Thinking out loud here.. I've always assumed a #Bittensor subnet would struggle to replicate what $TIG is building But the more I think about it.. the more I'm not sure $TIG has its own Optimisable Proof of Work system.. where algorithms compete, benchmarkers test them, and then innovators get rewarded based on adoption $TAO obviously works differently.. with miners, validators and Yuma Consensus deciding how rewards get distributed But.. Given how flexible #Bittensor subnets can be.. whats actually stopping someone from building a subnet with its own version of $TIG's benchmarking, verification and reward system? Could someone essentially recreate something similar to OPoW inside #Bittensor? Someone like @Apex_SN1, for example.. Obviously.. just because something is technically possible doesn't mean it would economically work Still questions around incentives.. verification.. licensing.. how rewards are distributed.. and whether it would all work properly at scale And maybe $TIG does have some very real advantages from being built specifically for algorithmic discovery But.. does that mean theres something fundamental about $TIG's architecture that would make it incredibly difficult for a #Bittensor subnet to replicate? Or.. does it basically come down to who designs the better system and executes it properly? I can already see the replies coming.. lol I'm not trying to FUD anything here.. I'm obviously heavily interested in both $TAO and $TIG I just think its a genuinely interesting question worth exploring.. Because the more I think about this stuff.. The less convinced I am that its as simple as $TIG = algorithms and $TAO = intelligence My dumb monkey brain does not know the actual answer.. So happy to be educated 👍