So last 10 years has been a ride for Tezos as anyone that has been around from the the start knows. The protocol itself made a lot of upgrades building a solid foundation but it still lacks a lot.
With all the AI revolution coming up the one feature Tezos protocol has that could be a game changer in my opnion is the possibility of self-amending. This might be the point where the fast and easy way of Tezos to self-amend really comes into play.
Have there ever been any talk on this topic of Tezos Foundation directing some of it`s resources to create a fully AI automated protocol focused on upgrading and improving the protocol based on usage and experience? Tezos protocol could even be a foundation for other projects looking in a way of using AI to build but still keep it under rails and rules (voting system).
Edit: Going with descentralization - the idea would be that the AI is ownerless and emergent from the protocol itself. It would not be a product owned by a foundation or Nomadic labs for example - it would be an emergent rule set. Baker approval would be the safeguard of every proposal the AI makes.
After thounsands of years of corrupt human governance, I dare to be optmistic that given a chance real descentralization may be a game changer. AI might be the path to make that possible actually.
All this pessimism around AI is just the most common human trait expressing itself: Fear.
Anyway - AI will and already is doing better work than developers. It will be in usage to improve many system and softwares in the coming years and I hope Tezos is one of them.
Also - forget about price and moon - we should be mature enough by now to be beyond that. Having a protocol driven partly by AI and voted by human agency may bring some good change.
Forget the price and going to the moon? Boooooring, dear sir. If that’s what maturity looks like, count me out. I’m only here to witness the bullish AI!
On a serious note: AI always needs a supervision of competent humans. I’ve seen enough of the cases where latest AI models were planting security issues in the code and then being like “you are totally right!”
