AI Is Lowering the Cost of Cyberattacks Artificial intelligence helps attackers research targets and develop tools with less technical knowledge and manual work In its 2026 Global Threat Report, CrowdStrike reported an 89% year-on-year increase in the activity it observed from attackers using AI Two documented cases 👇

Public token fundraising has recovered unevenly. In CryptoRank’s dataset, the average disclosed public token sale raised approximately: ◻️ 2021: $1.50 million ◻️ 2023: $460,000 ◻️ 2025: $2.08 million ◻️ 2026 YTD, through 10 June: $3.15 million. Activity remained volatile in 2026 CryptoRank reported just $8.4 million in total token-sale fundraising in August. The first week of October recorded the highest weekly total since February Capital remains concentrated Coinbase’s analysis of 962 projects with documented token-sale proceeds from 2021 to September 2026 found that 130 projects accounted for approximately 75% of proceeds This broader sample includes public and private sales beyond launchpads The sector mix also changed. Within that sample: ◻️ Infrastructure, L1/L2 networks and DeFi represented 64.5% of sales in 2025 ◻️ AI’s share rose from 1.3% in 2021 to 13.2% in 2025 ◻️ Gaming and metaverse sales fell from 75 in 2021 to 17 in 2025 The January–September 2026 subset contains only 20 documented sales, with recent disclosures incomplete. It does not support a reliable update to those sector shares Selected CoinList offerings in early 2026 illustrate three fundraising themes: ◻️ AI infrastructure finance: USD.AI - lending against GPU collateral ◻️ Confidential infrastructure: Zama - computation on encrypted data ◻️ Integrated DeFi: Flying Tulip - trading and lending within one protocol

Launchpads need to prove their value before and after a token sale Only 13 public token sales closed in May 2026, the lowest monthly figure since late 2020 Active institutional venture investors fell from 767 in Q3 2025 to 333 in Q3 2026 Returns have given buyers little reason to return: by December, 84.7% of 118 tracked launches from 2025 traded below their initial valuation We see three directions for launch platforms: ◻️ Selection and support before the sale. Teams undergo formal review and receive help with tokenomics, market entry and fundraising preparation. Some programmes also provide initial funding ◻️ Regulated sales. In the EU, professionally placing tokens on an issuer’s behalf is a regulated service under MiCAR, requiring the relevant authorisation ◻️ Control over capital after the sale. Some platforms hold proceeds in treasuries that teams cannot move independently Monthly budgets cover operations, while additional spending requires governance approval A launchpad seeking to rebuild trust should explain why it selected a team, what support that team receives and who controls the money after the raise

AI agents need a way to find and pay for the services their tasks require Incubated by Vertical, @vAPI_Network brings both into one flow with Call, using per-request USDC payments on @base Watch the walkthrough

Incubated projects should clearly present their development needs, explain funding requirements and transparently report spending The incubator reviews those needs, releases agreed funding and monitors progress Before fundraising, both parties should agree on the budget, milestones, reporting requirements, funding conditions and treatment of unused capital The incubator’s authority to request evidence, require corrections and pause funding should be documented. Capital should be released in tranches for defined purposes. Further funding should depend on documented expenditure and verifiable progress Material changes to the budget or use of funds should require prior approval Monthly project reports should show capital received, spending by category, remaining runway and progress against milestones Missed commitments or unexplained expenditure should trigger a documented review, with tighter controls or a funding pause where warranted Public updates should distinguish completed work from ongoing tests and future plans Unsupported claims should be corrected, and material delays or changes disclosed promptly At Vertical Labs, we believe founders should be accountable for execution and transparent reporting, and incubators for the quality of their oversight Investors and the community need clear evidence that funds are being used as agreed and commitments are being met

Helping projects reach the people who will use their products is central to Vertical’s next phase We are building an ecosystem that supports founders from development through distribution, with Gateway giving projects a direct way to reach our community @MarkTbuilds goes deeper into the structure behind this direction, the role of $VERTAI and what needs to be in place before its relaunch Watch the video below ⚡

Before the next token raise, a team should be able to show what the previous funding helped it learn about demand For products using token incentives to attract users, that means tracking what happens after a campaign ends: ◻️ How many users return when promotional rewards stop? ◻️ How many become paying customers? ◻️ Does the revenue they generate cover the incentives and the cost of serving them? These results should shape the next funding plan Strong retention can support a case for expanding distribution Users leaving after rewards end calls for a closer look at the product before increasing acquisition spending Founders should define these tests before allocating the budget, then report the results alongside the milestones delivered At Vertical Labs, we see this as an essential part of preparing teams for their next stage of growth