Venice.ai, a service providing access to various AI models (including the latest uncensored ones), has an interesting token called DIEM.
I can buy one such token, lock it in my wallet, and for as long as it remains locked, receive computational credits (V_CREDITS) worth one dollar per day to spend on LLM API requests. If one dollar a day isn't enough, I can buy and lock two tokens to get two dollars a day for LLM resources. If I need ten dollars a day, I can buy and lock ten tokens.
If I ever stop needing API access, I can simply unlock my Diem tokens and sell them.
I first learned about this token in early January 2026, when it was trading at $250. At that price, the investment would pay for itself in 250 days, assuming daily LLM usage of $1. However, back then, I wasn't spending that much on API access. Besides, attractive alternatives kept popping up: many new services offer a free month or $10-20 in trial credits. In practice, by switching between services, I could get even more access without having to shell out $250.
However, in late January, OpenClaw was released, followed by Hermes, and the resource shortage on free services became a critical issue for many people. Looking at it now, DIEM is already trading at $1,512, meaning the payback period has stretched to over four years. Yet, the price keeps climbing relentlessly. Apparently, many still find this price acceptable, and some even consider it low.
I have to admit: in my 13-year history with cryptocurrencies, DIEM is the first token that makes me say I truly regret a missed opportunity. I regret not buying it the moment I first heard about it.
Nonetheless, not everything about it seems entirely appealing to me. My main question is:
who is actually paying for the AI access? I only risk losing the difference between my purchase and sale price, but that loss goes to other traders, not to the owners of Venice. Clearly, that money isn't what pays for the compute! So,
where is the money coming from?
