What do you think about Huma giving Kaito Yaper an airdrop?

KOL ecology "hierarchical differentiation" accelerates.

Written by: Haotian

Regarding the airdrop from @humafinance to Kaito Yaper, there is much more to this matter than meets the eye. Here are three points:

1. The era of "algorithmic weight" Mindshare has arrived, transitioning from "interactive mining" to "algorithmic mining". In the past, mining was about "diligence"—opening multiple wallets, increasing interactions, and stacking TVL. Now, it has directly shifted to competing in "algorithmic weight".

Platforms like @KaitoAI and @cookiedotfun essentially create a "digital profile" for each KOL, quantifying content value, audience quality, interaction efficiency, and other influence dimensions through machine learning.

To some extent, this upgrades the KOL selection mechanism, which originally relied on "insider relationships" and "subjective judgment," to an AI data-driven precise delivery.

However, the initial algorithm evaluations are often unsatisfactory, as small-scale manipulation can be done through mutual praise groups, follower farms, and comment assistance, leading to a short-term influx of profit-seeking studios rushing into the opportunity to exploit.

But don't forget that algorithms can be continuously optimized. When engaging in roll interactions, paying attention to IP and asset correlation can help avoid being targeted by witches. However, the probability of being targeted by witches will only increase under "black box" conditions, especially with roll algorithms. Treat it as a "fur harvesting business" and be cautious.

2. The "hierarchical differentiation" of the platform KOL ecosystem will accelerate. To be honest, top KOLs already have the ability for Alpha research and the opportunity to deeply participate in high-quality projects at an early stage, which can be monetized through roles such as consultants, investments, and on-chain financial management.

Therefore, these big V accounts tend to be more "aloof", posting infrequently and interacting cautiously, which may be classified as "inactive users" in the eyes of the algorithm. On the other hand, some mid-tier KOLs frequently retweet, comment, and engage daily, scoring high in the algorithm's activity rating.

This actually exposes a core bug in the current algorithm assessment - treating "quantity" as "quality" and "frequency" as "value." In the short term, it will indeed bring a wave of benefits to KOLs who are willing to frequently promote projects.

That said, algorithms ultimately need to rely on objective influence assessments to succeed. As algorithms continue to optimize, 'interaction frequency' will inevitably give way to the weight of 'content value'; otherwise, top KOLs and high-quality projects will leave, which is something the platform controlling the algorithm's black box absolutely does not want to see. The key is how to balance content value and interaction frequency simultaneously, avoiding severe differentiation of platform KOL resources.

3. The "hidden inflation" of marketing costs for project parties has already begun. On the surface, it seems that by finding agencies to package KOL resources and directly using platforms like Kaito for precise placements, the intermediary links have indeed been cut out. But what is the reality? Project parties have to pay booth fees to participate in this "algorithm arms race," and as competition for bidding positions becomes increasingly fierce, the hidden costs will only rise.

What’s worse is that the algorithm overly relies on quantitative indicators—like the number of interactions of Smart Followers—while neglecting truly valuable elements for dissemination, such as content depth, audience quality, and brand fit. The issues caused by algorithmic bias are quite evident:

First, the marketing ROI has declined - airdrops have been given to accounts with mismatched influence value, and the actual conversion effect is certainly not as expected; second, there is a brand reputation risk - overemphasizing the quantity of interactions rather than the quality of the content may even damage the market recognition that the project team has worked hard to establish.

Of course, this is also a dynamic game process. The algorithm model will constantly optimize, and the project party can also intervene to adjust it artificially. In the end, it still needs to return to the two-way matching of brand value and user value for the business models of algorithm platforms like Kaito and Cookie to truly grow strong.

Note: I personally acquire Yap points in a purely Buddhist way. In the past week, I've clearly felt that quality content has been weighted, and my ranking is quite high. Platforms with AI algorithms are quite important in the distribution of "ecological niches" in the attention economy's Mindshare.

But it is best to avoid a monopoly, so it is necessary to support more platforms similar to Cookie to join the competition.