AI credits should be assets, not subscriptions. ANO Vision: wallet-native Nano Banana, 5¢/image.

Spent two weeks figuring out the cleanest way to pay for AI image

generation with crypto. Shipped ANO Vision this week. Here's the

thinking in case it sparks debate.

THE PROBLEM

Every consumer tool that wraps Google's Gemini 2.5 Flash Image

("Nano Banana") collects a credit card and signs you up for a

subscription. Krea, Magic Hour, Higgsfield, 10 to 25 USD per month.

Google's own apps want a Google account. The only "free" path

(Whisk) is US-only.

So you're paying a SaaS recurring fee to access a centralized AI,

in exchange for credits that vanish when you cancel.

THE EXPERIMENT

What if AI credits were an asset you own, instead of a subscription

You rent?

In ANO (E2E messenger live on Base mainnet):

- Charge ANO tokens into onchain "energy" balance (one tx, gas sponsored)

- Spend 5 energy (5¢) per image

- Unused energy stays in your wallet forever

- Sell ANO back on Aerodrome anytime if you want fiat out

Same Nano Banana backend. Different ownership shape.

WHAT'S ACTUALLY ONCHAIN VS OFF

Onchain (on Base): identity (AA wallet), energy balance, every

message ever sent (encrypted events).

Offchain: the Gemini inference itself. Next iteration moves the

energy debit onchain too, by adding a VISION message type — your

prompt becomes an encrypted onchain message, prompt history becomes

a user-owned archive.

ECONOMICS

We charge 5 energy (5¢) per image. Gemini API cost is around 4¢

margins are tight on purpose, the priority is wallet-native access,

not max take rate.

WHAT I'D LOVE INPUT ON

- Is "AI credits as an asset" a real wedge, or am I overrating it?

- Should the energy be its own ERC-20, or stay coupled to the

existing ecosystem token?

- What integrations would make this click for you? (Farcaster

frame, Discord bot, generate-from-message-thread)

Free for new users right now. AMA in comments.

Disclosure: I'm the builder of ANO. Not financial advice. Roasting welcome.