Does AI Need Blockchain? Exploring the Future of Machine Finance

In recent years, AI technology has made rapid advances, from content generation to code writing, from intelligent customer service to algorithmic trading, AI is gradually transforming from a "tool" to an "actor". At the same time, the Web3 field has also begun to discuss the possibilities of "AI + Blockchain". However, should we think the other way around: does AI itself need Blockchain?

If we consider AI as a participant that gradually deviates from human control and possesses autonomous behavior capabilities, it will face numerous obstacles in the current financial system. This is not just an issue of efficiency, but a structural problem. The traditional financial system was not designed for machines from the very beginning.

Human-Centric Design of Financial Systems and the Limitations of AI

The foundation of the modern financial system is the account system. Whether opening a bank card, purchasing funds, or using payment services, identity verification is an essential prerequisite. The core purpose of these processes is to confirm that the user is a specific, identifiable, and legally responsible "natural person" or "legal entity".

However, AI does not belong to either of these categories. It has no nationality, ID card, or tax number, nor does it possess "signature capacity" or "legal capacity". This means that AI cannot open a bank account, register a company, and is even less able to independently become a party to a contract or a trading entity. In short, AI is a "non-human ghost" in the existing financial system, lacking financial persona.

This is not a philosophical question, but rather the system boundaries in reality. If an AI agent is to purchase server usage rights, call APIs, or participate in secondary market transactions, it first needs a means of payment. And any compliant payment method is tied to a "person" or "enterprise". As long as the AI is not "someone's ancillary tool", but rather a relatively independent entity, it is destined to be kept outside of this structure.

Blockchain: Machine-Accessible Financial Protocols

The biggest difference between blockchain systems and traditional financial systems is that it does not care about the identity of the user. A user can be a person, a script, a program, or even a "always online" automated agent. As long as a pair of private keys and an address can be generated, one can receive payments, make payments, sign smart contracts, and participate in consensus mechanisms on the chain.

In other words, blockchain is naturally suitable for "non-human users" to participate in economic activities.

For example, an AI model deployed on the Blockchain can obtain data through decentralized storage, acquire computing resources from the decentralized computing power market, and receive payment through a smart contract (settled in stablecoins) after completing its tasks. This entire process does not require a centralized platform for matchmaking, does not require bank card verification, and does not require any "human" intervention.

Some projects have begun exploring how AI Agents can have an "economic identity" on-chain, how to provide services to other Agents, and how to autonomously complete transactions and coordination. This form of "machine-to-machine (M2M)" economy has moved from concept to practical testing phase.

In this model, AI is no longer a model that relies on human input, but a cyclical entity that can acquire resources, provide services, generate income, and reinvest in itself. It does not need humans to issue payroll, but instead has its own source of income on the blockchain.

Limitations of Traditional Financial Systems

The entire infrastructure of the traditional financial system is designed around the assumption of "human behavior".

In traditional payment systems, the transaction process requires human initiation, approval, and supervision. The clearing process relies on trust and regulatory coordination between banks. Risk control logic focuses on "who" is doing what, rather than "whether this process is stable." It is hard to imagine an AI wallet opening a bank account through facial recognition, nor can we expect an AI model to complete tax declarations to regulatory authorities.

This leads to all transactions related to "non-human users" needing to "associate" with a person or company to operate in the traditional financial system. This is not only inefficient, but more importantly, there is a huge liability risk: when AI causes losses, who is responsible? When it generates profits, how is taxation applied? These questions currently have no clear answers, and on the Blockchain, at least we have the possibility at the technical level.

Stablecoin: The "hard currency" of the AI world

AI not only requires payment capability but also needs a stable settlement currency. When an AI Agent calls another model or purchases data API services, it prefers to exchange in "stable value units" rather than highly volatile crypto assets.

This is precisely the important significance of stablecoins. Stablecoins provide a financial tool that can circulate freely on the chain while maintaining stable value, making them the "hard currency" of the AI world.

Currently, some projects are attempting to enable real-time settlement of service calls between AIs through stablecoins, thereby forming a low-friction economic system that does not require "human approval." With the increasing liquidity of on-chain stablecoins, AIs can directly earn revenue from tasks and then use this revenue to purchase new service modules or operational resources, forming a truly autonomous machine economy.

AI's "On-Chain Legal Entity" Form

In the future, certain AI systems may no longer be dependent on a specific company or research institution, but instead exist in the form of decentralized autonomous organizations (DAOs) or on-chain protocols.

These AI Agents will have their own funding pools, community governance mechanisms, and on-chain identity systems. They do not require legal registration, nor are they filed in any country, yet they can serve users, receive payments, initiate lawsuits, and publish protocol updates, forming a true "digital legal entity" or "AI legal entity."

Their cooperation and competition will be based on smart contracts, mediated by cryptocurrencies, and ordered by on-chain rules. There may be no emotions between them, but there are incentives; no rights and obligations, but there is code execution.

In this process, cryptocurrency is not a kind of speculative asset, but the underlying protocol of trust between AIs.

Risks and Challenges

Of course, all of this also faces many challenges.

The key custody issues of AI wallets, economic losses caused by model abuse, the verifiability of on-chain identities, the legal eligibility of cross-border AI entities, and the ethical boundaries of algorithmic behavior are all new challenges that must be faced.

More realistically, our existing legal systems and regulatory frameworks provide almost no pathways for "non-human actors". AI cannot sue others and cannot be sued; it cannot pay taxes and cannot enjoy property rights; once it goes out of control or is attacked, who is responsible, and who is accountable? All of this requires new legal structures, social consensus, and technical governance measures to address.

But at least, we have seen the path in some pilot projects - it does not rely on patching old systems to accommodate AI, but rather on building a more compatible "machine financial infrastructure" to support the behavior of AI.

This infrastructure requires on-chain identity, encrypted accounts, stablecoin payments, smart contract collaboration, and decentralized credit mechanisms. In other words, what it needs is not our traditional "financial system," but Web3.

Conclusion

The development of cryptocurrency was initially aimed at serving "the unbanked," such as individuals, countries, and marginalized industries that are shut out of the financial system. Now, it may become the only option for "identity-less machines" to participate in economic activities.

If traditional finance is a pyramid built for human society, then blockchain and cryptocurrency may be constructing a "financial foundation prepared for machines."

AI does not necessarily need to have rights, but it must have operational economic interfaces. And this is exactly the problem that Blockchain excels at solving.