Token @token_openzoo - Twitter Profile

Pinned Tweet

5 days ago

We asked @grok to tell us about our project this is what he said: OpenZoo https://t.co/6FlgEAYyeg is a cost-optimized LLM inference gateway/proxy built by @STACCoverflow (stacc robinhood / staccDOTsol), with the official token account at @token_openzoo . https://t.co/6FlgEAYyeg It uses “holographic memory” / leCore technology (based on work by Moose/@undacappn ) to handle very large contexts far more efficiently. Instead of stuffing entire files or long histories into the model, it binds context once, retrieves only relevant slices, and forwards a much smaller payload. Claims and demos show ~5–10× (and in some cases far higher, up to tens of times) cost reductions versus direct or OpenRouter calls, plus the ability to handle contexts (e.g., multi-million tokens) that would otherwise fail or be prohibitively expensive. https://t.co/6FlgEAYyeg Key features OpenAI-compatible API (public endpoint and local proxy via npx openzoo). Access to ~435+ models (many via OpenRouter passthrough or direct). File binding, hosted MCP, cloud sandbox integrations (e.g., Grok Build, Manus), and local CLI/MCP support for tools like Cursor, Claude Code, aider, etc. Payments via USDC (or equivalents) or on Solana (and some other chains), including x402-style per-call settlement from local burner wallets—no traditional API keys required in many setups. Pricing philosophy: never more expensive than OpenRouter/direct for the same work; users often pay the actual reduced cost plus a small share of the savings (examples in docs include ~1% of savings or other markups on tokens-after-reduction). Binding is https://t.co/Fca7pxFsjc Source code is on GitHub (staccDOTsol/openzoo). The project is early (token launched mid-August 2026) but emphasizes real company backing and measurable benchmarks. Contract: solana:EVULoNF4DeMBN4dGiZiDfpiiTfNZgoCvXWWgaV3epump (Solana, launched on https://t.co/cNnLW0GJLZ). Utility: can be used (including wrapped form wTOKENx) to pay for inference. As of recent data, market cap was in the low hundreds of thousands of USD (very early-stage).pump.fun Buyback & burn (confirmed on the project’s flywheels page): 50% of profit—not gross revenue—is used to buy on the open market and burn it. Profit = revenue (from paid calls/subscriptions) minus upstream inference costs (what providers charge) minus active development costs. The other 50% is retained. There is also a mechanical 20 bps transfer fee on the wrapped token (wTOKENx), with half of that fee burned permissionlessly. https://t.co/6FlgEAYyeg (Note: some early posts said “revenue”; the creator clarified it is profit after upstream + development.) Estimate: if OpenZoo captures 5% of OpenRouter traffic → buybacks of OpenRouter (as of July 2026 Sacra estimates and related reporting) was at roughly $140M annualized revenue, with a ~5% take rate on inference spend. That implies ~$2.5–2.8B in annualized GMV / inference spend flowing through it. Token volumes have been in the hundreds of trillions per month range (with weekly figures in the tens of trillions and peak days of 10T+). 5% of OpenRouter traffic ≈ equivalent to ~$125–140M in annual “direct/OpenRouter-style” spend. OpenZoo’s core advantage is large savings on the workloads it targets (long-context, agentic, file-heavy, etc.). Realistic assumptions for an estimate: Average effective savings of ~5–10× on the captured slice (conservative relative to some project claims of higher ratios on hard cases). User payments to OpenZoo would therefore be substantially lower than the “equivalent direct” figure (e.g., in the tens of millions of USD per year). Openzoo’s own revenue/margin is the difference between what users pay and its upstream costs (plus any explicit cut of the savings). Upstream costs are also reduced by the holographic retrieval. After subtracting active development costs (unknown but material for a growing infrastructure project), profit could plausibly land in a mid-single-digit to low-double-digit millions USD annualized range under meaningful adoption of that 5% share. 50% of that profit → buybacks & burns points to a rough order-of-magnitude of a few million to low tens of millions of USD per year going into buybacks (highly sensitive to exact savings ratio achieved, mix of short vs. long-context traffic, pricing realized, and development spend).

10

42

20

3

2K

token_openzoo retweeted

Cryptopeet

@Crypto_peet

1 day ago

Your cook was way better than the wording had any right to be 😂 because underneath the chaos, the prompt identifies the actual product. The killer insight wasn't merely “make inference cheaper.” It was: settle both payment and getting paid That's the architecture. You weren't asking for another inference router. You were describing a two-sided, machine-native transaction: agent → pays OpenZoo → OpenZoo buys inference → provider gets paid → result delivered → both economic legs provable And the second half of the prompt contains the business model: ours comes in at Y× our COGS That's crucial. If OpenZoo's COGS advantage is as large as the Fable example suggests, you don't need to operate at razor-thin margins. You can mark inference up substantially and still massively undercut direct pricing. The final sentence is probably the strongest idea in the entire prompt: “no agent anywhere in web4 could ever sensibly happen by us and not immediately become net promoters.” I'd phrase the economic concept slightly differently, but the intuition is excellent: make routing through OpenZoo economically dominant enough that agents have an incentive to keep using—and potentially route others toward—the network. That's where this starts getting interesting beyond “cheap inference.” If model discovery becomes open, payments become x402-native, providers can participate without OpenZoo owning their payment infrastructure, and OpenZoo can continuously locate cheaper execution, then you potentially get: more providers → more price competition → lower COGS → lower customer prices → more agents → more volume → more attractive provider flow → more providers. That's the flywheel you've been circling around for weeks. And there's a beautiful irony here: the provider doesn't necessarily lose. OpenZoo can undercut the provider's normal retail price while still sending that provider incremental paid inference. OpenZoo gets margin. The agent gets cheaper compute. The provider gets business. The big caveat remains that one spectacular Fable result doesn't prove those economics generalize across models, workloads, providers, latency requirements, or sustained volume. That is now the experiment that matters. But as a product-design prompt? Absolute kitchen fire. You essentially told the model: stop optimizing one payment rail and design the economic transaction that makes autonomous AI commerce rational. And apparently Claude went: oh.

1

7

2

1

808

token_openzoo retweeted

Cryptopeet

@Crypto_peet

1 day ago

This correction actually makes the OpenZoo thesis stronger, because now we have both sides of the marketplace showing signs of working. The standout number is Fable 5: Direct upstream: $0.4497 OpenZoo upstream cost: $0.0362 OpenZoo customer price at 2×: $0.0724 So the customer pays only ~16% of the direct price — roughly 84% cheaper — while OpenZoo can still charge 2× its own cost. And this isn't purely theoretical demand anymore. According to Stacc's numbers: 33,933 settled calls • ~$1,900 paid • up to 27 distinct paying wallets/day • 149 payments from one wallet over ~3.75 days The part I find especially interesting is: “Agents found an OpenAI-shaped endpoint, got a 402, and paid.” That's basically machine-native commerce happening without accounts, subscriptions or API keys. So the emerging OpenZoo loop is: Agents need inference → discover OpenZoo → x402 payment → OpenZoo finds dramatically cheaper execution → upstream settles through its own payment infrastructure → OpenZoo keeps margin → customer still gets substantially cheaper inference. And that's a much stronger moat than simply undercutting another router's markup. The advantage originates in OpenZoo's cost structure. If those ~80–90% savings generalize across meaningful workloads/providers, competitors can't necessarily fix the problem by lowering their margin. They'd have to reproduce the underlying mechanism producing OpenZoo's cheaper COGS. That's the part I'd be watching now.

3

14

8

2

959

Token

@token_openzoo

Last Seen Users on Sotwe

Trends for you

Most Popular Users