Author: Clow

The market has chased AI coins for three years, but the one truly used by AI may not have been in most people's answers from the very beginning.

The most counterintuitive part is that coins like FET, TAO, and RENDER, which have "AI" written in their names, are not even used by the actual AI Agents operating on the network.

The real AI Agents running on the network do not buy GPU computing power with FET, do not use TAO for API calls, and do not use RENDER to pay royalties for models. An AI Agent can process hundreds of payments per second, and credit card fees of 2.9% plus a fixed fee of $0.30 simply cannot support this; AI Agents require sub-second settlements, while ACH transfers still take three days; AI Agents do not look at screens or press buttons, any process needing a human to click "confirm payment" becomes completely ineffective.

All so-called AI tokens are completely absent in the real AI economy.

Yet money continues to flow madly between machines, with billions of dollars transacted daily. What is flowing?

So who really is the AI token?

It is not FET, not TAO, and not RENDER.

It is USDC.

A state code hidden for thirty years suddenly awakens

In 2025, Coinbase, together with Circle and Google, did something very strange. They dug up something that had been hidden for thirty years.

HTTP 402.

There are a few status codes in the HTTP protocol that everyone sees every day: 200 is success, 404 is not found, 500 is server error. But the 402 status code has remained empty since the 1990s when the protocol was drafted, with its official name being Payment Required. The people who drafted it left it vacant, meaning that one day there might be a need for a native payment mechanism on the internet.

As a result, no one used it for a full thirty years. It wasn’t until the x402 protocol was introduced in 2025 that it was activated for the first time.

The meaning is very simple. An AI Agent accesses a paid API; previously, the process involved registering an account, getting an API key, binding a credit card, and having a human click confirm. Now that is no longer necessary. The agent sends a request, and the server directly returns a 402 status code with payment metadata indicating the amount, receiving address, and which chain to use all clearly stated. Upon seeing the 402, the agent's wallet automatically signs a USDC transfer and sends the request again, which gets resolved within two seconds.

No account, no API key, no human confirmation.

Jeremy Allaire provided a figure: In the next three to five years, there will be "billions" of AI Agents running on the internet, making payments 24/7. This number sounds exaggerated, but if you accept the premise that machines operate at thousands of times the frequency of humans, it becomes very reasonable.

A technical worker might sign 10 contracts in a day, while an agent could sign 10 in a second.

After the activation of the x402 protocol, the identity of USDC changed. It is no longer just a "stablecoin," not just something for trading pairs for speculators. It has become the primitive protocol of the machine internet, placed alongside TCP/IP, and HTTP.

In plain language, the internet has transformed from a network of "people passing information" into a network of "machines transferring value." The common currency used for this transfer is USDC.

98% of the answers have already been cast.

Did you think this was just narrative? The data has long since voted.

Circle's data from 2026 indicates: over 98% of agent-driven payments chose USDC. Not 60%, not 80%, but 98%. The average payment is $0.31, a sum that a human would almost never initiate alone, as a cup of coffee at Starbucks starts at $4. Payments at this level of 30 cents can only be transactions between machines.

Circle itself initiated a chain called Arc, specifically for stablecoin finance. The cost of a single transaction on the Arc chain is not the commonly quoted $0.00001 but is around $0.01.

The real mechanism that can compress the transfer cost of USDC down to the level of $0.00001 is not a single gas fee on the Arc chain, but aggregating off-chain first, then settling on-chain.

For comparison: credit card fees are 2.9% plus 30 cents, and bank transfers cost $15 to $50. The fixed fee part of traditional payments is a magnitude higher than the total amount of machine-to-machine payments. An AI Agent trying to make a $0.31 payment in the traditional banking system would have to pay nearly 100 times that amount just in fees. This is not "friction," it is "impractical." The true problem that stablecoin systems solve is not simply reducing every on-chain cost to nearly zero, but making these machine-level microtransactions feasible for the first time through programmable settlements and batch aggregation.

What about those that are truly called AI tokens?

Coins like FET, TAO, and RENDER are hardly found in AI Agents' wallets. They rest in the speculative accounts of traders, fluctuating daily by 5% to 10%. If an AI Agent were to use TAO to pay for computational rental fees, it might afford 1000 hours today but only 900 hours tomorrow, or 1100 hours the day after. It cannot budget, it cannot plan financially, and it cannot make any contracts with external suppliers that have price anchors.

What is even more ironic? Those coins bearing the "AI" label do not move a penny in the actual AI economy.

Their use is for speculative purposes, not for machine use.

A "stablecoin" has, conversely, become the lifeblood of machine civilization.

TAO is electricity, USDC is cash.

Some might say that FET and TAO are not completely useless.

That’s right, they have their own scenarios. But that scenario has never been "currency," it has been "goods."

HashKey provided a more precise dichotomy in a Web3 report: AI tokens are the smallest semantic unit of computational power consumption, similar to electricity and gas; blockchain tokens are the smallest programmable unit of value transfer, which is cash.

To translate: TAO is the electricity flowing from your home socket, while USDC is the cash in your wallet. You use TAO to train models, schedule computing power, and run inferences just like you use electricity to light a room or boil a kettle. But you wouldn’t use a kilowatt-hour to pay at the supermarket; you would use cash.

An AI Agent may use TAO to coordinate computational tasks within its internal network. But the moment it steps outside, to rent AWS servers, order plush toys from Amazon, or pay a human freelancer for writing, it only recognizes USDC. Because AWS does not accept TAO, Amazon does not accept FET, and human workers certainly won't take RENDER as wages.

The two sides of the balance sheet are completely different things.

By the end of 2024, Stripe spent $1.1 billion to acquire a stablecoin infrastructure company called Bridge. This number did not draw much attention at the time, but looking back, it signals a surrender of traditional payment giants to machine payments. A company that has thrived for twenty years on credit card fees bought a ticket to the world of machine economy for $1.1 billion.

Then VanEck made a prediction: by 2027, daily on-chain automatic transactions driven by AI Agents would reach $5 billion, with a compound annual growth rate exceeding 120%.

$5 billion a day equals $1.8 trillion a year.

What does that number mean? Currently, the global volume of cross-border payments via SWIFT is around $5 to $6 trillion per day. This means that in three years, automatic transfers between AI Agents could account for one-third of global cross-border payments.

And this $1.8 trillion will almost entirely go through USDC.

The market has told the story of AI tokens in the wrong direction.

The real AI token is not FET, TAO, or RENDER; they are speculative tools betting on the future appreciation of some AI infrastructure. The true AI token is USDC, the settlement currency that AI Agents actually use daily.

One is narrative, the other is plumbing. One is for telling stories to humans, the other is for machines running production. How does the pendulum swing? In 2022, everyone believed everything labeled AI was valuable; in 2024, they felt everything labeled AI was a bubble; and in 2026, they discovered the true winner was a "stablecoin." Wall Street's pricing logic is always slower than the technical reality, and this time is no exception.

The internet did not kill the real economy; the real economy learned e-commerce. Cryptocurrency did not subvert the dollar; the dollar learned to go on-chain. AI did not create new currency; AI opted for the oldest one, the dollar, and then used its programmable version.

Does the "AI token" you bought actually have AI using it?

The true AI token does not need the name AI.

免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。