Many people, upon first seeing @Firestarter_AI, might easily mistake it for an already established AI × Web3 project. The core message Firestarter conveys externally isn't complicated; it doesn't focus on making AI give you better suggestions, but rather on a more fundamental question:

Can AI be authorized to act on behalf of users to complete real business actions and execute transactions? This is a severely underestimated gap.

Today, most AI remains at the decision-support level, with final execution still carried out by humans. But once AI enters the execution layer, it inevitably involves permission boundaries, trust mechanisms, accountability, and deep integration with payment and settlement systems.

Firestarter is attempting to bring this issue to the forefront. It isn't rushing to showcase features or on-chain data but repeatedly emphasizes the automated closed loop from user intent to actual action.

This isn't something a lightweight application can solve; it's a systemic challenge involving AI agents, authorization mechanisms, and security boundaries. Because of this, Firestarter is more about raising questions than providing answers.

Whether it ultimately falls into Web3, whether it introduces on-chain execution or token mechanisms, has not been officially confirmed and shouldn't be assumed prematurely. But in the longer term, this direction is fundamentally sound.

If AI agents truly participate in economic activities in the future, someone will need to solve how AI can be safely and controllably authorized to act.

At least, Firestarter has already stood at the starting point of this issue. Rather than judging it by short-term product standards, it's better to see it as an exploration of future structures.

In the process of AI evolving from a tool to an agent, such attempts are worth continuous observation.

Learn more:

@Bantr_fun @easydotfunX