Decentralized AI networks have to turn many validators' subjective quality scores into one reward number. Bittensor's Yuma Consensus uses a stake-weighted median and clips the rest — robust to a <50% bloc. Then a parasite shows up: copying the consensus pays better than producing it.
Decentralized RL splits the actor from the learner across the internet: the policy a worker acts with runs several steps behind the one that learns. INTELLECT-2 held reward at 4 steps stale; SparrowRL cut the broadcast 79x. The bandwidth and staleness taxes, and what the chain secures.
Verification overhead gets the blame, but the real tax on decentralized LLM inference is the batch a single-tenant node can't fill. On identical 8x H100s, Llama-3.3-70B costs about $258 per million tokens at batch 1 and $2.30 at batch 256 — a 112x spread. Why, and how networks fight it.
Secure multi-party computation runs a transformer without any party seeing your prompt — at minutes per query and gigabytes per token. BumbleBee's BERT-base: 6.4 GB, 2.55 min; LLaMA-7B: ~8 min/token. The bytes don't go where you'd think, and it's why 'blind' networks fall back to TEEs.
An AI agent that retrieves from an untrusted vector DB can't tell the true top-k from a cherry-picked or fabricated one. Re-running the search needs the whole corpus. The 2026 fix: commit the snapshot, then prove the k-th distance is a boundary, not the sort. V3DB proves it 22x faster.
On-chain AI loves to say a model is 'stored on-chain.' But a chain commits to a 32-byte hash for cents; keeping the 140 GB it points to retrievable is a separate, recurring, surprisingly centralized bill. The storage math, erasure coding, and the retrieval wall.