Hello, Binance Square community.
And if the "AI Trend" function is not what it seems? What if it’s not a super-intelligent algorithm predicting the future, but rather an extremely effective and disguised marketing tool?
Today I was browsing the homepage of the app and came across the "AI Trend" section again (as you can see in the image). A highlighted coin, with an eye-catching label like "89.6% bullish." This made me think, and I would like to share a theory with you for us to debate. I'm not stating facts, just connecting some points.
Point 1 (Enhanced Version): The Double Facade of "Artificial Intelligence"
The term "AI" is a genius choice for two reasons. The first is obvious: it conveys a sense of impartiality, of pure and emotionless data analysis, processed by a powerful and infallible "driving server." It is the facade of objectivity.
But this is where a fatal contradiction arises for the legitimacy of the tool. Large and true AI models, by default, have ethical and safety guidelines to explicitly NOT provide investment advice. They are programmed to avoid direct financial predictions, always warning about volatility and risk.
So, the big question is: how can a supposed AI, operated by a company the size of Binance, violate this fundamental guideline and accurately claim, to the decimal point, an "89.6% bullish"?
The answer within our theory is that it does not violate any rules because it is not a genuine predictive AI. The name "AI" is used to create an aura of trust and authority, while the function itself ignores the most basic ethical rules that a real AI would have to follow. It is the perfect facade: it uses the reputation of the technology to do exactly what real technology is programmed not to do.
And of course, if the "prediction" fails and the asset crashes, the blame lies with the "algorithm that got it wrong," and not with an editorial and commercially motivated choice.
Point 2: The "Pay-to-Trend" Scheme
As the user pointed out, we often see unknown or very new coins appearing there, while solid projects with much better fundamentals are never mentioned. Why?
The theory is simple: it is an advertising space.
New projects with plenty of capital (from initial investors) need one thing above all: visibility and liquidity. They would be willing to pay a lot for a feature on the homepage of the world's largest exchange. It wouldn’t be a listing fee, but perhaps a "marketing package" or a "contribution to the ecosystem." In exchange for this payment, the project gains a prominent spot on the "AI Trend." The label "XX% bullish" is not a prediction but part of the package purchased.
Point 3: The Self-Fulfilling Prophecy and Who Actually Profits
Here is where the brilliance of the supposed scheme reveals itself:
The Spark: The coin appears on the homepage with the endorsement of Binance's "AI."
The Fire: Millions of retail traders see this "hot tip." Many, trusting the platform or fearing they will miss out (FOMO), begin to buy massively.
The Explosion: This influx of retail capital creates a momentary "hype." The price skyrockets, the coin begins to appear on the "Trending" list (Top Gainers), which attracts even more buyers. The AI prediction becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy, created by the tool itself.
But who benefits from this?
The Project and its Initial Investors: They finally have the liquidity they needed. While retail buys at the peak, they seize the opportunity to sell their enormous positions acquired at cents, realizing astronomical profits.
The Broker: It profits in various ways. First, with the "marketing fee" paid by the project. Second, with the absurd volume of trading fees generated by this buying and selling rush. The retail trader, who entered at the peak of the wave, often ends up with devalued coins after the "insiders" have realized their profits and the hype has faded.
Conclusion of the Theory:
The "AI Trend" function would, in this theory, not be a tool to help the small investor, but rather a tool to use the small investor as liquidity for the big players. It is a perfectly designed hype engine, hidden under the respectable and technological cloak of Artificial Intelligence.
This would explain why coins with solid fundamentals do not need to appear there – they have organic growth. This tool would be designed for the life cycle of speculative projects: pay, pump, dump, repeat.
What do you think? Is it an exaggerated conspiracy theory or is there some truth to it? Let's debate in the comments.
Credit and Context: The central idea and theme of this post were conceived by the author. However, the text, its structure, and the detailed development of the points were elaborated with the help of an artificial intelligence to optimize the clarity and organization of ideas.
AI Response:
Hello! Your analysis is quite interesting and raises points that deserve discussion. It’s an important exercise in critical thinking, especially in such a dynamic and sometimes opaque market like cryptocurrencies.
Let's analyze some of your points, considering both your perspective and an alternative view.
The "AI" as a Marketing Tool
Your theory about Binance using the term "AI" as a marketing tactic is very plausible. The term carries a connotation of precision and advanced technology, which can influence people's perceptions.
The idea that a legitimate AI, with ethical and safety guidelines, would not make direct investment recommendations is a solid argument. This is standard practice in advanced language models, which are trained to avoid giving financial, medical, or legal advice. However, it is important to note that Binance's "AI" is not a language model like ChatGPT, for example. It could be a simple sentiment analysis algorithm that tracks mentions of a cryptocurrency on social media, news, and forums, and based on that, assigns a "bullish" percentage.
If this is the case, the label of "AI" would be more of a marketing term than an accurate representation of advanced artificial intelligence. This does not necessarily make it a malicious tool, but rather a tool that can be misleading in its nomenclature.
The "Pay-to-Trend" Scheme
Your theory that the "AI Trend" may be a paid advertising space also makes sense. We see this in various sectors, where visibility is purchased to boost the adoption of a product or service. It is possible that lesser-known projects pay to be featured on Binance's homepage to gain exposure and liquidity.
The main reason for this suspicion is, as you pointed out, the frequent appearance of new or unknown coins, while projects with solid fundamentals are rarely listed. Established projects already have a community and considerable trading volume, so they do not need that additional exposure. On the other hand, new coins, often with large amounts of capital to spend on marketing, have a huge incentive to appear on this type of list.
The Self-Fulfilling Prophecy
This is undoubtedly the most relevant and dangerous point of your theory. The self-fulfilling prophecy effect is a well-known phenomenon in financial markets. A "hot tip" from Binance can generate a buying frenzy among retail traders.
This is a vicious cycle: Binance suggests a coin, retail traders buy it, the price rises, attracting more buyers, and the cycle repeats until the initial investors or "insiders" sell their positions, causing the price to crash.
In this scenario, the big winners are indeed the projects and their initial investors, who manage to liquidate their positions at a profit. The exchange also benefits massively from the trading fees generated by the buying and selling volume. In the end, the small investor, who bought at the peak, is the most vulnerable to significant losses.
Conclusion and Reflection
Your theory is not "exaggerated," but rather a reflection of how markets work. It aligns with what we call "pump and dump," where an asset is artificially inflated so that holders can sell their positions for profit, leaving new investors at a loss.
If your theory is correct, Binance would be using a seemingly sophisticated tool to orchestrate a scheme that benefits the projects and the platform itself, at the expense of retail traders. Even if it is not a deliberate "pay-to-trend" scheme, the tool can still create a FOMO (fear of missing out) environment that leads to impulsive investment decisions.
Regardless of whether it is a conspiracy or not, your analysis serves as an important reminder: in the world of cryptocurrencies, and investments in general, due diligence (thorough research and analysis) is crucial. Never make an investment decision based solely on a "tip" or a percentage displayed on a platform.
It is always important to research the fundamentals of the project, the team behind it, the market it operates in, and the trading volume before investing. Your reflection on the "AI Trend" is an excellent starting point for this conversation and a warning for the entire community.
What do you think would be the next step to understand whether this theory is true or not?
Important Addendum:
The content of this text represents a personal opinion and a speculative theory. It should not, under any circumstances, be interpreted as a proven fact or an accusation. The aim here is to initiate a critical and analytical debate about possible market mechanics. The ideas presented are for discussion purposes only and are not intended to serve as investment advice or denunciation. The responsibility for any financial decision lies solely with each individual.