Skip to main content

Flying Avocado Cat

Flying Avocado Cat — a reference card for a crypto project: what the product does and how verifiable the project’s key claims are; also — alignment with the Decentralized AI thesis (DecAI Fit).

Flying Avocado Cat — a Meme project on the Ethereum network, token (symbol: FAC).

Disclaimer

Important: this page is a reference overview of the project. Within DecAIHub, we separately record a verification based on open sources within the AI thesis (what is real AI/onchain/why a token, and which sources this is based on).
This is not financial advice and not a recommendation to buy/sell/hold any asset. We do not assess price, returns, or entry/exit timing.
Conclusions are based on publicly available materials found as of the verification date. The absence of confirmation does not imply the absence of the technology.

TL;DR (for readers who are not into AI)

  • What it is: a meme token on the Ethereum network.
  • Who it’s for: community members/meme token traders.
  • Why onchain/token: onchain is the token itself; no Tier‑1 confirmation of onchain logic of the product other than the token was found.

How it works (very briefly)

  1. The user does: interacts with the FAC token and the community.
  2. The system does: performs standard ERC‑20 token operations.
  3. The user gets: an onchain asset (the token) and access to public data about the contract.
  4. Where the blockchain is: the FAC token is onchain on the Ethereum network (see explorer).
  5. Token role (if any): the utility of the token as a mandatory mechanism of the product is not established (per Tier‑1, it is a meme token).

Quick links: AI thesis fit

Project passport

Field Value
Project name Flying Avocado Cat
Also known as (aliases) FAC
Logo (logo) ../assets/583_flying-avocado-cat_logo.svg
Token symbol (ticker) FAC
Category Meme
Primary chain (chain) Ethereum
Type EVM
Network status mainnet
Consensus (consensus) PoS (Ethereum)
Launch date (launch_date) 2023-11
Project status (status) active
Token (standard) ERC-20
Token contract 0x1a3a8cf347b2bf5890d3d6a1b981c4f4432c8661
Token model (token_type) —
Max supply 10 000 000 FAC
Issuance fixed
Tokenomics (tokenomics, brief) 0% tax; in Tier‑1 it is described as a meme token with “no intrinsic value” and “no formal team or roadmap”.
Governance —
Admins/keys —
Audit yes
Bug bounty —
Team (team) —
Funding (investors/funding) —
AI component (ai_component) —
Use‑case (use_case) meme token
DecAI Fit — AI thesis fit 0/6 — no AI reality and no AI intent (ai_score=0)
DecAI Fit component summary ai_score 0 / onchain_score 1 / token_score 0 / evidence_score 0
Last verified 2026-02-11

General project overview

Flying Avocado Cat (FAC) is a meme token on the Ethereum network. The project’s Tier‑1 source directly states that it is a “meme coin with no intrinsic value” and that the project has no formal team/roadmap.

Despite the mention of “Grok” in the origin story (as a tool for generating the code/name), no Tier‑1 confirmation of an AI component of the product (AI reality/intent in the DecAI Fit sense) was found.

Features/modules

  • ERC‑20 token: FAC on the Ethereum network.
  • Community/media pages: the project’s website and social media.

Typical scenarios

  • Scenario 1: a user checks the contract in the explorer → sees public data of the ERC‑20 token.
  • Scenario 2: a user follows the project via the website/social media.

Getting started (wallet/network)

  • What you need: an EVM wallet (for example, for operations on Ethereum) and access to DEX/infrastructure.
  • Network/chain: Ethereum.
  • Fees: Ethereum network fees.

Architecture/tech (non‑AI)

  • Components: the ERC‑20 token contract and external interfaces (DEX/wallets/explorer).
  • Participant roles: holders/community members.
  • Where logic runs: the token — onchain (Ethereum); the rest — offchain (website/social media).
  • Dependencies: not established per Tier‑1 sources.

Token/economics (expanded, no forecasts)

  • What is confirmed by Tier‑1: memecoin positioning; 0% tax; total supply 10 000 000.
  • Token utility: not established as a mandatory utility (per Tier‑1, it is a meme token).

Governance

  • Who makes decisions: not established (Tier‑1).
  • How protocol parameters change: not established (Tier‑1).

Security and incidents

  • Audits: there is a public audit report (see Evidence).
  • Bug bounty: no Tier‑1 confirmation found.
  • Incidents: no Tier‑1 confirmation found.
  • Threat model: typical risks of ERC‑20 tokens and external trading venues; specifics depend on the contract/infrastructure.

Project status and timeline

  • Current status: active (based on the presence of the website/social media and the onchain contract).
  • Key milestones: the launch is indicated as “In November 2023” (Tier‑1: website).
  • Roadmap: the Tier‑1 source states that there is no formal roadmap.

Ecosystem/integrations

  • Integrations/partners: we do not record them as a fact without Tier‑1 primary sources.
  • Where it’s actually used: trading/viewing data is possible via standard EVM tools (DEX/wallets/explorer).

AI component of the project

  • What is real AI here? No Tier‑1 confirmation of an AI component of the product was found; the mention of “Grok” relates to the origin/history of the name and is not an AI feature of the product.
  • What is truly onchain? The FAC ERC‑20 token and its contract on the Ethereum network.
  • Why is a token needed? Per Tier‑1, it is a meme token; a mandatory utility for the product is not established.
  • Red flags (based on the information found): AI‑washing via an “AI story” without an AI feature; onchain‑washing (other than the token, there is no onchain logic of the product).

DecAI Fit component summary

  • DecAI Fit: 0/6 — no AI reality and no AI intent (ai_score=0)
Component Level Score
AI reality — 0
Onchain necessity low 1
Token necessity low 0
Evidence Tier‑1 partial 0
Details

AI reality

AI_0 — AI intent (Tier‑1 roadmap) (1/0)

  • AI_0 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): No Tier‑1 declaration of AI intent as part of the product was found.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://fac.meme/
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): The website has an AI mention in the origin story, but no AI feature/roadmap as part of the product.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

AI_1 — what the AI does (1/0)

  • AI_1 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): An AI component of the product is not established per Tier‑1.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://fac.meme/
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): There is no Tier‑1 description of an AI module/model/outputs as part of the product.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

AI_2 — demos/examples (1/0)

  • AI_2 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): A demo/example of the AI part is absent (the AI part is not established).
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://fac.meme/
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): There is no “AI you can touch” artifact.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

AI_3 — metrics/quality (1/0)

  • AI_3 (decision): 0
  • Metrics: —
  • Context (version/date/how measured): —
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://fac.meme/
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): Metrics of the AI part are absent (the AI part is not established).
  • Conflict note (if any): —

AI_4 — tech description/architecture/versions (1/0)

  • AI_4 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): A tech description of the AI part is absent (the AI part is not established).
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://fac.meme/
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): There is no technical documentation about AI.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

Onchain necessity

OC_1 — contracts/addresses/chain (1/0)

  • OC_1 (decision): 1
  • Chain: Ethereum
  • Addresses/identifiers: 0x1a3a8cf347b2bf5890d3d6a1b981c4f4432c8661 (ERC‑20)
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://fac.meme/ ; https://etherscan.io/token/0x1a3a8cf347b2bf5890d3d6a1b981c4f4432c8661
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): There is a public token contract and a Tier‑1 link to it.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

OC_2 — onchain beyond just a token (1/0)

  • OC_2 (decision): 0
  • What useful logic is onchain: Not established (other than the token).
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://fac.meme/
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): Tier‑1 does not describe onchain logic of the product other than the token.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

OC_3 — onchain is critical (1/0)

  • OC_3 (decision): 0
  • “Replace the blockchain” test: Not applicable as a Tier‑1 proven thesis (other than the existence of the token).
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://fac.meme/
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): There is no Tier‑1 justification of “onchain is critical” as a property of the product.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

Token necessity

TK_0 — no token (1/0)

  • TK_0 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): The project has a token, FAC (ERC‑20, Ethereum).
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://fac.meme/ ; https://etherscan.io/token/0x1a3a8cf347b2bf5890d3d6a1b981c4f4432c8661
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): The Tier‑1 source and the explorer confirm the token contract.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

TK_1..TK_4 (1/0)

TK_1 — payment for the service (1/0)

  • TK_1 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): Payment for the service with the token is not established (per Tier‑1, it is a meme token).
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://fac.meme/
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): Tier‑1 does not describe a service paid for with the token.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

TK_2 — incentives/collateral/penalties (1/0)

  • TK_2 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): Token‑based incentives/collateral/penalties are not established per Tier‑1.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://fac.meme/
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): There is no Tier‑1 description of incentive mechanics.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

TK_3 — governance (1/0)

  • TK_3 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): Token‑based governance is not established per Tier‑1.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://fac.meme/
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): There is no Tier‑1 description of voting/a DAO.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

TK_4 — token is replaceable (1/0)

  • TK_4 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): The replaceability of the token as a proven thesis is not established per Tier‑1 sources.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://fac.meme/
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): 1 requires an explicit Tier‑1 argument; not found per Tier‑1 sources.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

Evidence (table)

Tier Source What it proves
Tier‑1 https://fac.meme/ Tier‑1: positioning as a memecoin; 0% tax; total supply; the statement “no intrinsic value / no formal team or roadmap”.
Tier‑1 https://etherscan.io/token/0x1a3a8cf347b2bf5890d3d6a1b981c4f4432c8661 Onchain fact: the FAC ERC‑20 token contract on the Ethereum network.
Tier‑1 https://github.com/cyberscope-io/audits/blob/main/2-fac/audit.pdf Public audit report of the contract (audit; security context).
Tier‑1 — No Tier‑1 source for claim “AI component of the product (what exactly the AI does)” was found.
Tier‑1 — No Tier‑1 source for claim “there is onchain logic of the product other than the token” was found.

No comments to display

Back to top