Deterministic + verifiable. Same (prompt, seed) → byte-identical PNG. Check the exact binary the canister runs:
dfx canister info 7chv3-5iaaa-aaaao-bbq3a-cai --network ic
module hash d89a560… — reproduce any output and prove it.

@stockfishchess is on-chain ♟⛓ World's strongest open-source chess engine, 12,000+ lines of C++, now runs inside a single smart contract on the Internet Computer, compiled with @icpp_pro No server. Every move agreed by 13 nodes. Can you beat it? 👇 ne5l7-xiaaa-aaaaj-qsm3q-cai.…

I am still standing by my prediction about llama_cpp_canister that it can become the most replicated and highest cycle burner of all 🔥 For some periods during 2025 it contributed up to 40% of total CBR.

Guard your DAO's OpenChat community channel. Getting close to making this a reality by using llama_cpp_canister with a classifier trained on our own public channel data. Link to generic version in thread.

Total solution: use AI (e.g. Claude) to migrate your PHP app to Motoko, and run it on the Internet Computer, making it *tamperproof*. Now you can modify it at will, and you'll automatically skip the next hole too.

We're about to switch the ICP Dashboard to a new version: every number is read straight from the chain, and the dashboard itself is served from a canister. internet-computer:native Like it? Don't? Found a bug/issue? Tell me below 👇 g3psz-xyaaa-aaaam-ajeza-cai.…

An important advantage that network cloud can provide to onchain services is better "AI Safety". Here's how. When AI makes cryptography unsafe, networks can be rapidly upgraded, protecting all hosted software. With traditional tech stacks, algos are linked into the various layers and components, making upgrading difficult and laborious for those operating services. Networks, like the Internet Computer/ICP, can abstract the core security math that keeps hosted services safe. They can also upgrade peripheral (non-core) cryptography. For example, on a dime, the Internet Computer could could upgrade to a new version of HTTPS in response to AI suddenly making the current version unsafe, without those running services having to do anything. By contrast, on traditional tech stacks, (or "on" traditional blockchains, where the apps are actually served from traditional tech, such as from AWS, with only tokens a DeFi logic onchain), those running services would need to manually upgrade all their web servers and application servers. Where the software powering a service makes HTTPS outcalls to other services, it will be directly linked to libraries enabling the calls — so it will all need to be upgraded too! By contrast, the Internet Computer hosts serverless code, where these kinds of complexities are abstracted away from services. If a service makes an HTTP outcall to another service, the call uses whatever version of HTTPS the network chooses (since the network makes the actual call on behalf of the software). If the network is upgraded, then so is every service — automatically. This further reflects the way that the Internet Computer as cloud dramatically reduces security admin and systems admin demands compared with building on traditional tech, and additional unique advantages. It also highlights another crucial axis on which networks must be measured, whether they seek quantum safety (when relevant) or AI safety (since today, AI can now find flaws in algorithms and software at any time) — agility. That is, how fast can a blockchain network be upgraded in response to a new threat? The Internet Computer is unique in that it is orchestrated by a decentralized governance system called the Network Nervous System (something like a DAO with system privileges, but much more sophisticated). That enables the network to be agile, and to rapidly respond to emerging threats, by upgrading the code running on the node machines hosting it. The Internet Computer is a self-updating, adaptive network. The ability of chains to rapidly react to new threats that have been suddenly uncovered/created by AI, whether they are flaws in cryptography algorithms, or flaws in software libraries, will be a defining feature as things get more hairy. This is a conundrum for traditional chains chasing quantum safety, of course. By definition, they are claiming that upgrading networks is a long and arduous process, and therefore that they have achieved something important and valuable by upgrading to quantum-safe algorithms ahead of time. But the algorithms they are upgrading to — so they can claim "quantum safety" — are new and do not benefit from the decades of examination that e.g. ECDSA has. What then, if AI finds suddenly problems with them, like it did with HAWK? They have tacitly declared that they cannot quickly switch back, because transitioning is something that takes time, which is why their upgrades are such an achievement... I will press the point no further, but as an industry, we need to get much more nuanced and sophisticated in how we understand security in an age where AI can suddenly upset security assumptions and make software insecure. The Internet Computer has got this crucial agility axis covered, and it's agility, not the premature adoption of new and unproven quantum safe crypto algorithms, that really defines safety. The key point is, if a network has to adopt these unproven algorithms years before a cryptographically-relevant quantum computer exists, then it's doing something very wrong. The Internet Computer has solved agility. It provides an end-to-end alternative to traditional tech, where people can build services, and gain safety and independence from the rapidly shifting sands of security that the AI era will bring. It is another reason that the mainstream world needs Internet Computer cloud. It's a security and resilience haven.

With cloud engines, apps run without cycles, and now, deploying to the shared Internet Computer subnets will be a breeze too. Agents can show users QR codes, so they can pay with their credit cards, avoiding token friction. ICP is becoming mainstream agentic infrastructure.