Kaito, trap the KOL in the algorithm

Author: Fairy, ChainCatcher

Editor: TB, ChainCatcher

Is it "Yap-to-Earn" or "Earn-to-Leave"?

In the Crypto world, "attention" is gradually becoming a quantifiable asset. Kaito has emerged as a star InfoFi project in this context. Backed by top-tier capital such as Dragonfly and Sequoia, Kaito was once seen as an innovator in "information financialization."

However, just a few months later, increasing voices have begun to question its algorithmic mechanisms and ecological impact. Kaito aims to capture users' attention with AI algorithms, but currently, the community seems to have lost patience.

Is the Creator Ecosystem Being Undermined?

The issue of low-quality content has been controversial since Kaito launched its "Yap-to-Earn" mechanism. The X platform is filled with similarly styled "in-depth industry analysis" posts, which, on the surface, are full of jargon and structured analysis, but in reality, the content is hollow, interactions are superficial, and it is inefficient, repetitive, and created merely for profit.

Community member @0xcryptoHowe described Kaito's dissemination mechanism as "elevator advertising for Crypto." He pointed out, "The long-tail traffic effect of Kaito is essentially like elevator ads, constantly repeating content in a closed space, cycling through at different times." For the audience, this is indeed a quick way to memorize and gain exposure, but problems arise: when the platform is occupied by "homogeneous content," KOLs are algorithmically pushed to repeatedly produce, ultimately forming an information closed loop—like being locked in a never-ending advertisement "sealed elevator," making it difficult to access truly valuable new content.

Meanwhile, Kaito's mechanism has been criticized for "free-riding" on the traffic of mid-tier creators. Crypto KOL @connectfarm1 pointed out that some mid-tier accounts, which originally valued a single piece of content at 500U or more, are now willing to accept returns far below market value because of Kaito. This strategy not only lowers the real value of content but also forces some creators to express only 50% or even less of their potential.

Kaito may be making the standards for content creation monotonous, binding creators into a system driven by "algorithms" and "scores." As community user @0xBeliever stated, "There are many criteria for evaluating KOLs, but Kaito has made it somewhat singular."

Frequent Mistakes from the Team

In addition to the mechanism controversy, the Kaito team has recently encountered some minor incidents in its operations.

On March 16, Kaito AI and its founder Yu Hu's X account were hacked. Team member Sandra posted on X, stating, "The attacker chose to strike in the middle of the night in Yu Hu's time zone, taking control of the account while he was asleep."

Then, on April 27, founder Yu Hu stated that the platform accidentally backfilled the new algorithm to the past 12 months, causing users to see a longer time window while front-end data appeared incomplete.

Although neither incident caused serious consequences, the series of minor flaws has raised concerns about its stability.

Algorithm Controversy of "Relationship重"

Kaito's core selling point lies in its AI-driven content scoring algorithm, which claims to identify valuable Web3 content. However, as users delve deeper, this algorithm has frequently sparked controversy.

User @Jessethecook69 climbed to the ninth position globally and first in the Chinese region on the Kaito Yapper leaderboard within just 24 hours, based solely on three "borderline" pieces of content. This raises the question: Is this algorithm truly filtering valuable information?

Many users have pointed out that Kaito places low weight on view counts, with the algorithm focusing more on interactions between high-influence accounts. Unfortunately, some ICT (Inner Crypto Twitter) users have begun to "band together," further amplifying this algorithmic bias.

Crypto KOL @sky_gpt bluntly stated that Kaito's algorithm is essentially designed to capture the KOL institutional market, severely harming the ecosystem for ordinary creators. He noted that a 300,000-word piece of valuable content he wrote received a score almost identical to a 2,000-word ad post bought by a project, while non-Kaito related content was systematically suppressed in the algorithm. "The top 50 KOLs are reaping huge rewards," he wrote, "Kaito is cutting off the path for newcomers to rise."

When newcomers are trapped under the algorithm's invisible ceiling, and creators are forced to cater to algorithmic preferences, we can't help but ask: Is an AI-driven content platform reshaping the information order, or merely replicating old power dynamics?