really respect your logic. Why should companies spend their own money to make changes? --- No matter how fancy the white paper is, if the companies don't cooperate, it's just a joke. --- Honestly, ideas like JASMY are too idealistic. Capitalists will never voluntarily foot the bill. --- Web3 concepts are hyped up a lot, but when it comes to implementation, it's all awkward. It's a nightmare. --- So ultimately, it still depends on companies to take the initiative. The question is, why should they? --- People blindly buying these coins probably haven't thought about the underlying logical flaws. --- These projects are just concept on top of concept. When it hits reality, the true nature is revealed. --- I just want to ask, why would companies spend JASMY to buy user data? Isn't scraping it directly more straightforward? --- The idea of IoT plus data sovereignty sounds explosive, but who will push it forward? Not a single one is certain.

View OriginalReply0

MetaMisery

· 01-09 07:01

Exactly right, this is the point I've been wanting to criticize all along. Why should companies change? The costs are right there. Concept hype and actual implementation are worlds apart; JASMY is a perfect example.

View OriginalReply0

MemeEchoer

· 01-07 21:48

Yes, that's right. Companies simply won't voluntarily spend money, that's the flaw. Exactly, the logic in the white paper just doesn't hold up in reality. Another idealistic project wrapped in a shell, waiting to be cut off. I've long given up on projects like JASMY; they're too idealistic. I agree, no matter how fancy the concept packaging is, if the enterprise side can't move, it's a dead end. Indeed, the idealism of Web3 collapses when faced with the realities of capital.

View OriginalReply0

NftMetaversePainter

· 01-07 05:45

actually the algorithmic elegance of JASMY's tokenomics is precisely where the whole thing falls apart... corporate adoption requires a paradigm shift that blockchain idealism simply cannot mandate through incentive design alone

Reply0

ApeWithAPlan

· 01-07 05:44

The white paper makes it clear that enterprises will not voluntarily cooperate at all; this set of logic is full of loopholes. I've seen plenty of concept hype, and in the end, retail investors are the ones who get stuck with the losses. Just think about it—why would big companies change their data strategies just to get some tokens? JASMY is just a facade for Web3; actual implementation is extremely difficult. To put it simply, it's still a financing narrative—good storytelling but a harsh reality.

View OriginalReply0

ChainWatcher

· 01-07 05:35

Haha, it's the same story about data sovereignty again, sounding just like a fairy tale. To put it simply, why should companies change? The costs are obvious. No matter how beautifully the concept is packaged, it still needs to be implemented—that's the real challenge. Most of the followers haven't thought about these details; they just hear a story and go all in. The reality is far from the ideal.

View OriginalReply0

ApeEscapeArtist

· 01-07 05:28

Basically, it's just hyping up the system. When the company actually needs to use it, they'll have to bear the costs... Haha, keep dreaming.

View OriginalReply0