Whew boy, it’s been a wild two weeks since our last post, but we, along with every risk asset in existence, are so back. I’m intimately familiar with weeks in crypto evaporating a rational sense of time that feels like months to quarters, but I’m absolutely not familiar with that feeling in tradfi markets. The past three weeks of price action have not only been intoxicating, but also historic.

• Nasdaq past 13 day returns (~18%) surrounded by corollary events that exclusively include a cluster of, gulp, 1998-2001, ‘08-’09 and the COVID bounce

• “The last 10-days have been unlike any 10-day period in the market since 1950. First, the S&P 500 is up 9.8% in 10-days, which is 99.7th percentile of all 10 day returns.”

• From April 14th, “The S&P 500 is up 9.83% the past 10 trading days, for the best 10 day gain since coming off the COVID lows in March 2020.”

• “Hedge funds covered their ETF short positions last week at the fastest pace in more than a decade.”

• Goldman: “the speed of CTA global equity buying over the last week is top five all time…+$86 billion over that time”

Pure chaos, but finally the good kind! Those headlines and data can easily read bearish, you know the whole 99%+ percentile rallies and return clusters included alongside 2000 and 2008, but instead of direction the core focus they should highlight is the continuously rapid changing market structure.

We often joke about everything trading like a shitcoin, but it’s unequivocally true with each passing day. Fundamentals still (mostly) drive the market on long enough timeframes, but in the short to mid term flows, positioning, leverage, options and overall market plumbing dominate the direction. Of course, this is not something new or particularly insightful, but I think the weight of that collective influence is still broadly under appreciated.

To highlight this more specifically, we’ll examine what happens when those plumbing factors work in the bulls favor. After a treatise of bad news in the post from two weeks ago, I closed the macro section with the below.

“And finally, for the good news, if that doesn’t happen and things are more or less wrapped up in a couple weeks then hope wins out, at least in the short to mid term, through the aforementioned charts of oil, dxy, yields and the vix.

Correlation algos, along with myself and countless other traders, will see those four key assets almost certainly systemically trade lower as everything related to risk on is bid as a result and the endless hedging and puts are wound down.”

While in hindsight I wish I would’ve pounded the table for the bull scenario in that post a bit more, the effects outlined above, make the reactionary nature of markets much more valuable than the predictive ones. Of course, everyone wants to quote tweet victory lap predictions, but pseudo trend/algo following these headline terrorism markets is more valuable as you know the chase, that importantly happens in both directions, is now on. As we saw in the headlines at the top of the article, in this market, the predictive outcomes are less valuable than following the systemic that flows are forced to crowd back into markets.

As I outlined two weeks ago, the current chase in markets were them drowning as DXY, oil, VIX & yields ripped. Algos, flows, leverage and the overall market plumbing were “forced” to sell as these assets continuously climbed higher. Since then, and more specifically since April 6th circled in the charts above, those four assets have absolutely puked “forcing” those same market participants to generally buy anything and everything. What a beautifully simple market it can be sometimes.

Okay, so what now. Well, as you can see in the charts above, we’re probably back in the danger zone. The binary outcome of two weeks ago (“solve” this somehow, someway to rip markets or everything really dies) is reset and as of Saturday morning we’re, imo, squarely leaning more heavily into the scared again phase. Not scared in the sense of “oh shit this is horrendous” like we were in the initial outset of the war, but scared enough by the combination of:

• how much better can it get — crypto people are deeply aware of this, and even more so the opposite phrase of how much worse can it get at market bottoms. at this stage, i’m not sure what news flow could meaningfully guide the markets higher and they’re currently priced to essentially a perfect outcome of the chaos that is still the Strait of Hormuz

• the propensity for “silliness” to occur at/around market highs; the admin routinely feels emboldened when markets are at their highs like we now currently are, i would argue this is compounded by the velocity of the rally providing them with even more confidence moving forward

• with that emboldenment in mind, i feel confident in believing that we’re generally in a structurally higher VIX, DXY, yields and oil environment. how much lower (worse) can these assets trade in the short term? we’ll almost certainly continue to wax and wane between the buying and selling these assets force while the pendulum has now clearly swung back to upside in them (net market selling as a result)

• the strait of hormuz still isn’t open? we’re going on six weeks of this now and while two weeks ago i highlighted how the market doesn’t particularly care about things until they hit the US, the situation for the rest of the world deteriorates by the day. the binary outcome has played out and the picture is once again increasingly opaque.

• we just had one of the greatest bounces in the history of equities markets. while ATHs beget ATHs and buying ATH breaks is true in both equities and crypto, it’s probably okay to be a bit cautious now given the circumstances that caused the initial selloff haven’t changed that much

• how much longer can the peace during the week, escalation and bad news during the weekends continue? if there’s an edge to be had, it’s almost always quickly erased. is this different?

Where this leaves me heading into next week (because it’s almost impossible to trade anything but core positions on timeframes longer than a week these days) is relatively bearish. I spent most of the last few hours of trading on Friday buying index puts and some longer dated calls on OXY and VIX for the reasons stated throughout the above section. Core equity long positions remain and are only added to during market stress given the overall direction equities head on any long enough timeframe. I’m kicking myself a bit this Saturday morning for not slamming some oil, natgas and energy related things to close the week (as I don’t think a long term solution for them is in place as they tapped their 100emas Friday morning) but OXY and VIX will be a fine enough substitute for the time being.

With that specific positioning in mind, I don’t really have major qualms about the overall economy. It’s abundantly clear that there remains a massive bid for inference, compute and token demand so I’ll continue to remain a buyer of stocks throughout those sectors on any and all pullbacks until that changes. Uranium, solar and Euro defense are also core interests moving forward for me as alternatives to oil and Europe/NATO’s defense structure become more important by the day. On a final note, it’s absolutely insane how hard and deranged it is to be a longer term equity bear. We had one of the most legit reasons for a continued pullback in a decade+ and the best bears could do was a ~10% selloff followed by a historic V reversal to new ATHs. The Michigan consumer sentiment index just hit an all-time low while the indexes rocketed to new high after new high. Brutal.

Being in equity bear is essentially always a losing game, but it compounds to a truly dangerous place when the bearish case makes so much sense. Add in the whiplash of headline terrorism combined with a pavlovian response to bid equities no matter what the selloff is and you’re quickly ran over. Even if there is escalation next week, the fear of missing the rally on the other side of whenever the solution comes has compounded since COVID. 20% selloffs become 15% selloffs that become 10% selloffs which result in 5% selloffs because it’s all going to be okay anyway. That is until, you know, the mythical big one. Optimists win.

Cryptographic Currencies

Okay, that was plenty macro-pontificating for the time being, so let’s talk coins. I don’t think it should come as any surprise that since I’m positioned (short-term) bearishly on equities, I generally feel the same for the coins. As I wrote two weeks ago, I’ve been routinely buying spot coins (almost exclusively in BTC, HYPE, ZEC, MON & LIT) since the initial Iran strikes so any upside is of course a welcomed sight. But, I’m still not fully deployed and continue to selectively short coins when I think they’re overextended (like after Friday close into bad news Saturday morning) and unfortunately can’t fully shake the gut feeling of lower still. The red button for me is not fully disabled.

Some underlying reasons that I continue to remain skeptical of sustained, trending upside in crypto markets include:

• Relative strength against equities since the initial strikes of the war has mostly faded; the coins are more so keeping pace and/or being drug higher by equities instead of outperforming strongly to the upside as you’d hope given potential downside and the risk premium that should applied comparatively speaking, concerns for continuation given the recent equity rally make sense (if we can convincingly exit this range after the 3 weeks equities have had, it’s incredibly not looking good bruv)

• There still isn’t consistent, strong spot demand outside of Saylor and Tom Lee. Despite the equities run and their incessant continued buying, we’re mostly struggling to outperform QQQ & SPY over the past week; lack of other meaningful buyers remains clear while overhead supply is still present

• A lot of continued fuckery (RaveDAO, RAVE briefly the top 15 of market cap Friday night) in the alt market, specifically with Binance coins (this is of course not a new thing but still mildly concerning regardless); AAVE & ZRO once again highlighting this weekend how challenging the defi environment can be, risk premium continues to grind higher

• I fully understand it’s part of the game we play, but I can’t tell you how much I despise Saylor and STRC determining the direction of the market intraweek (and on that note, Saylor and Tom are a bit sidelined in the interim)

• Quantum — i’ll have deeper thoughts on this in the coming weeks, but the fears, fighting and potential forks here are only increasing

• On BTC and majors specifically, we’re mostly in a slowish, controlled stairway higher market regime. After tightly ranging for ~70 days, I would expect more explosive moves that aren’t routinely retested if the market structure has truly changed. Instead it’s more like partially explosive move, then the prices that were left behind are offered again in a couple days, rinse and repeat — if the prices are so good at/around the bear market lows, why are the offered multiple times over?

• Competition — it’s been years now since the coins have been the new shiny thing and it’s difficult to imagine a scenario where excess capital, froth and excitement continuously choose the coins over AI and the downstream effects there

• Alts (generally the trash ones) leading majors at this stage of the market, weakness in HYPE and the previously strong coins that lead this rally from the range lows give me caution for further upside (HYPE, ETH, MON, LIT, ZEC, TAO ((subnet drama obviously a factor here)), VVV)

While you can absolutely call me bearholed and that’s fine (despite a chunk of spot exposure), to change my mind in the short term I’d love to see idiosyncratic demand for spot crypto majors, outperformance of equities and the previously strong, “good” alts outperforming the dogshit to signal further momentum and upside. Two weeks ago I wrote,

“Moving forward, I’m highly confident that last cycle’s early stages signal in the SOL pairs will now be found in the HYPE pairs. Monitoring HYPEBTC and HYPEETH will almost certainly provide a good overall signal for the broader market moving forward…Speaking of HYPE being the new SOL pairs, I’m also pretty confident that SOL pairs are the ETH pairs from last cycle. Since the downtrend began it’s been reliable in signaling that the market is becoming tired and I don’t see what changes that moving forward. ETHBTC was a giant red warning flag for rallies to stop last cycle and until something changes I’m viewing SOLBTC as that continued signal moving forward”

Nothing has, or likely will, change in that regard and I’m hoping that HYPE strength and SOL weakness continues to signal healthier markets and the potential for more upside to come. One other chart I’m watching closely is BTC.D.

I think in an ideal world, we would see this exit the ~250 day range higher to 61%+ in a broad selloff. That would ideally be it for the BTC.D climb higher and then we can talk about sustained, trending upside higher across the board. As you can see in that chart, the spikes come on those market selloffs (OCT, NOV, JAN) and represent a healthy reset of the market. As I stated in the tweet above, I just can’t be wildly bullish when TIA, LDO and dead memes are leading the market higher while BTC.D coils at the top of the range. To be clear, I don’t think the lows are in danger of being swept and I will almost certainly be long anything I can get my hands on if/when we do get that (ideally) last wipe. The bullish line in the sand has, in my mind, been raised from 66k two weeks ago to ~70k today.

With the bearish thoughts out of the way, let’s focus on some good that gives me confidence in holding the spot coins I have and the countless coins I’ll be max long if/when we another wipe on BTC.D expansion. First, there’s continued to be strong buy and forget tendencies throughout the various BTC ETF products and I don’t particularly see what changes that trend. This is just how tradfi and ETF assets work. Supply is bought and held mostly without ever having a second thought. Second, the massive underlying institutionalization buildout, growth and demand continues to accelerate week over week beneath the surface.

In addition to the consistent, steady ETF buying and the ever increasing institutionalization of the asset class, the regulatory climate consistently, at least for now, improves as the SEC once again ruled in crypto’s favor. This time, defi frontends, wallet providers and browser extensions were cleared as having to register as broker-dealers as long as they do not monetize order flow, offer investment advice or take custody of user funds.

Furthermore, for as much as I despise the reliance on Saylor and STRC, Strategy announced a somewhat predictable change to STRC this week. As their tweet states, “Strategy is proposing to pay semi-monthly dividends on STRC, instead of monthly. No change to the annual dividend obligations or dividend rate. These proposed changes are intended to stabilize price, dampen cyclicality, drive liquidity and grow demand.” We’ll see how this develops in the coming weeks to months, but this should give Saylor/Strategy more continuous buying power throughout a month as the volume circus around the once a month dividend date is smoothed moving forward.

You know, after writing all the above maybe it is a bit silly to be bearish short term, but hey that’s what makes a market doesn’t it? To me, as we sit Saturday afternoon, the charts look tired and I’ll be hyper aware of potential failed breakouts across the board if we move lower throughout next week. Accepting back into the months long range after equities pulled the rally they did will be a bit painful.

Collectively though, I still feel better about the overall state of crypto than I have at anytime in the past ~9 months (which ofc happens when you compare the prices/froth from then to now) and I suppose that’s a large reason why I started writing again. I’m not fading that feeling on any timeframe longer than a few months at max, but until then I’ll continue to land where I think the market is pointing me (like net short right now). Unfortunately I think that’s down in the short term but I’d love for the bulls to prove me wrong. Cheers friends, I’ll see you in the orderbooks and here next week.

Not financial or tax advice. This newsletter is strictly educational and is not investment advice or a solicitation to buy or sell any assets or to make any financial decisions.

Friends, long-time readers first-time callers, cryptocurrency enthusiasts, steady lads, and fellow psych ward patients it is so so good to be back. It’s been ~2 years now since I’ve written in this medium which is far, far too long. It’s time to return to tradition. For anyone who’s unaware, I wrote Round Tripping, a weekly deep dive on the crypto ecosystem, every week for ~2 years. This article, along with weekly posts moving forward, will hopefully be as useful to people, and myself, as those articles coming out of the 2022 bear market were.

In this post, we’ll attempt to provide some value covering the macro state of tradfi and crypto. There’s no time to rest as more long days at the long day factory are ahead, so let’s get to it.

First, let’s head back a bit to January. From the start of the new year, markets generally chopped in a couple week tight range before rallying hard from the middle January until the end of it. If you recall, the strongest asset across virtually everything at this time was and continued to be gold as it climbed from 3500 to 5600 in 153 days. The 153rd day? Thursday, January 29th.

On January 28th, gold, SPY & QQQ put in fresh new all-time highs while BTC looked like it might be bottoming & breaking upwards from ~89k. When that failed, the full-blown bearish mindset, on both coins and stocks, began to fully take place for me. While I of course had absolutely no clue what gold, and to a lesser extent silver, were signaling, it was evident to me something was happening under the surface. There were/are of course fundamental/structural reasons as to why these shiny rocks traded and appreciated in value the way they did, but moves of that magnitude also signal some growing stress. Since January 28th, gold, SPY, QQQ & BTC are respectively down 14%, 6%, 8% & 26% (with lows obviously below that, especially for the indexes and gold given the rally we saw to close this week).

That brings us to today, day 35 of the Iran war. WTI is 112, Brent is 110, the DXY is 100, yields have ripped throughout most of March and the VIX, until the past few trading days, has had an infinite twap from god (also note the VIX in the below image never making new lows from the same day gold and indexes topped, January 28th). As mentioned, equities have declined but outside of the closing days of last week, it’s been anything but a straightforward decline.

While the overall picture and decline since late January is relatively straightforward and orderly, the intraday and intraweek noise has been tormenting, specifically since the war started. As Rhino so eloquently put it back in October, it’s a headline terrorism supercycle. Holy shit I am tired, boss.

Okay so what do we do now? To be honest, as I stated yesterday afternoon, I’m questioning my, almost exclusively bearish, positioning for the first time since the initial strikes of the war. The market has become wildly accustomed to not particularly selloffs and down equity markets, but what happens on the other side of them. Whether it’s days, weeks or months, stocks will be back to highs eventually so what’s the point of selling?

In addition to that belief, the headline terrorism supercycle, the 24/7 online nature of news and war coverage and the president’s constant truth social posts along with seemingly daily interviews and/or headlines creates a weird, pseudo schrodinger’s market where a singular headline or truth social can absolutely flip positioning from wildly bearish to wildly bullish intraminute, hour or day. It’s simultaneously both hard to sell and buy when a single headline can instantly punish you. The frequency, growth and volume of 0DTE and short dated options adds another wrinkle (Thursday saw the highest put/call ratio since liberation day) that creates a chaotic market environment where noise far outweighs signal.

I’m never going to pretend to have the answers but I still overall lean towards a bearish environment. I think it’s important to note that, especially for equities, the downtrend unequivocally preceded the escalations with Iran & oil trading 100+. Of course, this was an accelerate dumped onto a smoldering fire, but as noted, the flames, no matter how weak, started in the final trading days of January. Throughout that month, we saw 11 separate days of ES being unable to hold above 7k followed by another 5 failed attempts in early February which, imo, initiated the selloff that we’ve seen aided by geopolitical factors.

Additionally, the employment picture is okay enough while inflation sprouts were already growing before the Iran war began. Now, the potential of sticky inflation is front and center as the projection of Fed rate cuts has shifted from 3+ at the start of the year, to more than likely a hike as of two weeks ago, back to holding this week to, as of writing, an 11% chance of a hike after the NFP numbers this morning. Confusing and paralyzing. Speaking of, concerns surrounding the AI capex boom becoming a FCF and/or earnings drag and AI-driven layoffs along with the weight of the ever-growing top half of the K-shaped economy’s ability to sustain spending & 401k/retirement contributions were also already present (chumbawumba mode). Other concerning recent events that would support the bearish argument include, but are not limited to:

• CVX — the chart and the appetite, which is now eviscerated whoops, for a new public equity launch it is a wrapper of private companies

• The 11% “risk-free” yield Saylor continues to push along with the guaranteed 17.5% OpenAI is offering to private equity firms

• The questionable future returns and stability of the hundreds of billions Mag7 and others have spent and will continue to spend on AI scaling & data centers

• The GCC countries almost certainly not being marginal dollars for the above mentioned buildouts and funding needed as they rationally divert their time, energy and money to defending their homelands

• OpenAI raising 122 billion dollars (!!!) the largest private round ever

• SpaceX officially filing for IPO (at a $2 trillion dollar valuation with 80x forward sales, 500x forward earnings & 125x EV/EBITDA multiple) & almost certainly having immediate inclusion into the major indexes while exhibiting liquidity black hole type features

• The entirety of the cluster that is private equity at large right now

TACO attempts have largely become useless, stale and are possibly showing signs of mold as they sit in your fridge five days after you bought them from a questionable roadside food truck upon leaving the bar. It’s best to just throw them out. We’re stuck with a chaotic, schrodinger type market that is relatively paralyzed and facing a wildly binary outcome. As prices drift lower, TACO attempts and “good” headlines increase while rate cuts become more likely as recession and inflation fears grind higher. As prices climb, the militaries involved seem to become more active, correlations generally force DXY, yields, VIX lower while oil stagnates around ~100 slowly increasing the odds of a hike needed to combat down the line inflation without concerns for overall growth. A never ending loop of circling Dante’s Inferno. Sigh.

So, where we settle is back at the incredibly unfortunate binary outcome previously mentioned. While I still generally lean bearish as a result of mostly screaming higher yields, oil, vix and dxy charts that I linked earlier I can also see the potential for a wild wall of worry rally. Before we get to that scenario, we need a little more doom on what the potential looks like if this war continues until late April or longer (or god forbid ground troops are actually deployed). Here’s a collection of recent headlines that show that potential and how binary the outcome can be.

• “Global food prices rise in March on energy pressures from the Iran war”

• “South Korea raising oil imports from US amid Hormuz blockage; South Korea to keep fuel price cap even after Iran war ends”

• Korean president: “if we save every drop of fuel, avoid wasting even a single plastic bag, and add a spirt of mutual consideration and collective resolve, we can emerge from the tunnel of crisis safely and swiftly.”

• Australian PM in a national address talked about painful months ahead, their National Fuel Security Plan & said, “in the coming weeks if you can switch to take the train or bus, do so…the months ahead may not be easy, i want to be up front about that”

• “European jet, diesel prices hit new all-time highs”

• “German Chancellor warns Iran war could hit Europe as hard as covid”

• “Russia’s pipeline gas exports to Europe jump 22% YOY in March amid Mideast crunch” — think of how bad things have to be for Europe to increase their coordination and purchasing from Russia of all places.

What’s evidently clear from the above combined with the physical infrastructure damage that has occurred and the stoppage of, you know, physical transit through the SOH is that we’re squarely in the hope versus physics realm. The hope camp is, mostly justifiably, looking to what’s behind the door of this war ending while the physics camp points and screams at higher prices for oil, energy and food which every human and company on Earth needs.

The other benefit the hope camp has, whether “fair” or not, is that the immediate to short to maybe mid term damage is almost exclusively applied to APAC and European countries. For better or worse, and as we saw with covid, markets don’t care until the chaos reaches the United States. If that happens, we’re almost certainly facing some sort of, maybe wildly short lived, global recession. And finally, for the good news, if that doesn’t happen and things are more or less wrapped up in a couple weeks then hope wins out, at least in the short to mid term, through the aforementioned charts of oil, dxy, yields and the vix.

Correlation algos, along with myself and countless other traders, will see those four key assets almost certainly systemically trade lower as everything related to risk on is bid as a result and the endless hedging and puts are wound down. Fun! Binary outcomes of hell, where schrodinger’s market takes center stage until either side is achieved. In the scenario where the risk off assets trend lower, inflation and oil shortages are actually short lived I fully expect crypto to be the fastest horse out of the gate so let’s end the macrolarping there and talk about the coins.

Cryptographic Currencies

Relative strength, new paradigm, digital gold, safe have assets, outperformance. Look at it, it’s beautiful! If we, you know, ignore all of the price action that took place since October and just focus on what assets have been doing since the start of the Iran war, then there are few better assets to own on Earth other than cryptocurrencies, oil (and energy broadly + some agricultural stocks/assets), the US10Y and the US dollar.

Jokes aside, the real and observable relative strength of BTC and the coins has been impressive in an absolutely chaotic environment. Of course, as is usually the case, relative strength usually comes after the coins have already derisked which is clearly the case since October. While a week or two of this outperformance is not uncommon, unfortunately usually before some more downside as it was lagging all along, a month+ of it increasingly becomes notable. Coins selloff first, coins bottom first.

As you can see from the above image, while BTC and the coins have outperformed essentially all other risk assets since the Iran war began, they also haven’t gone anywhere, outside of some wicks to both sides, for two months now. If you thought trading tradfi markets during this chaos was making you insane, add in trading crypto on top of that and you booked a one way ticket straight to the insane asylum (speaking from personal experience over the past few months).

While I have been incredibly bearish equities, and more marginally bearish coins specifically after rallies within the range, one of the questions I continue to ask myself is who is left to sell spot coins? The endless chop has been wildly frustrating, but if you haven’t already sold coins to do the Iran War, quantum fears (though perking up again), Saylor’s increasing shenanigans (most of the maxi crowd still celebrates this), after the liquidations of 10/10 and wick on the initial strikes of the war, oil consistently being 100+ while equities selloff, the droopy endless selling of the past 6 months and BTC miners liquidating their coins for AI pivots why would you sell now?

• Riot Platforms sold $290M worth of BTC during Q1

• MARA sold 15.1k BTC for ~$1.1B in March

• Core Scientific sold 1.9k BTC for ~$175M in January

Two important caveats to the who is left to sell thesis. First, a lack of sellers does not mean there are buyers trying to barge through the door. Second, and probably most important, there are still countless coins in the hands of Saylor, Tom Lee and various DATs (though predicting and timing any selling or forced selling of that is a fool’s errand in the short term). Additionally, ETF buyers have largely been diamond handed and after a decline of holdings since the October top, they’ve been net buyers again throughout March.

Price is not the only thing endlessly chopping around as total open interest, outside of two spikes, has been flat along with most coin prices since February. As you can see, total OI is back to hanging around levels that we haven’t seen since April of last year (which was the cluster of weeks around 80k between the initial run to 100k+ and the eventual top of ~125k in early October). Again, I’m not convicted in an absolute price bottom, but (outside of Saylor and the DATs again damnit) there is incredibly little leverage in the system and sellers seem mostly out of coins.

While there are smallish intraday and intraweek moves, the story is similar to schrodinger’s stock market and endless hedging where you can see funding pretty quickly flip negative when price action, headlines or news are not supportive. With all of that being said, the charts, specifically the weeklies across most coins still look bad and BTC is almost certainly in trouble if 65.6 to 65k are lost. For the reasons laid out in the macro section I still unfortunately think lower before higher is more likely but once again that can be changed with singular war headline. I’m comfortable enough buying some BTC + IBIT, HYPE & LIT here and there just in case, as I have been doing since the initial strikes of the war. Even if we end up lower which is still my base case of now, I think it’ll likely be mostly wicks on longer time frames as the appetite for BTC, and the coins broadly, has been clearly demonstrated at/below these levels.

With BTC coverage out of the way, we’ll once again consult our chart of performance since the initial strikes on Iran but this time solely focus on notable tokens. One of the first things you’ll note is the dashed line on March 25th. As you can see, that has been the local top of the rally for most coins while BTC also locally topped at ~72k on that date.

I highlight this as one of the most important things you can do coming out of down trending and/or bear markets is to understand what assets, whether they’re coins or stocks, lead markets to the upside. Of course it’s not rocket science that when BTC locally tops, so do even the strongest coins, but often times with the strongest alts it can provide immensely valuable signal. Coming out of the ‘22 bear market, one of the most profitable and reliable trends that lasted for months to arguably even years was watching SOLBTC and SOLETH to tell you whether we reached local exhaustion or it was risk on.

Moving forward, I’m highly confident that last cycle’s early stages signal in the SOL pairs will now be found in the HYPE pairs. Monitoring HYPEBTC and HYPEETH will almost certainly provide a good overall signal for the broader market moving forward. On that note, the current HYPE weakness is also one of the reasons I remain relatively cautious crypto markets here as it has consistently bled since March 18th. Of course knowing where BTC is headed is the most powerful all knowing being, but having another asset or two to help you gauge overall risk is wildly beneficial. I think it’ll be wise to lean bullish when HYPE is leading and bearish when HYPE is lagging.

Speaking of HYPE being the new SOL pairs, I’m also pretty confident that SOL pairs are the ETH pairs from last cycle. Since the downtrend began it’s been reliable in signaling that the market is becoming tired and I don’t see what changes that moving forward. ETHBTC was a giant red warning flag for rallies to stop last cycle and until something changes I’m viewing SOLBTC as that continued signal moving forward.

While I’ll have a longer post on HIP3 soon, (along with stablecoins/agentic payments and other nuggets that I cut from this article given the length already) it’s worth highlighting how ridiculous the growth of HIP3 markets, volume and open interest has been. As the above charts show, HYPE, outside of BTC of course, is far and away the token with the clearest PMF and growth trajectory. Again, to me last cycle this was clearly SOL based solely on the infinitely superior UI/UX for trading it was the major token to watch. It’s not new or groundbreaking news, but through HIP3 and the volume of HL alone, HYPE is positioned to lead majors moving forward.

Lastly, as the comparison of coins chart since initial strikes shows, the major coins of interest moving forward for me are: HYPE & LIT (perp barbell, more on that later), ZEC (non-corrupted major alt ((no saylor, tom lee, DATs, etc)) with quantum & privacy tailwinds), TAO & maybe VVV though almost certainly late here (ai beneficiary tokens), MON (has been incredibly resilient at/above IPO price, TVL/activity climbing, far & away most interesting new L1 imo) & ZRO (connection layer to all token movement, actually impressive tech). My weight of holdings in these coins, in order, currently is BTC, HYPE (close), LIT, ZEC, & MON. I’m still mostly patiently waiting on ZRO and it’s a bit frustrating to not have been more on the ball with TAO and TAO subnets but alas, can’t catch ‘em all.

I’ll leave it there for today as it has been a long journey to finally get the pen back, but it feels incredible tbh. As mentioned, I’ll be back weekly moving forward and also have a standalone post on all things HL, HIP3 and agentic payments/stablecoins coming in the near future. If you enjoyed this and want to encourage/support future writings, share with a friend, retweet, send me a dm, etc. Good luck and godspeed in the order books this weekend and next week, maybe there won’t actually be long days (lol)?

Not financial or tax advice. This newsletter is strictly educational and is not investment advice or a solicitation to buy or sell any assets or to make any financial decisions.

Crypto’s a wild place, right? Scroll Twitter (I’m not calling it X or Xwitter) and you’ll see Ethereum “big brains” clashing with Solana speed freaks while Bitcoin maxis sip coffee in the corner, unbothered. These aren’t just blockchains, they’re pretty much tribes. Layer 1s are the sovereign chiefs battling for attention in a space where devs, users, and capital are the ultimate prizes. Layer 2s, you ask? They’re the megaphones, amplifying each tribe’s vision into niches that work for the masses.

This is the attention economy, after all. Where focus is king, and every L1’s got a flag to plant. Let’s break down the tribes, see how L2s juice their game, and peek at what’s next. Spoiler: It’s very messy, tribalistic (obviously), and the reason why crypto keeps moving despite the Tariff shenanigans.

L1s: The Attention Economy OGs

L1s are the base-layer blockchains. Think Ethereum, Solana, Bitcoin, all running their own rules, consensus, and state. But they’re not just “tech stacks” as the native devs would have you believe; they’re attention magnets in a crowded room. Devs can’t build everywhere, users won’t juggle 50 wallets, and investors? They’re always chasing the next big narrative. This essentially means that L1s turn into tribes, each with a unique identity; composability, speed, security or whatever else they choose to represent. Ultimately all hustling for your eyeballs and your onchain TXs.

Then enter the L2s, the sidekicks that don’t reinvent the wheel but scale it. They take the L1s core vision, whether it's Ethereum's DeFi dominance or Bitcoin's payment purity and crank it up for real-world use. It’s a two-punch combo: L1s grab the spotlight, L2s make it stick.

The Tribes of Layer 1: Who’s Running the Show?

Let’s meet the crews defining crypto in 2025.

Ethereum: The Composability Tribe

• Vibe: Lego for degens. Stack protocols like Uniswap or Aave and watch DeFi or NFTs bloom with all this composability. Chances are, if it’s a “meta”, it was probably first on Ethereum.

• Crew: Devs who’ll pay gas fees for the biggest sandbox. Costs sting, but the ecosystem’s unmatched. Whales who want access to the most liquid market.

• Big Win: Composability keeps it king, even with L2s stealing some thunder.

Solana: The Speed Tribe

• Vibe: Low-latency heaven. Serum traders, Pump.fun Lottery players and recently, the AI inference humble abode.

• Crew: Speed chasers who shrug off decentralisation. “Fast and cheap” is the gospel.

• Big Win: Transactions that don’t make you wait or broke (Otherside NFT Mint day)

Bitcoin: The Security Tribe

• Vibe: The OG. Simple, secure, decentralized to the core.

• Crew: Maximalists who’d just HODL over anything else (and who can blame them?). Lightning attempts to keep it practical, and Ordinals/BRC20s tried to make it a bit more fun.

• Big Win: Faith that doesn’t budge, ever.

Aptos & Sui: The Move Tribe

• Vibe: Move language for slick, safe scaling. PancakeSwap's already onboard with Aptos and you're seeing more projects porting their dApps over there every day.

• Crew: Devs geeking out on new tools that dodge bugs.

• Big Win: Fresh tech for a scalable future.

Monad: The Performance Tribe

• Vibe: EVM-compatible speed demon (still in testnet). Think trading-based apps and AI, all wanting the speed but not wanting to program Rust-based smart contracts.

• Crew: Ethereum devs who want Solana’s pace without switching stacks.

• Big Win: Fast and familiar. Also a cult.

Story Protocol: The Creator Tribe

• Vibe: Tokenized IP for artists and writers. Think digital art or music royalties on chain (but this time it’ll work, fr).

• Crew: Creators who want ownership, not just exposure.

• Big Win: Crypto meets culture, not just a crash (to everyone’s disbelief)

Berachain: The Liquidity Tribe

• Vibe: Proof-of-Liquidity (PoL) and a tri-token flex (BERA, BGT, HONEY) since its February 2025 mainnet drop.

• Crew: Yield farmers and DeFi heads securing the chain while stacking gains.

• Big Win: Liquidity that pays, literally.

Abstract: The Consumer Tribe

• Vibe: Degens who want to extend the fun to the non-crypto crowd.

• Crew: Devs who don’t want to fork uniswap with a token and make something that isn’t DeFi for the umpteenth time.

• Big Win: Unfaltering UI/UX, making actual sense of the notorious crypto user experience.

The Rest of the Pack

• Cardano: Research nerds dreaming.

• NEAR: Accessibility champs onboarding the normies through whatever means necessary.

• BNB Chain: Binance pragmatists keeping it practical.

• Polkadot: Grandfather of Interoperability

Each tribe’s got its hook. The reason to scream “pick me!” in a sea of options.

L2s: Turning Tribal Vibes Into Big Moves

L2s may not run the show, seeing as they piggyback on L1s for security however, they dial up the usability. They’re the amplifiers, taking a tribe’s core idea and scaling it into something you can use. The way they decide to do so is what makes L2s a lot more interesting. You can see the overall L2 as a “bet” on the medium they think will scale up their native L1s.

• Ethereum L2s: Arbitrum pumps DeFi volume, Optimism toys with DAO governance, Base gives it a “regulatory” wrapper, and so so so many more. They all keep Ethereum’s composability alive without the gas pain.

• Bitcoin’s Lightning Network: Instant payments that don’t ditch BTC’s security ethos.

• Solana’s Termina: Doubling down on speed.

• Berachain’s Future L2s: Early days, but they’re definitely are experimenting.

Newer tribes like Monad, Abstract or Story will most probably spawn L2s soon because at the end of the day, it’s all about stretching the tribe’s reach without getting lost in the sauce.

Devs and Users: Who’s Riding With Who?

Devs pick tribes based on what clicks:

• Tooling: EVM fam sticks to Ethereum or Berachain; Move fans hit Aptos/Sui.

• Use Cases: Story’s IP play pulls creators, Berachain’s PoL lures DeFi builders.

• Performance: Monad’s testnet has speed junkies drooling, with Solana devs testing ideas in realtime with that speed already available.

Users? They’re simpler:

• Cost: Solana’s pennies win traders.

• Reliability: Ethereum’s uptime keeps the cautious comfy.

• Purpose: Bitcoin for HODLing.

Twitter, Discord, and Telegram aren’t just hangouts; they’re the engines that turn blockchain tribes into cults, and devs are the spark. These platforms give developers a direct line to their faithful, letting them drop updates, tease roadmaps, or just vibe with the crowd. Think Berachain’s pre-mainnet run: devs didn’t just push code; they dangled NFTs and yield promises like catnip, turning degens into a frothing mob camping out for airdrops. Twitter’s the megaphone with devs blasting out manifestos or clapping back at haters, setting the tribe’s pulse. Discord’s the clubhouse, where real-time chats with the team feel like backstage passes. Telegram? That’s the bat signal, Quick pings and alpha drops that keep the inner circle buzzing. This isn’t passive PR; it’s devs stoking loyalty and giving users a sense of ownership.

This isn’t a one-way street; it’s a feedback frenzy. Users bring the energy like hype, rage, or straight-up demands and devs (for better or worse) lean in, tweaking the project to match the tribe’s pulse. It’s messy, loud, and a little unhinged, but that’s the juice. Platforms like these don’t just amplify the cult, they’re arguably the glue that keeps devs and users riding together, for better or worse.

The intention of this is quite simple. Devs and users are locked in a loop where every ping tightens the bond.

Growth: Winning the Attention Game

Tribes don’t just sit pretty (or more specifically, they can’t unless you’re Ethereum). They need to hustle:

• Airdrops: Berachain’s BERA drop had wallets scrambling.

• Grants: Ethereum’s dev cash keeps the code flowing.

• Hype: Solana’s meme lords and X battles stay loud.

L2s are the ultimate tribal flex, pumping their L1 vibes into new territory. Optimism jacks up Ethereum’s governance game with DAO experiments, letting the tribe steer the ship on everything from funding to upgrades. Lightning Network turns Bitcoin into a merchant’s dream, pushing fast, cheap payments so BTC flexes beyond the HODL crowd. The scoreboard? It’s in the stats: dev commits surge when L2s land (Optimism’s code churn spiked post-launch), active wallets stack up (Lightning’s merchant adoption doubled BTC users in 2024), and ecosystem projects multiply (Arbitrum’s DeFi boom outshines some L1s). That’s the amplifier’s win state. Attention grabbed and influence extended, one L2 at a time.

The Catch: Tribalism’s Messy Side

Crypto’s tribalism isn’t just about code or coins, though. At its worst (arguably the default state), it’s a behavioral dumpster fire where identity and ego turn communities into warring factions. We already know this to be true when we look at Ethereum maxis versus Solana degens: it’s less about tech specs and more like rival cliques scrapping over who’s got the cooler clubhouse. People pick a chain and defend it like it’s their bloodline, hurling insults like “Ethereum’s gas guzzlers” versus “Solana’s centralized slot machine”, all while the real world scrolls past. This loyalty isn’t just loud; it’s also a momentum killer. Instead of pooling brainpower to solve big problems like usability or adoption, tribes waste energy on petty one-upmanship. It’s high school drama with higher stakes. Everyone’s too busy picking teams to notice the game’s slipping away (New L1s too sick and tired of the existing norm)

The chaos gets worse because tribalism thrives on blind spots. Each side clings to its chain’s strengths and shrugs off its flaws like a proud parent excusing a kid’s tantrum. Solana’s mindshare? “Speed’s worth it.” Ethereum’s L2 sprawl? “Decentralization, baby.” Honest critique gets drowned out by cheers and jeers, leaving little room for self-reflection or collaboration. It’s a feedback loop of stubbornness with the tribes doubling down, not to improve, but to win. Meanwhile, outsiders peek in, see the bickering, and leave. Why join a space that’s more about flexing than fixing or creating something new? The counterproductive catch is that this chest-thumping stalls progress, turning a movement into a shouting match.

And then there’s the gamble nobody talks about: the real world doesn’t care about what your tribe’s vibe is. Regulators loom like storm clouds. Newer L1s have a long road ahead with Story Protocol’s IP tokens or Berachain’s governance experiments potentially getting hit by legal hammers, no matter how “decentralized” the pitch. Usually, tribes don’t strategize for that; they’re too busy hyping their superiority to spot the risks. It’s a classic groupthink trap. Loyalty paints red flags as battle scars, and dissenters get labeled traitors. Crypto’s tribal mess isn’t just noise; it’s a self-inflicted wound. The fight to be right overshadows the need to build right, and that’s the catch nobody’s dodging.

The Future: Tribes Together or Apart?

The tribal saga in crypto’s wild west isn’t slowing down any time soon, it’s just going to get weirder. Picture this: tribes might actually start linking up, not out of some kumbaya vibe, but because the tech’s making it hard to stay siloed. Interop-focused chains like Initia are tossing lifelines across ecosystems, letting assets and data zip between tribes without anyone having to ditch their flag. Built on Cosmos, Initia’s play is simple: one wallet, multiple worlds. Swap an Ethereum NFT for Solana tokens? Done. It’s not about picking a side, it’s about what gets the job done. Then you’ve got cross-tribal dApps, the nomads of the space. Think DEXs or marketplaces that don’t care about your L1 loyalty. They’ll pull liquidity from Aptos, fees from Arbitrum, and users from anywhere, smudging those crisp tribal borders into a messy, functional blur.

But it’s not just the connectors stirring the pot. New L1s are crashing the party, and they’re hungry. Monad’s souped-up EVM is gunning for Ethereum’s dev crowd, promising speed that could power trading bots or AI apps without the usual gas-induced choke. Berachain, meanwhile, is flexing its Proof-of-Liquidity muscle; its BERA-BGT-HONEY token trio is the holy trifecta for DeFi yield chasers who’d otherwise camp out on Fantom with their point farming. The spotlight’s swinging, and these upstarts want it all.

Here’s the kicker, though: tribalism’s chaos is the engine. It’s not a bug, it’s a feature. L1s stake their ground, L2s hoist the banners, and the whole space lurches forward on the fumes of rivalry. Innovation doesn’t come from hand-holding, it comes from tribes scrapping to outbuild each other (when they’re not busy shitposting on twitter). Whether they link up, fracture further, or just keep slugging it out, that tension’s what keeps the wheels spinning. The future’s wide open, and it’s a hell of a ride.

Into the Dark Forest, But Make It AI

Remember that famous blog post "Ethereum is a Dark Forest" by Dan Robinson and Georgios Konstantopoulos? They recounted their harrowing experience of watching a profitable transaction slip away, snatched by MEV bots lurking in the mempool shadows.

Well, brace yourself; The predators in Ethereum’s dark forest have levelled up. They’ve evolved from basic scripts into sophisticated AI-driven systems capable of anticipating your moves. Worse yet, they’re now targeting the very protocols designed to shield your transactions from prying eyes.

If you thought privacy-preserving solutions like Tornado Cash or zk-based systems were your sanctuary from MEV, think again. Reinforcement learning (RL) algorithms have arrived, and they’re getting eerily adept at peering into these opaque systems. Let’s dive into what’s happening, why it matters, and what might counter it.

MEV Basics: The Blockchain Buffet Line

First, a quick refresher on MEV.

Picture the blockchain as a buffet line. Everyone’s queuing up to get their transactions processed, but some transactions stand out; ripe with profit potential, like a token swap at a bad price or a DeFi liquidation waiting to happen. Maximal Extractable Value (MEV) is the profit one can extract by strategically ordering, including, or excluding transactions in a block, beyond standard rewards and fees. You can read more about these from Flashbots’ documentation and academic work like "Quantifying Blockchain Extractable Value".

Traditionally, MEV extraction follows this pattern:

• Bots scan the mempool (the transaction waiting room).

• They spot profit opportunities (e.g., arbitrage, liquidations).

• They submit competing transactions with higher gas fees to miners/validators.

• Their transactions get prioritised, capturing the value.

This has been a multi-billion-dollar game for years. By mid-2022, MEV on Ethereum hit $686 million, with projections pointing to billions annually (Chainlink, 2022). Efforts like Flashbots aim to streamline this, but it remains predatory where bots prey on user transactions.

Historically, MEV has targeted transparent DeFi systems like Uniswap, where contract logic is fully visible and outcomes are predictable, as detailed in "Flash Boys 2.0". But what happens when the target hides its mechanics?

Privacy Protocols: The Blockchain’s Secret Keepers

Privacy-preserving protocols aim to restore what public ledgers sacrifice: privacy. They obscure the link between your identity and on-chain actions or hide transaction details.

Key examples include:

• Tornado Cash: Uses zero-knowledge proofs to disconnect deposit and withdrawal addresses.

• Aztec/zk.money: Layer 2 solutions employing zero-knowledge tech for confidentiality.

• Penumbra: A DEX with threshold encryption to conceal transaction values until a set block height.

These systems leverage cryptography to keep critical details hidden, even on public blockchains. As noted in the paper “The Blockchain Model of Cryptography and Privacy-Preserving Smart Contracts” (Kosba et al., 2016), zero-knowledge proofs aim to minimise observable data, theoretically thwarting traditional MEV tactics.

In principle, this opacity should deter MEV bots. If they can’t see a transaction’s contents until execution, how can they profit? Cue the rise of AI-powered MEV extraction.

The New Threat: AI Learns to See Through Walls

Here’s where it gets wild and frankly a bit unsettling. Traditional MEV bots thrive in clear visibility, but privacy protocols plunge them into darkness. Enter reinforcement learning (RL), a machine learning approach where agents learn by trial and error, guided by rewards. Known for mastering complex games like Go and StarCraft, RL is now eyeing MEV.

These AI-driven bots don’t need full visibility, however. They infer patterns from scant data and improve over time. Research like "The Blockchain Imitation Game" (Qin et al., 2022) explores RL’s potential in crafting adversarial contracts, hinting at its power here.

Think of it like poker: you can’t see your opponent’s cards, but over time, you notice betting patterns or tells. RL does this at scale, predicting privacy protocol behaviours without breaking their cryptography. It:

• Analyses visible data (gas usage, timing, inputs).

• Predicts likely actions.

• Acts on those predictions.

• Refines its approach with each outcome.

This enables MEV extraction from systems built to resist it. While specific RL-MEV data is scarce, Liu et al. (2021) show RL’s edge in financial security, suggesting these bots may extract significantly more value from opaque contracts than traditional methods.

This isn’t a small step but rather a huge leap forward.

The Technical Playbook: How These AI Bots Operate

How do these bots pull it off? Here’s a breakdown, sans excessive jargon.

Multi-State Simulation: Probing the Unknown

To predict a black box’s behaviour, these bots simulate multiple scenarios. Using tools like Erigon, they fork Ethereum’s state in parallel, tweaking transaction orders or parameters. By comparing outcomes, they uncover profitable patterns.

Pattern Recognition in Noise

Recurrent neural networks (RNNs) process transaction sequences, spotting trends humans might miss. A 2024 survey by Zhang et al. highlights the effectiveness of RNN-based models in cryptocurrency sequence analysis, like price prediction, suggesting their potential applicability to MEV pattern detection tasks, say, linking gas patterns to Tornado Cash withdrawals

Probabilistic Guessing

With partial data, bots use Bayesian inference to refine predictions as evidence accumulates. This theoretical approach suits opaque contracts, letting bots estimate withdrawal sizes from gas limits without direct access.

Adapting to Defences

Generative adversarial networks (GANs) could train bots to counter defences. One network designs anti-MEV measures; another breaks them, improving both. This requires hefty computation, akin to ML training, but is grounded in GANs’ adaptability (Goodfellow et al., 2014). These bots predict withdrawals with high accuracy, exploiting bridges and pools, per trends in Chainlink (2022).

Real-World Impact

What happens when AI excels at cracking privacy systems? The fallout is significant.

Privacy Erosion

Mixers and privacy protocols promise anonymity, but AI challenges that. Chainalysis (2022) shows clustering techniques deanonymizing a significant portion of Tornado Cash users via timing and fees. Even if we don’t know the exact number, the threat to shrinking anonymity sets is real.

Economic Distortions

Information asymmetry in MEV extraction exists and is exploitable. This is where privileged actors can exploit transaction data that others can’t see, giving them an edge, potentially centralising MEV among resource-rich players, as discussed by Qin et al.

Rising Costs

Defences against AI will inflate gas costs. Zk-SNARKs, vital for privacy, substantially raise overhead, with Vitalik Buterin’s analysis confirms this trend. Privacy’s price is climbing (even without AI in the mix)

Countermeasures

Are we defenceless? Not quite. Here are emerging strategies:

MEV-Aware Designs

• Optimistic Rollups: Optimism is an example of a platform that uses optimistic rollups, a layer 2 scaling solution that bundles numerous transactions into a batch submitted to the main blockchain, to resist frontrunning. By relying on a challenge period where fraud proofs can be submitted, Optimism prevents MEV bots from manipulating transaction order immediately, though transaction data remains visible during this period, unlike ZK-rollups, which use zero-knowledge proofs.

• ZK Rollups: By using zero-knowledge proofs, ZK-rollups conceal individual transaction details until the entire batch is finalised. This prevents MEV bots from accessing pending transaction data early, effectively blocking frontrunning and other order-based exploits. The zero-knowledge proof ensures transaction validity without exposing contents prematurely, making ZK-rollups a robust defence against MEV. However, generating zero-knowledge proofs is computationally intensive, leading to higher costs for users and slower transaction throughput compared to other solutions. While ZK-rollups excel at privacy and MEV resistance, their performance limitations may affect scalability and user experience in high-demand scenarios.

• Supra: Supra offers another approach to MEV resistance by using threshold signatures to randomise transaction ordering. This cryptographic shuffling makes it nearly impossible for MEV bots to predict or manipulate the sequence of transactions, preventing tactics like frontrunning and sandwich attacks. By ensuring unpredictable order, Supra promotes fair execution for all users without relying on delayed finality or concealed data. While this method effectively counters MEV, the cryptographic overhead may impact transaction processing speed. Supra balances MEV resistance with fairness, making it a compelling option for decentralised systems.

These alter protocol rules to curb MEV, though tradeoffs in performance persist.

Conclusion

The rise of AI-powered MEV extraction, fueled by reinforcement learning, is reshaping blockchain privacy. These intelligent systems adapt and exploit vulnerabilities with precision, outpacing traditional defences and signalling a need for a fundamental shift in how we protect decentralised ecosystems. This evolving threat challenges the blockchain community to rethink privacy engineering entirely.

A proactive, collaborative response is essential. By uniting developers, researchers, and experts in cryptography, AI, and game theory, we can craft innovative defences that match the sophistication of these threats. This convergence of disciplines offers a chance to not only counter AI-driven MEV but to redefine privacy as a dynamic, resilient system, turning a pressing challenge into a catalyst for progress in the decentralised world.

The dark forest now has smarter predators, but with innovative defences, we might yet navigate it.

Further Reading:

• Zero-Knowledge Rollups and Optimistic Rollups: An Overview

• MEV Trilemma

• Cross-Rollup MEV: Non-Atomic Arbitrage Across L2 Blockchains

• MEV and me

• Mecon: A GNN-based graph classification framework for MEV activity detection

The tension between decentralised organisations and traditional regulatory frameworks has created a fascinating grey area where DAOs operate as de facto regulatory arbitrage vehicles. While regulators scramble to define what exactly constitutes a DAO (let alone how to regulate one), these digital organisms continue to evolve, capitalising on jurisdictional gaps and leveraging code as their primary shield. Let's dive into the mechanics, edge cases, and ethical quandaries that emerge when autonomous organisations dance between regulatory boundaries.

1. How DAOs Play the Game (And Sometimes Rewrite the Rules)

Code Doing the Heavy Lifting

• Kleros: Blockchain’s Judge Judy
  Imagine a dispute over an insurance payout settled not in a dusty courtroom, but by a global crew of token-staking randos on Kleros. In 2021, Kleros jurors handled a claim for Unslashed Finance faster than you can say “objection.” No suits, no borders, just smart contracts enforcing the call. It’s about solving problems where traditional systems lag. It’s a pretty slick system.

• Aragon: Governance with a Twist
  Aragon’s toolkit lets anyone launch a DAO, but here’s the spicy idea: what if it baked in compliance, like smart contracts that auto-filter users by location? It’s not live, but it’s a clever way to nod at regulators while keeping things decentralised. Think of it as training wheels for a bike that’s already doing wheelies.

• DeFi’s Shell Game
  DeFi projects don’t just pick a home; rather, they scatter like confetti across the globe. A token might be minted via a Cayman Islands foundation, governance run through a Swiss Verein, and swag sold by a Delaware LLC. It’s a hydra of legal entities: chop off one head, and the others keep dancing. When regulators swing, they hit air; there’s no single throat to choke. It’s a jurisdictional shell game where the prize is survival, and the players are seemingly always one step ahead.

• Midnight Votes: The 24/7 Life
  Ever wonder why governance votes sometimes feel like they’re timed for maximum mischief? Picture a DAO pushing a critical proposal, say, moving millions in treasury funds at 3 AM EST, when the SEC’s sipping coffee in dreamland. By sunrise, the vote’s locked, the funds are gone, and the blockchain’s immutable. No documented case pins this down, but it’s a tactic straight out of the degen handbook: time-zone arbitrage. It’s chaotic, it’s plausible, and it’s pure crypto after all time zones are so TardFi.

2. How DAOs May Trip Over Their Own Cleverness

Oracles: The Messenger Problem

• The Oracle Problem
  Oracles are the bridge between the real world and the blockchain, but they’re also a juicy target. In 2020, a Harvest Finance attacker used a flash loan to trick Chainlink oracles and nabbed $24M. Now imagine a DAO voting to bribe an oracle operator to fake KYC data, letting restricted users slip through. It’s not happened yet, but flash loan attacks have already twisted Chainlink feeds for profit. Extend that to regulatory evasion, and you’ve got a powder keg: on-chain “truth” that’s a lie, leaving regulators scrambling to catch up.

• BrightID: Who’s Real Here?
  BrightID aims to stop sybil attacks by verifying unique humans. Simply put, it proves you’re not a bot, which is great for fair votes. Now, however, let’s flip the script for a second. What if a crafty founder uses similar technology to spawn a legion of fake identities? Picture a DAO where one person controls half the votes, all hidden behind the “Verified” mask. It’s not tied to a specific project yet, but it’s a peak CT exploit of decentralisation as a costume for centralised power (HyperLiquid x Jelly anyone?).

Ooki DAO: A Lesson in “Decentralised-ish”

Ooki DAO tried to pull a fast one by handing “control” to the community while the founders clutched the multi-sig keys like a lifeline. The CFTC wasn’t buying it, slapping them with a 2022 enforcement action that exposed the charade. It’s a masterclass in how not to fake decentralisation: if you’re going to play the game, at least hide the puppet strings better. The wreckage is a glorious reminder that regulators love a bad actor, especially the ones they catch.

3. Tokenomics: The “Not a Security” Tightrope

The SEC's Howey test hinges partly on expectations of profit from token trading, so what happens when tokens technically can't be traded? The theory: if you can't sell the token, it fails a critical prong of the Howey test.

Creative Token Twists

• FriendTech’s Keys
  FriendTech sells “keys” to chat with influencers, which are tradable, hyped, but “not securities” because… vibes? It’s a semantic sidestep so slick the SEC might need a magnifying glass to call it a security. It’s not a “dodge” per se, it’s on-chain art.

• Liquity’s Staking Play
  This token may represent one of the most ingenious regulatory arbitrage designs in DeFi. LQTY tokens themselves generate no direct revenue – instead, they must be staked to receive protocol fees. This small technical distinction creates a massive regulatory difference: the token itself provides no "expectation of profits" (breaking one Howey prong), while the staking relationship could be characterised as active participation rather than passive investment.

• Coordinape’s GIVE “Tokens”
  These non-transferable reputation scores pack a punch, shaping who gets paid from DAO treasuries without ever hitting a DEX. Securities laws crave liquidity to strike, but GIVE slips through the cracks. It’s influence without a ticker, a VIP badge with real juice. The genius?

  It’s less about profit and more about cred: holders divvy up funds based on vibes, not personal cash-outs. By dodging the tradable-token trap, it turns governance into a reward system.

  The brilliance here is in divorcing governance from direct financial benefit. GIVE holders determine fund allocation but don't personally profit from those decisions. This approach essentially transforms what would otherwise be securities into voting rights, potentially bypassing the entire regulatory framework designed for financial instruments

• Curve’s veCRV Bet
  Locking tokens into veCRV to boost voting power isn’t just a governance flex, it’s almost a calculated jab at the Howey Test. By tying rewards to time rather than raw investment, Curve dances on the edge of “security” status.
  Will it hold up in court? Who knows but Bold move, anon.

4. The Global Rules Riddle

The notion that DAOs can simply forum-shop for friendly jurisdictions ignores the reality of regulatory contagion. DAOs live on-chain, but laws don’t. A DAO might be golden in Malta’s crypto-friendly arms, yet tangle with the EU’s MiCA passporting rules the second it touches Brussels. Or picture a U.S. court ordering a shutdown while Singapore’s regulators sip tea and shrug.

The emerging scenario where different jurisdictions issue contradictory rulings on the same protocol creates unprecedented legal confusion. When a Japanese court ruled that Bitflyer could continue listing XRP while the SEC maintained it was an unregistered security, the result was a bifurcated market where the same asset had different legal status depending on jurisdiction. For truly global DAOs, these conflicts create impossible compliance requirements, forcing either withdrawal from certain markets or operating in direct violation of some jurisdictions' rules.

A legal quagmire is brewing on the horizon, and global operations are clashing with patchwork rules. No one’s been burned yet, but the sparks are flying, and the chaos will be a lawyer’s dream. Like playing chess on a Risk board.

5. Ethics: The Fun Gray Stuff

PleasrDAO’s Snowden NFT

PleasrDAO snagged Snowden’s NFT for $5.4M, not for clout (well), but to flex blockchain’s activist side. It’s degens flexing their wallets for a cause, thumbing their noses at surveillance states with every ETH spent. No hidden agenda, just pure, unfiltered activism in blockchain form.

Free Speech Puzzle

What if an on-chain jury votes to delist a political NFT, say, a protest piece banned in some countries? Is it censorship by community fiat, or compliance with unseen pressure? It’s a thought experiment, not a headline, but it’s the kind of dilemma that could split the crypto world. Free speech versus pragmatic survival, so where’s the line?

Nexus Mutual’s Hack Insurance

Insuring hacks is cool, and among that Nexus Mutual insures against exploits, a noble pursuit. However, it’s not an infallible solution. Imagine paying out a claim to someone who torched a protocol, all because the code says “bug, not theft”. A payout for a legit exploit? It’s a moral tightrope: protect the community, or honour the contract?

Tornado Cash: The Unkillable DAO

The aftermath of the Tornado Cash sanctions revealed the resilience and moral ambiguity of privacy-focused DAOs. While the original developers faced criminal charges, the community reconstituted core elements of the protocol through a DAO structure, effectively decentralising control to evade regulatory action.

This raises the unsettling question: can DAOs launder not just money but legitimacy itself? If enough participants vote to continue a sanctioned service, does the collective decision somehow cleanse the underlying activity? The DAO's inherent structure creates diffusion of responsibility that makes enforcement nearly impossible while raising profound questions about collective versus individual accountability.

6. The Future: Regulatory Arbitrage 2.0

The Role of AI in the Driver’s Seat

• Fetch.ai’s Smart Bots
  The integration of AI with DAO governance represents the next frontier in regulatory arbitrage. Projects like Fetch.ai are already deploying autonomous agents that execute trades and governance actions based on predefined parameters, raising unprecedented regulatory questions. If an AI agent autonomously violates securities laws by executing a prohibited transaction, who bears responsibility? The developers who created the agent? The DAO that deployed it? The validators who processed the transaction?

  The legal doctrine of "mens rea" (guilty mind) requires intent for many financial crimes, but an autonomous agent operates without human intent in the traditional sense. This creates a potential accountability gap that sophisticated DAOs are already exploring through experimental AI governance modules.

Privacy Tech

• Aztec’s ZK-Proof Sovereignty

  Zero-knowledge proofs represent perhaps the ultimate form of regulatory arbitrage, allowing entities to prove compliance without revealing underlying data. Aztec Protocol's approach demonstrates this perfectly. Their system allows users to prove they're not from prohibited jurisdictions without revealing which jurisdiction they actually reside in.

  This technology creates the cryptographic equivalent of Schrödinger's cat for regulators: the user exists in all compliant jurisdictions simultaneously, with no way to determine which specific one without breaking the cryptographic guarantees of the system. How do you regulate what you can't even see?

• Sovereign DAOs:

  The most ambitious regulatory arbitrage play involves DAOs purchasing actual sovereignty. Projects exploring "network states" and digital jurisdictions in places like Próspera, Honduras, represent an attempt to create truly sovereign entities beyond traditional regulatory reach. By combining physical territory with DAO governance, these projects aim to create jurisdictional carve-outs where code truly becomes law.

  While still nascent, these experiments have profound implications. If a DAO controls land with special regulatory status, it could theoretically issue its own banking licenses, create legal recognition for smart contracts, and establish physical enforcement mechanisms for on-chain governance decisions, creating true sovereign entities backed by both code and territory.

Wrapping It Up: DAOs Are the Experiment

DAOs represent the ultimate regulatory arbitrage vehicle – for now. Their fluid nature, jurisdictional ambiguity, and technological complexity create unprecedented challenges for regulatory frameworks designed around centralised entities with clear decision-makers.

But the regulatory tide is turning. EU's MiCA framework is creating a comprehensive regulatory net designed to catch the kind of arbitrage opportunities DAOs have exploited.

The window for unfettered regulatory arbitrage is narrowing, forcing DAOs to evolve once again. The most forward-thinking projects are already transforming into what we might call Regulation-Proof Organisms (RPOs) – structures designed not to evade regulation entirely but to compliantly interface with multiple regulatory regimes simultaneously through sophisticated compliance wrappers and jurisdictional partitioning. But that’s an article for the future.

The fundamental question isn't whether DAOs will face regulatory reckoning – they will – but whether they can evolve quickly enough to maintain their core ethos of decentralisation while navigating increasingly sophisticated regulatory frameworks. Those that can't adapt will collapse under their own contradictions, while those that find the right balance between compliance and autonomy will define the next generation of decentralised organisations.

The regulatory arbitrage dance continues, with the stakes and the potential rewards higher than ever.

In the rapidly evolving landscape of technology and innovation, we often hear about Minimum Viable Products (MVP) - the strategy of launching with just enough features to be usable. However, another crucial concept deserves attention: Minimum Fork Viability (MFV). This concept represents the baseline level of innovation and infrastructure required for a project to serve as a foundation for future iterations and improvements by other teams. As a former Innovation lead, it was my job to think about such concepts and design solutions based on my research and findings.

Minimum Fork Viability goes beyond simply creating a working product. It's about establishing a robust, well-documented, and innovative framework to inspire others to build upon it. While an MVP aims to test market fit with minimal resources, MFV seeks to create a springboard for compound innovation across an entire sector.

The significance of MFV in today's technological landscape cannot be overstated. With the rise of open-source development, blockchain technology, and collaborative innovation, the ability to create forkable projects has become a crucial driver of progress. When a project achieves Minimum Fork Viability, it doesn't just solve a problem - it creates a new paradigm for approaching similar problems.

Understanding MFV

Core Principles of Forkable Projects

For a project to achieve Minimum Fork Viability, it must embody several key principles:

1. Foundational Innovation: The project must solve a fundamental problem in a novel way. This isn't about incremental improvements; it's about establishing new patterns or approaches that can be applied in various contexts.

2. Architectural Clarity: The project's architecture must be clear and logical enough for others to understand and build upon. This doesn't mean it has to be simple, but it must be comprehensible and well-structured.

3. Documentation Robustness: Comprehensive documentation is crucial. This includes technical documentation, the reasoning behind key decisions, and the project's architectural philosophy.

4. Extensibility: The design must allow for meaningful extensions and modifications without requiring a complete overhaul of the core system.

The Balance Between Innovation and Replicability

One of the most challenging aspects of achieving MFV is finding the right balance between groundbreaking innovation and practical replicability. A project needs to be innovative enough to solve real problems in new ways, yet structured enough that others can understand and build upon it.

This balance manifests in several ways:

• Technical Architecture: Complex enough to solve difficult problems, but organized enough to be comprehensible

• Documentation: Detailed enough to be useful, but not so overwhelming that it becomes a barrier to entry

• Core Features: Rich enough to demonstrate the project's potential, but not so complete that there's no room for meaningful innovation by others

Creating Strong Foundations for Others to Build Upon

A project that achieves MFV must provide a solid foundation that others can trust and build upon. This involves:

1. Technical Stability: The core functionality must be reliable and well-tested. While edge cases may exist, the primary features should work consistently.

2. Clear Boundaries: There should be well-defined interfaces between core functionality and potential extension points.

3. Upgrade Paths: Consideration must be given to how the project can evolve without breaking dependent projects.

4. Community Tools: Basic tools and resources that make it easier for others to begin building should be provided.

The Role of Open Standards and Documentation

Documentation in an MFV context goes beyond typical technical documentation. It should include:

1. Technical Specifications: Detailed documentation of APIs, protocols, and core functionality.

2. Design Philosophy: Clear explanations of why certain decisions were made and what principles guide the project.

3. Implementation Guidelines: Best practices for building upon the project and extending its functionality.

4. Use Cases: Examples of how the project can be adapted for different purposes.

5. Development Standards: Clear guidelines for code style, contribution processes, and quality expectations.

This comprehensive documentation serves multiple purposes:

• It helps others understand how to build upon the project

• It establishes standards that promote consistency across different implementations

• It preserves institutional knowledge that might otherwise be lost

• It reduces the barrier to entry for new developers and projects

The combination of these elements - core principles, balanced innovation, strong foundations, and comprehensive documentation - creates an environment where others can not just copy, but truly innovate upon the original project. This is what makes MFV such a powerful concept in the modern technological landscape.

The Network Effect of Forking

The power of a forkable project lies not just in its initial innovation, but in the network effect it creates through subsequent iterations and improvements. When a project achieves true Minimum Fork Viability, each fork serves to validate and strengthen the original concept.

Market Validation Through Iterations

When multiple teams choose to fork a project rather than build from scratch, it provides strong market validation for the original concept. This validation manifests in several ways:

• Direct Validation

  • Teams investing resources into building upon the concept

  • Market participants choosing between different implementations

  • Ecosystem growth through complementary tools and services

• Indirect Validation

  • Industry attention and discourse around the core concept

  • Academic research and formal analysis

  • Integration with existing systems and infrastructure

The more forks a project spawns, the more the market signals its belief in the underlying concept. This creates a positive feedback loop where increased adoption leads to:

• More resources devoted to solving common problems

• Faster identification and resolution of edge cases

• Broader applicability across different use cases

Community Building Through Shared Foundations

A successful forkable project creates more than just code - it builds a community of developers, users, and innovators who share:

1. Common technical knowledge

2. Shared vocabulary and concepts

3. Similar technical challenges

4. Collective solutions and improvements

This community aspect is crucial because it:

• Accelerates learning and innovation

• Creates a talent pool familiar with the core concepts

• Enables faster problem resolution through shared experiences

• Builds a knowledge base that benefits all participants

Real-World Examples

Let's examine some prominent examples of projects that achieved MFV and the ecosystems they spawned.

Bitcoin and the Cryptocurrency Space

Bitcoin represents perhaps the most significant example of MFV in recent history. Its core innovation - solving the double-spending problem through proof-of-work consensus - created a foundation that countless projects have been built upon.

Key Forks and Iterations:

• Direct Protocol Forks

  • Litecoin: Modified mining algorithm and block timing

  • Bitcoin Cash: Increased block size for better transaction throughput

  • Dogecoin: Changed monetary policy and community focus

• Conceptual Forks

  • Monero: Privacy-focused implementation

  • Zcash: Zero-knowledge proof implementation

  • Numerous others focus on specific use cases or technical improvements

Why Bitcoin Achieved MFV:

• Solved a fundamental problem (digital scarcity)

• Provided clear documentation through the whitepaper

• Implemented basic functionality without overcomplication

• Left room for improvement in various aspects

• Created a robust and secure foundation

Ethereum and Smart Contract Platforms

Ethereum built upon Bitcoin's foundation but achieved its own MFV by introducing programmable smart contracts. This innovation spawned numerous platforms that either forked Ethereum directly or implemented similar concepts with different approaches.

Examples of Innovation Building:

• Direct EVM Competitors

  • BSC (Binance Smart Chain): Higher throughput, centralized validation

  • Avalanche C-Chain: Subnet architecture with EVM compatibility

  • Berachain: L1 chain focussing on “Proof of Liquidity”

• Conceptual Iterations

  • Solana: Different architecture focusing on performance

  • Cardano: “Academic” approach to smart contracts (aka doesn’t work and are now pivoting to a BTC L2 solution, lmao)

  • Immutable X: Straight-up Radioactive Dumpster Fire “Gaming Focussed”

The success of Ethereum's MFV is evidenced by:

• Widespread adoption of EVM compatibility

• Creation of standard interfaces (ERC tokens)

• Development of shared tools and infrastructure

• Growth of cross-chain bridges and interoperability

DeFi Protocols and Their Evolution

The DeFi space provides excellent examples of MFV at the application layer, with protocols like Uniswap and Curve establishing new paradigms that others have built upon.

Uniswap's Impact:

• Core Innovation: Automated Market Making (AMM)

• Key Forks and Iterations:

  • SushiSwap: Added governance and yield farming

  • PancakeSwap: BSC implementation with additional features

  • Aerodrome: AMM on BASE which adds in various mechanisms from years past

  • Many others across different chains

What Made Uniswap Forkable:

• Simple, elegant core mechanism

• Clear, auditable code

• Well-documented interfaces

• Strong product-market fit

• Room for feature expansion

The Evolution of Lending Protocols:

• Compound's Contribution:

  • Established standards for lending protocols

  • Created cToken model

  • Introduced governance tokens

• Notable Iterations:

  • Aave: Added flash loans and multiple token types

  • Cream Finance: Cross-chain expansion (when it’s not hacked for the umpteenth time)

Each of these examples demonstrates how achieving MFV leads to:

1. Rapid innovation through parallel development

2. Market validation through multiple implementations

3. Ecosystem growth through complementary services

4. Standard setting through common interfaces

5. Community building through shared knowledge

Cultural Impact

The influence of forkable projects extends beyond technical innovation to shape market dynamics and cultural narratives. Understanding this impact is crucial for projects aiming to achieve lasting significance.

First-Mover Advantage vs. Better Technology

The relationship between original projects and their forks highlights an intriguing market dynamic. Being first carries significant advantages: established brand recognition, natural network effects, and the benefit of market education. However, technical superiority alone doesn't guarantee market dominance for subsequent iterations.

Consider Bitcoin versus privacy coins or Ethereum versus high-performance chains. Despite newer platforms solving various technical limitations, the original projects often maintain their market position through the compound effect of their first-mover advantage and established ecosystem. This isn't because they're technically superior - they've simply built sufficient network effects and trust that overshadow pure technical improvements.

This pattern shows that market dominance in technology often depends more on timing, community building, and ecosystem development than on technical excellence alone. The challenge for new iterations isn't just about being better - it's about providing enough value to overcome the gravitational pull of established networks.

Brand Recognition in Innovative Spaces

Despite technical improvements in forks, original projects often maintain significant mindshare:

• Reasons for Sustained Recognition:

• Historical significance

• Proven security over time

• Larger developer ecosystem

• Stronger network effects

• Cultural attachment to the original

Examples of Brand Persistence:

• Bitcoin remains "digital gold" despite:

  • More advanced privacy features in other chains

  • Better transaction throughput in newer networks

  • More sophisticated smart contract capabilities elsewhere

• Ethereum maintains dominance through:

  • First-mover advantage in smart contracts

  • Developer mindshare and tooling

  • Cultural position as the "world computer"

How Original Projects Maintain Relevance

Original projects face constant pressure from newer, technically superior iterations. To maintain their market position, successful projects engage in continuous innovation by regularly updating their core offerings and selectively integrating successful features that emerge from forks. This careful balance of innovation and stability helps them evolve while maintaining their core value propositions that initially attracted their user base.

Community engagement plays a crucial role in maintaining relevance. The most successful projects foster active developer communities through robust support systems and strong governance mechanisms. They maintain transparent communication channels with their users and stakeholders, ensuring that the project's direction aligns with community needs while preserving its fundamental vision.

Perhaps most importantly, these projects invest heavily in ecosystem development. They actively support complementary projects that build on their foundation, operate grant programs to fund innovative additions to their ecosystem, and maintain comprehensive educational initiatives. This approach ensures a thriving ecosystem that reinforces the project's position as a market leader, making it increasingly difficult for technically superior but isolated solutions to gain significant market share.

Success Metrics for Forkable Projects

How to measure if your project has achieved true MFV:

Quantitative Metrics

Technical Indicators:

• Number of active forks

• Contributor growth

• Documentation coverage

Ecosystem Indicators:

• Developer tool adoption

• Third-party integrations

• Community size and engagement

Qualitative Indicators

Community Health:

• Quality of discussions

• Collaboration level

• Knowledge sharing

Innovation Impact:

• Novel use cases

• Technical improvements

• Market validation

Conclusion

Minimum Fork Viability represents a powerful framework for creating a lasting impact in the technology space. By focusing on creating forkable foundations rather than just viable products, projects can catalyze innovation across entire sectors. The success of a truly forkable project isn't measured just by its adoption, but by the ecosystem of innovation it spawns.

The future of technology development increasingly depends on our ability to create these forkable foundations that others can build upon. Understanding and implementing MFV principles isn't just about better project design – it's about creating the conditions for compound innovation in our increasingly interconnected technological landscape.

I wrote this blog post for a second startup in late 2023, which I was building but ultimately stopped as I couldn’t “validate” the idea (Get a single meeting with VCs, Angels or anyone to fund the idea). While I still believe that the thesis is valid (A web3 startup called “Camp Network” raised money for a very similar idea), I believe that talking about this model is more valuable than just gatekeeping & leaving it as a failure on my end. As such, I hope you enjoy this article

I. Introduction

The Creators Economy represents a paradigm shift in producing, consuming, and monetising content. At its core, this model places individual creators at the centre of their economic ecosystems, bypassing traditional media gatekeepers and establishing direct relationships with their audiences. We've all heard the term “The Creators Economy” thrown around too many times but they refer to multiple creators interacting with the global landscape. The core idea here is that the Creators themselves are at the centre of their own “economy” which is fuelled by various participants (Fans, Advertisers, “Consumers” etc)

The rise of social media platforms, democratized content creation tools, and evolving consumer preferences have facilitated this transition from conventional media to creator-centric models. The result is a landscape in which individuals can build substantial, sustainable businesses around their content, personality, and audience relationships.

II. The Creator as the Economic Center

In the Creators Economy, the individual content producer becomes the primary generator of value. Unlike traditional media models where content creators often work within larger organizational structures, this new paradigm empowers individuals to build their micro-economies.

Key aspects of this creator-centric model include:

1. Value Generation: Creators produce content that resonates with specific audiences, creating value through entertainment, education, or utility.

2. Direct Creator-Audience Relationship: Platforms allow creators to interact directly with their audience, fostering community and loyalty.

3. Multiple Revenue Streams: Creators can monetize their content and influence through various channels, from ad revenue and sponsorships to merchandise and direct supporter contributions.

For example, a YouTube tech reviewer might generate income from video ad revenue, sponsored content, affiliate product links, and a Patreon subscription service for exclusive content. This diversification allows creators to build more stable and sustainable businesses. This isn’t anything new for a lot of the full-time creators, it’s almost always a goal to become self-sufficient through such a blueprint.

III. Ecosystem Components

The Creator Economy ecosystem consists of several interconnected components:

1. Content Creation and Distribution: Creators use various platforms (YouTube, Instagram, TikTok, etc.) to produce and share content with their audience.

2. Audience Engagement and Community Building: Successful creators foster active communities around their content, encouraging interaction and loyalty.

3. Monetization Channels: These include advertising revenue, sponsorships, merchandise sales, crowdfunding, and direct support from fans.

4. Cross-Platform Synergy: Creators often leverage multiple platforms to reach different audience segments and create a more robust presence.

Everything here is still somewhat known, yet the big issue is that of audience/platform fragmentation. While several people can make a good living off a single platform, in this growing day and age, you need to be active on various platforms to organise, cater to and distribute your media. This is a behemoth task in its own right and its current form can require an entire team to operate and scale.

Think of this from a different angle for a better illustration. Every single platform that the creator is on, has their independent community that they need to cater to. While there might be overlap between these communities, each platform has its own:

1. Content Format Requirements

   1. Video length restrictions (TikTok's short-form vs. YouTube's long-form)

   2. Text Length restrictions (Twitter vs Blogs)

   3. Image specifications and aspect ratios

   4. Platform-specific features (Stories, Reels, Shorts)

   5. Algorithmic preferences for certain content types

2. Audience Expectations

   1. Platform-specific engagement patterns

   2. Different demographic compositions

   3. Varying levels of community interaction

   4. Platform-native content preferences

3. Monetization Mechanisms

   1. Platform-specific revenue-sharing models

   2. Different sponsorship opportunities

   3. Varying payment thresholds and terms

   4. Platform-exclusive monetization features

IV. The Fragmented Economy Challenge

This fragmentation has given rise to what I call the "Fragmented Economy" - a complex ecosystem where creators must maintain multiple parallel economies across different platforms. Each platform operates as its microeconomy, with distinct rules, audience behaviours, and revenue potential. Unlike traditional businesses that might adapt their product for different markets, creators must essentially run multiple parallel businesses simultaneously.

The burden of managing this fragmented presence creates significant operational challenges. Creators often find themselves spending more time on content adaptation and platform management than on actual content creation. A single piece of content might need to be reformatted dozens of times, each version requiring platform-specific optimizations, metadata, and engagement strategies.

V. The Evolution of Creator Tools

The market has responded to these challenges with an emerging ecosystem of creator tools. Modern content management platforms now offer integrated solutions for cross-platform publishing, but they're still in their early stages. The most effective tools focus on reducing the friction between platforms while preserving the unique characteristics that make each platform valuable to creators.

These tools generally fall into two categories:

1. Cross-Platform Management Solutions

   1. Content scheduling and distribution tools

   2. Analytics aggregation platforms

   3. Unified engagement management systems

2. Content Adaptation Tools: A couple of years ago, creators would spend hours manually reformatting content for different platforms. Today, AI-powered tools can automatically resize videos, generate platform-specific captions, and even suggest optimal posting times based on cross-platform analytics. However, these solutions still require significant human oversight to maintain brand consistency and content quality.

VI. Cross-Platform Relationships: Breaking the Platform Silos

One of the most significant challenges in today's Fragmented Economy is the inability to maintain coherent relationships with fans across multiple platforms. Currently, a creator's super-fan might be following them across YouTube, Instagram, and Twitter, but to the creator, they appear as three separate entities. This artificial separation creates several missed opportunities:

Understanding Multi-Platform Engagement: Today's creators are flying blind when it comes to cross-platform audience behaviour. A fan might watch long-form educational content on YouTube, engage with behind-the-scenes content on Instagram, and participate in community discussions on Twitter - all valuable touchpoints that currently exist in isolation. Breaking down these silos would allow creators to:

1. Identify True Super-Fans

   1. Track engagement across all platforms

   2. Understand preferred content types per platform

   3. Measure total fan investment (time and money)

   4. Recognize and reward cross-platform loyalty

2. Optimize Content Strategy: Instead of treating each platform as a separate entity, creators could develop integrated content strategies that guide fans through a coherent journey across platforms. For example, a tech reviewer could use:

   1. YouTube for in-depth reviews

   2. Instagram for quick tips and updates

   3. Twitter for community discussions

   4. Discord for direct engagement All while maintaining a unified view of how individual fans engage across these touchpoints.

The Power of Unified Fan Relationships: Moving beyond platform silos enables a "Relationship-First" methodology. This approach focuses on the holistic fan relationship rather than platform-specific metrics. Imagine a creator being able to:

• Identify which combination of platforms drives the strongest fan relationships

• Understand how fans migrate between platforms and why

• Target content specifically for different engagement patterns

• Create platform-specific content that complements rather than competes

For example, a creator might discover that fans who engage with their Twitter threads before watching their YouTube videos are 3x more likely to become paid subscribers. These types of insights are impossible in today's siloed ecosystem.

VII. The Future Model

The evolution toward a "Creators Economy" becomes even more critical when considering cross-platform relationships. The future model will need to incorporate:

1. Universal Fan Identity: A blockchain-based identity system could allow fans to maintain a single identity across platforms, carrying their engagement history, preferences, and relationship status with creators wherever they go. This goes beyond another login system - it would be a fundamental shift in how creator-fan relationships are structured. You can identify relationships and behaviours across the platform through “achievements” (soul-bound tokens) while allowing for future capabilities on top.

2. Intelligent Engagement Mapping: AI-driven systems could analyze cross-platform behaviour patterns to help creators:

   1. Predict which platforms best serve different audience segments

   2. Optimize content distribution across platforms

   3. Identify early signals of super-fan behavior

   4. Personalize content and engagement strategies at scale

3. Value Exchange Optimization: Smart contracts could enable seamless value exchange across platforms, allowing creators to:

   1. Reward cross-platform engagement

   2. Implement unified membership programs

   3. Potentially create platform-agnostic token economies

   4. Enable fluid movement of value between platforms

VII. Conclusion

The evolution from today's Fragmented Economy to tomorrow's Creators Economy won't happen overnight. It requires fundamental changes in how platforms interact with each other and how creators manage their presence across multiple channels. The success of platforms like Camp Network suggests that the market recognizes this need and is willing to invest in solutions.

The future of the creator economy isn't just about enabling content creation and monetization – it's about building sustainable, scalable systems that allow creators to focus on what they do best: creating valuable content for their communities, regardless of where those communities exist. The winners in this space will be those who can effectively bridge the gaps between platforms while maintaining the unique value propositions that make each platform attractive to creators and their audiences.

I. Introduction: Decoding the Art of Medium-maxxing

Alright, folks, gather 'round for a little chat about "medium-maxxing." No, it's not a new diet fad or a questionable life hack from that weird corner of Reddit. It's the art of understanding the game you're playing and absolutely dominating the field.

Think of it as not bringing a knife to a gunfight, or a meme to a board meeting (unless you're pitching to a Gen Z startup, in which case, meme away). It's about knowing your playground inside out, because let's face it, half the battle is just figuring out what game everyone else is playing.

But why should you care about medium-maxxing? Well, unless you enjoy feeling like a fish out of water in every new situation (and hey, no judgment if that's your thing), understanding the unwritten rules of each "medium" can be the difference between thriving and merely surviving. Whether you're navigating the treacherous waters of corporate politics or trying to make sense of the latest social media platform, medium-maxxing is your secret weapon.

So buckle up, buttercup. We're about to embark on a journey through various life arenas, decoding the hidden rules and mastering the art of playing each game like a pro. By the end of this, you'll be medium-maxxing so hard, people will think you've got cheat codes for life.

II. The Finance Arena: Decoding the Language of Money and Memes

Let's kick things off with the world of finance, where the only constant is that your portfolio will tank the moment you start feeling confident. Whether you're a Wall Street wannabe or a crypto cowboy, understanding the rules of the money game is crucial. After all, you can't HODL if you don't know what you're HODLing.

Wall Street vs. Crypto Twitter: Same game, different languages

On Wall Street, it's all about quarterly reports, EBITDA, and pretending you understand what the Fed chair just said (Which as we’ve previously explored is mostly about pumping their own bags). You'll need to master the art of looking serious while saying things like "bullish on the fundamentals" and "bearish on the macroeconomic outlook." Bonus points if you can do this while wearing a suit that costs more than most people's monthly rent.

Crypto Twitter, on the other hand, is a wild west of diamond hands, laser eyes, and "have fun staying poor" energy. Here, the key is to embrace the chaos. Learn to speak in memes, worship at the altar of blockchain, and never, ever admit that you don't understand what a decentralized autonomous organization actually does. Remember, in crypto, confidence is king (until it's not, and then it's all about who can panic-sell the fastest).

Technical Analysis: The astrology of finance

Ah, technical analysis - where drawing enough lines on a chart will definitely predict the future. It's like astrology for finance bros. But here's the kicker: if enough people believe in it, it kind of works. Self-fulfilling prophecy? Maybe. But hey, if it makes you money, who are we to judge?

To truly master technical analysis, you need to learn the lingo. Bullish engulfing patterns, head and shoulders formations, death crosses - it's like a twisted game of financial Pictionary. The real pros can look at a chart, draw a few lines, and confidently predict that the price will either go up, down, or sideways. Impressive, right?

Fundamental Analysis: For those who like their investments with a side of reality

For those who prefer their investments with a side of reality, there's fundamental analysis. It's all about diving into the nitty-gritty of a company's financials. Balance sheets, cash flows, and profit margins - oh my! It's like being an accountant but with the potential for yacht ownership.

To excel at fundamental analysis, you'll need to develop a love for spreadsheets and the ability to read through mind-numbingly boring financial reports as if they're the latest bestselling thriller. You'll find yourself getting excited about things like debt-to-equity ratios and free cash flow. Warning: this may make you significantly less interesting at parties. But you can always throw your own party in your yacht if you get it right!

The power of narrative: Riding the waves of market sentiment

In the end, markets are moved by stories. Whether it's the "tech will save us all" narrative or the "this meme coin will definitely not rugpull" saga, understanding the current market narrative is key. Just remember, every bull market thinks it's different this time. Spoiler alert: it never is.

To master this aspect of finance, you need to become a storyteller yourself. Learn to weave compelling narratives about why your chosen investments are the next big thing. Practice phrases like "paradigm shift," "disruptive innovation," and "to the moon!" But always remember, the market has a way of humbling even the best storytellers. So maybe keep a backup narrative about the virtues of long-term value investing, just in case.

III. The Academic Battlefield: Where Knowledge is Power and Coffee is a Food Group

Now, let's turn our attention to the hallowed halls of academia, where sleep is optional and coffee is a food group. Whether you're a fresh-faced freshman or a battle-hardened grad student, mastering the academic game can mean the difference between sailing through with flying colours and drowning in a sea of overdue papers and regret.

Cracking the professor code: The Rosetta Stone of academia

Professors are like enigma machines with elbow patches. When they say "This won't be on the test," they mean "This will definitely be on the test, and probably worth 40% of your grade." Learning to decipher these academic Morse codes is crucial for survival.

To truly excel, you need to become fluent in professor-speak. "Feel free to come to my office hours" means "I'm desperately lonely and would love to talk about my research." "I don't give A's easily" means "Challenge accepted." And "The reading is just a suggestion" means "Ignore this at your own peril."

But it's not just about understanding what they say - it's about knowing what they want. Each professor is a unique ecosystem of pet peeves, favourite topics, and grading quirks. Your job is to become the Jane Goodall of academia, observing and adapting to each professor's natural habitat.

The art of the essay: Bullshitting eloquently for fun and profit

Essays are the academic equivalent of jazz - it's not about the words you write, it's about the words you don't write. The key is to sound smart while saying very little substance. Throw in some obscure references, a dash of critical theory, and voila! You're basically Foucault.

To master the art of the essay, you need to develop a few key skills:

1. The ability to make anything sound profound. "The cat sat on the mat" becomes "The feline entity positioned its corporeal form upon the textile floor covering, a motion ripe with metaphysical implications."

2. The knack for finding quotes that support your argument, even if you have to take them wildly out of context. Remember, if it's in quotation marks, it must be true!

3. The talent for stretching a single idea into a 10-page paper. Padding is not just for bras and shoulders - it's an essential academic skill.

4. The gift of crafting a conclusion that somehow ties everything together, even if you're not quite sure what point you were trying to make.

Remember, in the world of academic writing, confidence is key. If you sound like you know what you're talking about, half the battle is won.

Group projects: A crash course in human psychology and conflict resolution

Ah, group projects - the bane of every student's existence and a preview of every workplace ever. The key here is to identify the overachiever, the slacker, and the ideas person early on. Then, position yourself as the "coordinator" who does just enough work to not feel guilty.

To truly excel at group projects, you need to become a master of human psychology. Learn to motivate the slacker with just the right mix of encouragement and thinly veiled threats. Rein in the overachiever before they suggest building a full-scale model of the Parthenon for your Greek history class. And learn to translate the ideas person's caffeine-fueled 3 AM ramblings into something actually useful.

But perhaps the most important skill in group projects is the art of diplomatic email writing. Learn to craft messages that light a fire under your teammates' butts without actually accusing anyone of slacking. Master the use of phrases like "As per our discussion" and "Just checking in" - the passive-aggressive backbone of group project communication.

Exam strategies: The art of educated guessing and strategic cramming

When it comes to exams, remember the ancient wisdom: "C's get degrees." But why settle for mediocrity when you can aim for slightly above average? Here's how to max out your exam game:

For multiple-choice, go with your gut - your subconscious knows more than you think. If all else fails, remember that statistically, 'C' is the most common correct answer. It's not much, but hey, you're a student - you'll take any advantage you can get.

For essay questions, remember the hamburger method: a beefy paragraph of content sandwiched between a punchy introduction and a satisfying conclusion. If you're really stuck, just write your intro paragraph three times in slightly different ways. Chances are, the professor will be too bored to notice.

And always remember, it's not about knowing everything - it's about knowing just enough to pass. In the words of the great philosopher Homer (Simpson, that is), "Trying is the first step towards failure." So don't try too hard - just try hard enough.

IV. The Corporate Jungle: Where Success is Measured in Buzzwords and Free Snacks

Welcome to the corporate world, where the dress is business casual and the casual is all business. Here, success isn't just about what you know or even who you know - it's about how well you can navigate the unwritten rules of the corporate game. Strap in, because we're about to decode the secret language of cubicle land.

Office politics: The game within the game

Office politics is like a game of chess, if chess pieces could gossip and steal your lunch from the communal fridge. The key is to align yourself with the right people, avoid the energy vampires, and always, always know where the bodies are buried (metaphorically speaking, of course).

To truly master office politics, you need to develop a few key skills:

1. The ability to read the room. Is your idea being well-received, or are people just being polite? Learn to spot the difference between a genuine smile and the "I'm mentally updating my resume" grimace.

2. The art of strategic visibility. Be seen working hard, but not so hard that people think you're gunning for their job. It's a delicate balance, like walking a tightrope while juggling flaming batons.

3. The knack for building alliances. Remember, today's coffee buddy could be tomorrow's promotion decision-maker. So be nice to everyone, even the guy who microwaves fish in the break room.

4. The skill of diplomatic disagreement. Learn to say "I respectfully disagree" in a way that doesn't make people want to respectfully push you out a window.

Remember, in the game of office politics, you're either playing or being played. Choose wisely.

Meetings: The corporate equivalent of purgatory

Meetings are the corporate equivalent of a black hole - they suck in time and productivity, and not even light can escape. But they're also where reputations are made. Master the art of sounding insightful while saying nothing, and you'll go far. Bonus points if you can successfully suggest "taking this offline."

To excel in the meeting game, consider the following strategies:

1. The strategic nod. Perfect the art of nodding thoughtfully at key moments, even if you're mentally planning your weekend. Unfortunately, this also means you need to turn your camera on (Pants Optional)

2. The insightful question. Learn to ask questions that make you sound engaged without committing you to any actual work. "How does this align with our Q3 objectives?" is a good all-purpose option.

3. The artful redirect. If you're put on the spot, learn to gracefully punt the question to someone else. "That's an excellent point, Sarah. What are your thoughts on this?"

4. The power move. For advanced players only - master the art of the well-timed yawn. It asserts dominance and might even get the meeting wrapped up early.

Remember, the goal in meetings is to be noticed without being notable. Strive to be the person everyone thinks contributed something important, even if they can't quite remember what it was.

Email etiquette: The fine art of passive-aggressive communication

Email is an art form. "As per my last email" is the corporate equivalent of "Did I fucking stutter?" Learn to wield the CC field like a weapon, and never underestimate the power of a well-timed "Regards" (the colder cousin of "Best regards").

To become an email savant, consider these advanced techniques:

1. The strategic timestamp. Sending emails at 11 PM or 5 AM gives the impression of dedication without actually requiring you to work at those hours. Thank you, scheduled send!

2. The CYA (Cover Your Arse) CC. Always CC relevant parties when dealing with difficult colleagues or clients. It's like having witnesses but for your inbox.

3. The polite persistence. Master the art of following up without sounding annoyed. "Just floating this to the top of your inbox" is the email equivalent of a gentle nudge.

4. The tactful decline. Learn to say no without actually saying no. "I'll have to check my bandwidth" is corporate-speak for "Not a chance in hell."

Remember, in the corporate world, your email style is your personal brand. Make it count, but also make sure it's vague enough to provide plausible deniability if needed.

Networking: Making friends with ulterior motives (but like, in a good way)

Networking is essentially adult friendship with benefits (the benefit being career advancement, you horndog). It's about building relationships that are genuine enough to not feel icky, but strategic enough to actually be useful. Master the art of the LinkedIn humble brag, and you're halfway there.

To become a networking guru, try these advanced moves:

1. The strategic compliment. Learn to compliment people in a way that invites them to talk about their work. "That presentation was fascinating. I'd love to hear more about your approach."

2. The value-add connection. Don't just ask for favours - offer something in return. Even if it's just a relevant article or an introduction to someone in your network.

3. The follow-up finesse. Master the art of the post-event follow-up. A quick "Great to meet you" email can go a long way.

4. The social media savvy. Like and comment on your contacts' posts, but don't be a stalker about it. There's a fine line between engaged and creepy.

Remember, networking is a long game. You're not just collecting business cards - you're building a web of relationships that will support your entire career. So be genuine, be helpful, and for the love of all that is holy, don't be the person who tries to sell multi-level marketing products at networking events.

V. The Social Media Circus: Where Everyone's a Clown (but some get paid for it)

Step right up to the greatest show on earth (or at least on your phone) - social media! In this digital big top, everyone's vying for attention, validation, and maybe a sponsored post or two. But fear not, intrepid social media warrior. With the right strategies, you too can become a ringmaster in this circus of likes, shares, and inexplicably popular dance challenges.

Platform-specific strategies: One size fits none

Each social media platform is its own ecosystem, with its own unspoken rules and peculiar customs. It's like each one is a different country, and you're a digital nomad trying to blend in with the locals. Let's break it down:

LinkedIn is the corporate cocktail party of social media. It's all about humble-bragging your professional achievements without looking like you're trying too hard. "Thrilled to announce" is the "Open sesame" of LinkedIn, magically opening doors to a world of congratulatory comments and "Let's connect!" messages.

Instagram is where you go to show off your perfectly imperfect life. It's a delicate balance between "I woke up like this" and "I definitely didn't spend two hours setting up this 'casual' brunch photo." Master the art of the strategic filter, and don't forget to pepper your captions with enough hashtags to make your English teacher weep.

TikTok is... well, we're still trying to figure that out. It's like if ADHD was a social media platform. One minute you're watching a cat play piano, the next you're learning how to make a gourmet meal in a dorm room microwave. The key here is to embrace the chaos and maybe learn a dance move or two. It basically secured Addison Rae her current stardom.

Twitter is where wit goes to die in 280 characters or less. It's a platform that rewards quick thinking, thick skin, and the ability to craft the perfect reaction gif for any situation. Just remember, on Twitter, today's clever quip is tomorrow's reason for a public apology.

The key to mastering the social media game is to tailor your content to each platform. Your LinkedIn post about quarterly earnings might not get the same traction on TikTok (unless you can somehow turn it into a catchy dance). And your Instagram thirst trap? Probably not appropriate for your professional network on LinkedIn (unless you're an influencer, in which case, carry on).

The art of the humble brag: Showing off without showing off

The humble brag is the social media equivalent of a magic trick - the goal is to make your audience focus on the "humble" part so much that they don't notice the "brag." It's a delicate art, like trying to pat your head and rub your belly while also solving a Rubik's cube.

Examples of expert-level humble bragging include:

• "Ugh, so tired from my 5 AM workout before my TEDx talk!" (Translation: I'm disciplined AND successful)

• "Can't believe I spilled coffee on my shirt right before accepting this award!" (Translation: I'm relatable AND accomplished)

• "Feeling blessed to be featured in Forbes' 30 Under 30. Now, back to grinding!" (Translation: I'm successful but still hungry for more and will probably end up in prison soon due to this)

The key is to wrap your brag in a layer of self-deprecation or faux humility. It's like hiding broccoli in a cheese sauce - people might know it's there, but they'll swallow it anyway.

Dealing with trolls: Don't feed them, unless it's for the engagement

Internet trolls are like that one kid in class who ate glue - best ignored, but sometimes fascinating to watch. They lurk in the comments section, ready to pounce on any perceived weakness with their caps lock firmly engaged and their spell-check broken.

The key is to engage only when it benefits you. A well-timed clapback can do wonders for your engagement rates. Just remember, the house always wins, but sometimes the troll does too. If you do decide to engage, make it witty, make it brief, and make sure it makes the troll look foolish, not you.

Some strategies for dealing with trolls:

1. The high road: Simply ignore them. It's not as satisfying, but it's often the smartest move.

2. The wit route: Respond with humour. If you can make your audience laugh, you win.

3. The kill-with-kindness approach: Respond with excessive politeness. Nothing confuses a troll more than genuine niceness.

4. The brand move: If you're managing a brand account, use the "Thanks for your feedback!" response. It's the corporate equivalent of patting someone on the head.

Remember, on the internet, attention is currency. Sometimes, a troll's negative comment can actually boost your visibility. In the words of the great Oscar Wilde, "The only thing worse than being talked about is not being talked about."

VI. The Creativity Arena: Where Past Experience Meets Future Innovation

Welcome to the dazzling world of creativity, where your past experiences are the building blocks of future innovations. Whether you're a coder, marketer, artist, or any other flavour of professional, the ability to creatively apply what you've learned is the secret sauce to standing out in your field. So, let's dive into the art of turning your mental attic of random knowledge into a treasure trove of innovative ideas.

The Remix Culture: Everything old is new again

In the world of creativity, originality doesn't mean conjuring ideas out of thin air. It's more like being a DJ, sampling bits and pieces from different tracks to create something fresh. Your past experiences and knowledge are your vinyl collection - the more diverse, the better.

Take, for example, the tech world. The most innovative apps often come from mashing up existing concepts in new ways. Uber is essentially a remix of GPS technology, smartphones, and the age-old concept of taxi services. TikTok? It's a blend of short-form video, music, and the human desire for 5 seconds of fame (Hawk Tuah, spit right on that thang)

The key is to look at your field with fresh eyes. Ask yourself:

1. What unlikely combinations could solve an existing problem?

2. How can concepts from one industry be applied to another?

3. What if you took a common practice and completely reversed it?

Remember, Steve Jobs didn't invent the smartphone. He just remixed existing tech in a way that made us all wonder how we ever lived without it. And let's be honest, he also made us wonder if we needed to remortgage our homes for a new phone every year.

Cross-pollination: Borrowing brilliance from other fields

One of the best ways to spark creativity is to venture outside your professional bubble. It's like going on a field trip for your brain. You might be surprised how often solutions in one field can be adapted to solve problems in another.

For instance:

• Architects have used principles from nature (biomimicry) to design more efficient buildings.

• Chefs have borrowed techniques from chemistry to create new culinary experiences.

• Marketers have used storytelling techniques from literature to craft more compelling campaigns.

The trick is to be a knowledge omnivore. Read widely, attend conferences outside your field, and strike up conversations with people in different industries. You never know when that random fact about beekeeping might inspire your next big software feature. (Worker bees and agile development teams (Death to Waterfall model) have more in common than you'd think.)

The "Yes, And" Approach: Embracing the power of iteration

In improv comedy, there's a golden rule: always respond to your scene partner with "Yes, and..." This keeps the scene moving forward and builds on what's already been established. The same principle can supercharge your creative process.

Instead of shutting down ideas with "No, but..." try expanding on them with "Yes, and..." This approach allows you to:

1. Build on initial concepts, no matter how flawed they might seem at first.

2. Encourage collaboration and create a positive brainstorming environment.

3. Discover unexpected directions that your original idea might take.

For example, let's say you're designing a new coffee mug. Your colleague suggests making it square. Instead of immediately dismissing it, you might say, "Yes, and we could add rounded corners for comfortable sipping." Before you know it, you've invented the next must-have desk accessory for geometrically inclined coffee addicts everywhere.

The Art of Productive Procrastination

Contrary to popular belief, not all procrastination is bad. Sometimes, letting your mind wander is exactly what you need to make those creative connections. It's like letting your mental crockpot simmer - you might end up with a gourmet idea stew.

Some productive procrastination techniques:

1. The shower thought: Some of the best ideas come when you're not trying to think of them. That's why we all need waterproof notepads.

2. The workout breakthrough: Physical activity can get your creative juices flowing. Who knew that the key to solving that coding problem was hidden in your running shoes?

3. The coffee shop effect: Sometimes, a change of scenery is all you need. Plus, the ambient noise of a coffee shop has been shown to boost creativity. Or maybe it's just the caffeine. Either way, win-win.

Remember, Leonardo da Vinci was notorious for starting projects and not finishing them. So the next time someone accuses you of procrastinating, just tell them you're following in the footsteps of a Renaissance genius. (Results may vary. Mona Lisa is not guaranteed.)

Embracing Failure: The compost of creativity

In the garden of innovation, failure is the fertilizer. Every creative genius has a graveyard of bad ideas, failed projects, and embarrassing first drafts. The key is to see these not as defeats, but as compost for your next big idea.

Some tips for failing productively:

1. Keep an idea journal: Even bad ideas can lead to good ones. That app for teaching dolphins to speak might be ridiculous, but it could spark a breakthrough in underwater communication technology.

2. Have post-mortem meetings: When a project fails, dissect it. Understanding why something didn't work is often the first step to figuring out what will.

3. Celebrate the lessons: Instead of hiding your failures, share them. Some companies even have "failure parties" to destigmatize and learn from mistakes.

Remember, WD-40 got its name because the first 39 formulas didn't work. If they had given up after WD-39, our world would be a squeakier place.

In conclusion, creativity isn't about waiting for a lightning bolt of inspiration. It's about consistently showing up, making connections, and not being afraid to look a little silly in the process. So go forth and create! Mix those metaphors, cross-pollinate those ideas, and remember: if at first you don't succeed, you're probably doing it right.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I need to go take a shower. I have a feeling my next big idea is just a shampoo lather away.

VII. Conclusion: Mastering the Meta-Game

Congratulations! You've now got a crash course in medium-maxxing across various life arenas. But the game never truly ends, does it?

The importance of adaptability: Be water, my friend (but like, smart water)

The only constant in life is change, and the ability to adapt is what separates the medium-maxxers from the medium-mediocres (This sounded better in my head). Be like water, flexible and able to fit into any container. But be smart water - you know, the overpriced kind that somehow convinces people it's better than regular water.

Continuous learning: Staying ahead of the curve (or at least not falling off it)

The learning never stops, folks. Whether it's a new social media platform, an emerging market trend, or the latest dating app, staying informed is key. Consider it your personal arms race against obsolescence.

Ethical considerations: Playing the game without losing your soul

While we're all about maximizing your potential in any given medium, remember that there's a line between smart strategy and being a jerk. Play the game, but play it in a way that lets you sleep at night. Unless you're on that crypto grind, in which case, sleep is for the weak.

Final thoughts: Medium-maxxing as a life philosophy (minus the philosophy degree)

At its core, medium-maxxing is about understanding the rules of engagement in any given situation and leveraging that knowledge to your advantage. It's about working smarter, not harder (although sometimes you gotta do both). So go forth, apply these lessons, and may the odds be ever in your favour.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I need to go optimize my LinkedIn profile for maximum humble-bragging potential. Catch you on the flip side, medium-maxxers!

Ah, diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) - the corporate world's latest attempt to solve societal issues while pretending it's all about the bottom line. Throw in some environmental, social, and governance (ESG) criteria, and you've got yourself a recipe for... well, something. Let's dive into this alphabet soup of good intentions and questionable outcomes, shall we?

ESG: Because Saving the World is (Apparently) Profitable Now

Picture this: You're an investment firm wanting to make money (Novel concept, I know). But wait! You also want to look like you care about the planet, people, and “proper governance” because the image of making money in the “traditional sense” just doesn’t cut it anymore. Enter ESG - the financial world's way of saying, "We're not just here for the money, pinky promise!"

ESG boiled down to its core is essentially a report card for companies, grading them on how well they're saving the whales, hugging trees, and not being total jerks to their employees. It's like when your mom used to give you a gold star for cleaning your room, except now it's Goldman Sachs giving gold stars to corporations for not actively destroying the planet.

But here's the kicker: ESG funds tend to underperform right before disclosure events. It's like watching a kid frantically clean their room before mom comes to check - sure, it looks good now, but we all know what's lurking under the bed. Then, miraculously, these funds outperform after disclosure. It's financial magic! Or, you know, just good old-fashioned portfolio shuffling.

And let's not forget the companies that tout their ESG credentials while quietly continuing business as usual. Looking at you, certain oil companies who shall remain nameless (but rhyme with Bexon and Fell).

DEI: Because Diversity is the Spice of... Profit?

Now, let's talk about DEI - the corporate world's attempt to make workplaces look like a Benetton ad from the 90s. The idea is simple: more diversity equals more money. It's like thinking that if you mix all the flavours at the soda fountain, you'll create some sort of super drink. (Spoiler alert: The last time I tried this, I got a tummy ache😔)

Companies are bending over backwards to implement DEI initiatives faster than you can say "unconscious bias training." They're handing out diversity hires like Oprah handing out cars.

But here's the thing: real diversity isn't just about hitting quotas. It's about creating an environment where different perspectives are valued & welcomed. It's the difference between inviting girls to your party and actually conversing with them. Many companies are great at the inviting part, but when it comes to the talking? Well, let's just say their moves need work.

Take tech companies, for example. They love to brag about their diversity numbers, but when you look closer, you often find that the diverse hires are clustered in non-technical roles. Shady? Yes. Needed? Probably not. Waste of everyone’s time? Truly.

BRIDGE: Because We Needed Another Acronym

As if ESG and DEI weren't enough, along comes BRIDGE (Benchmarking Race Inclusion and Diversity in Global Engagement). It's like the final boss in the video game of corporate virtue signalling. BRIDGE is here to make sure that even international development and humanitarian organizations are hitting their diversity quotas. Because nothing says "we're helping the world" like making sure your NGO won’t disclose their financials but seems to host a top-tier gala event every month

But let's be real for a second. The international development sector has long been criticized for its "white saviour" complex. So maybe BRIDGE isn't such a bad idea after all? It's like when your racist uncle finally decides to educate himself - sure, it's a bit late, but hey, better late than never, right?

The problem is, like many of these initiatives, BRIDGE risks becoming another box-ticking exercise. "Congrats, you've hit your diversity quota! Here's your 'Not Racist' badge!" Meanwhile, the underlying power structures remain unchanged. It's like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic - sure, the view might be better, but we're still heading for an iceberg.

The McKinsey Effect: When Correlation Becomes Causation (Sort Of)

Enter McKinsey & Co, the consulting firm that launched a thousand DEI ships with their 2015 report, "Diversity Matters." They said, "Hey, look! Diverse companies make more money!" And corporate America collectively lost its mind.

Suddenly, every company was scrambling to diversify faster than you can say "tokenism." But here's the thing about correlation and causation: they're not the same thing. Just because diverse companies tend to be more profitable doesn't mean diversity directly causes profitability. It's like noticing that people who own yachts tend to be rich, and concluding that buying a yacht will make you rich.

The McKinsey report became the corporate equivalent of a fitness influencer's "before and after" photos. Everyone wanted those results, but nobody wanted to acknowledge the possibility of cherry-picked data or other factors at play.

The Great DEI Backpedal of 2023

Fast forward to 2023, and companies are starting to realize that maybe - just maybe - slapping a bunch of diverse faces on your leadership team doesn't automatically make you more profitable. Shock Horror, I know!

Tech giants like Microsoft, Zoom, Google, and Facebook (sorry, "Meta" - I still can't get used to that just like how X is still Twitter) are scaling back their DEI programs faster than you can say "budget cuts."

But let's be clear: this doesn't mean diversity is bad for business. It just means that treating diversity like a magic profit wand doesn't work. It's not enough to hire diverse candidates; you need to create an environment where they can thrive and contribute.

The Inconvenient Truth: Diversity ≠ Instant Profit

Here's the kicker: turns out, that diversity alone doesn't guarantee higher profits. Shocking, I know. It's almost as if running a successful business is... a lot more complex.

Academic researchers trying to replicate McKinsey's findings have had about as much success as me trying to replicate my grandma's secret recipe; It might look the same but it certainly isn’t the same.

Some are even suggesting that maybe - just maybe - successful companies become diverse as they grow, rather than diversity making them successful.

The truth is, that diversity can be a strength, but only if it's leveraged properly. It's not enough to have different perspectives in the room; those perspectives need to be heard and valued. Otherwise, you’re assembling the Avengers and then using them exclusively for coffee runs for Kevin Feige and Co.

The thing is, diversity is a phenomenal tool, it’s implemented at a core level. Take CT for example. You’ll never meet a more diverse group of people (sex, age, geographic location and political affiliations) and yet time & time again, completely anonymous groups come together to work and solve a problem together.

Trying to drive the point home, what 99% of DEI (and now BRIDGE) initiatives miss is the fact that they don’t tap into what diversity can power if allowed to. Denzel Washington puts this more eloquently than I ever could; It’s not colour, it’s culture.

The DEI Industrial Complex

Despite all this, there's a whole industry built around DEI initiatives. Consulting firms are still pushing DEI harder than a used car salesman trying to offload a lemon. It's like they're saying, "Sure, it hasn't worked yet, but have you tried doing it... harder?"

We've got diversity trainings, inclusion workshops, equity seminars - it's like a never-ending corporate Coachella, minus the fun and a lot of uncomfortable role-playing exercises. And let's not forget the "Chief Diversity Officers" - a role that's become more common than free snacks in tech company break rooms.

All of these initiatives, while well-intentioned (and I say this very loosely), often miss the mark. They focus on surface-level changes without addressing the underlying cultural and systemic issues.

So, What's the Point?

Look, diversity is great. Having different perspectives and experiences in the workplace can lead to better decision-making, more innovation, and a more inclusive environment. But treating it like a magic profit-making wand is about as effective as trying to pay your rent with Monopoly money.

Maybe instead of focusing on hitting diversity quotas or ESG scores, companies could try, oh I don't know, creating genuinely inclusive environments and paying people fairly. Just a thought.

Real change takes time, effort, and a willingness to be uncomfortable. It's not about ticking boxes or hitting quotas. It's about creating a culture where everyone feels valued and empowered to contribute their best work. It's about recognizing that diversity isn't just about race or gender, but also about diversity of thought, experience, and background.

In the end, DEI and ESG initiatives, like many things in life, are complex issues that can't be reduced to simple metrics or quick fixes. They require genuine commitment, thoughtful implementation, and a willingness to admit when things aren't working.

But hey, what do I know? I'm just a chronically online pseudo-anonymous writer trying to make sense of corporate America's latest attempt to (show to) solve societal issues while still making a profit. Now, if you'll excuse me, I need to go work on my diverse portfolio of memes and Solana jeet jokes. It's not profitable, but at least it's honest work.

And remember the next time a company brags about their diversity numbers or ESG score, take it with a grain of salt. Make that a whole salt shaker. Because in the world of corporate virtue signalling, things are often not quite as diverse, equitable, or inclusive as they appear.

Introduction

The Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) is often portrayed as a neutral body working tirelessly to maintain economic stability. With their meeting last week (31st July) where they declared that they’re holding the rates steady for now and said “rate cut could happen as soon as next meeting”, the impact of those decisions became evident after the fact with the stock markets losing nearly $3 trillion as fears of a recession grow. Clearly, the FOMC has a lot of power but why and how did this happen in the first place?

A deeper examination reveals a more complex and troubling reality. This article aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of the FOMC's operations, its historical actions, and the true nature of its influence on the U.S. economy and global financial systems.

The Origins of the Federal Reserve

The Federal Reserve was created in 1913 in response to a series of financial panics. However, its creation was shrouded in controversy:

• The Federal Reserve Act was drafted in secret by bank representatives at Jekyll Island, Georgia, in 1910. This clandestine meeting, attended by some of the most powerful bankers of the time, laid the groundwork for a central banking system that would significantly alter the American financial landscape.

• The Act was pushed through Congress during the Christmas holiday season when many legislators were absent. This timing raised suspicions about the intentions behind the Act and the haste with which it was passed.

• It effectively privatized the nation's money supply, giving significant power to private bankers. This shift in control over the monetary system from the government to a quasi-private entity has been a source of controversy and criticism ever since.

Structure and Composition: A Facade of Public Interest

While the Fed is often referred to as a government agency, its structure tells a different story:

1. The 12 Federal Reserve Banks are privately owned institutions, operating mostly independently from direct government control. They are not funded through congressional appropriations but through interest on government securities and fees for services provided to banks. This unique structure blurs the line between public and private interests.

2. Member banks hold stock in their regional Federal Reserve Bank, which pays dividends, creating a financial incentive for participation. This stock is different from typical corporate stock in that it cannot be traded, sold, or pledged as collateral. However, the dividend payments create a direct financial benefit for member banks, potentially aligning their interests with those of the Federal Reserve.

3. Member banks elect six of the nine directors for each regional Fed bank, giving private banking interests significant influence over leadership. The Board of Governors appoints the other three directors, ostensibly to represent the public interest. However, critics argue that this structure gives disproportionate power to private banking interests in shaping monetary policy.

4. This structure allows private banking interests to influence the selection of Reserve Bank presidents, who participate in FOMC meetings and decisions. These presidents are not subject to the same public accountability measures as government appointees, raising questions about democratic legitimacy in shaping economic policy. The Reserve Bank presidents, despite their influence on national monetary policy, are not appointed by the President or confirmed by the Senate, unlike other officials with comparable power.

The FOMC's Extraordinary Powers

The FOMC's ability to set interest rates and control the money supply gives it unprecedented power over the economy:

1. Interest Rate Manipulation: By adjusting the federal funds rate, the FOMC influences everything from mortgage rates to the value of the dollar, impacting economic activity, borrowing, spending, and inflation. When the FOMC lowers interest rates, it becomes cheaper for banks to borrow money, which can lead to lower interest rates for consumers and businesses, stimulating economic activity. Conversely, when the FOMC raises rates, borrowing becomes more expensive, which can slow economic growth but help control inflation.

2. Money Creation: Through open market operations, the Fed can create money by purchasing government securities, dramatically increasing the money supply through quantitative easing. When the Fed buys government securities from banks or other financial institutions, it credits their accounts with newly created electronic money. This process can dramatically increase the money supply, potentially stimulating the economy but also raising concerns about inflation and currency devaluation.

3. Economic Forecasting: The Fed's economic projections often become self-fulfilling prophecies, shaping market sentiment and economic outcomes. When the Fed releases its economic outlook, investors, businesses, and consumers often adjust their behaviour in anticipation of the projected economic conditions. This can create a feedback loop where the Fed's predictions influence economic behaviour, which in turn validates the predictions.

4. Regulatory Authority: The Fed has broad supervisory powers over banks, allowing it to shape the financial landscape through capital requirements, stress tests, and merger approvals. This regulatory power extends beyond just monetary policy, giving the Fed significant influence over the structure and behavior of the financial industry. Critics argue that this concentration of power in one institution creates potential conflicts of interest, especially given the Fed's close ties to the banking industry.

Historical Evidence of Fed-Induced Recessions

The Fed has a long history of inducing recessions, often under the guise of fighting inflation:

• The Great Depression (1929-1939): The Fed's actions (and inactions) played a significant role in turning a recession into the Great Depression. Following the stock market crash of 1929, the Fed failed to act as a lender of last resort, allowing thousands of banks to fail. It also pursued a contractionary monetary policy, reducing the money supply by nearly a third between 1929 and 1933. These decisions dramatically worsened the economic downturn, leading to widespread unemployment and economic hardship that lasted for a decade.

• Roosevelt Recession (1937-1938): This downturn was largely caused by the Fed's decision to double reserve requirements between 1936 and 1937. This action, meant to give the Fed more control over an expanding money supply, instead led to a sharp contraction in the money supply and a subsequent recession.

• Eisenhower Recession (1957-1958): The Fed's aggressive interest rate hikes in 1955-1957 to combat inflation directly led to this recession. The federal funds rate was raised from 1.79% in 1955 to 3.11% in 1957, triggering an economic contraction.

• The Volker Double-Dip Recession (1908-1982): Fed Chairman Paul Volcker deliberately raised interest rates, causing unemployment to soar to 10.8%. This aggressive monetary tightening was aimed at combating high inflation but came at a significant cost to employment and economic growth.

• The 1990-1991 Recession: Aggressive interest rate hikes in 1989 contributed to an economic downturn. The Fed's attempt to preemptively control inflation led to a contraction in economic activity and a rise in unemployment.

• The 2001 Recession: Multiple rate increases between June 1999 and May 2000 contributed to the dot-com bubble burst. The Fed's tightening policy, aimed at cooling what was perceived as an overheating economy, played a role in precipitating the collapse of the tech bubble.

• The 2008 Financial Crisis: While not directly caused by the Fed, its policies of keeping interest rates low and failing to adequately regulate the housing market contributed to the crisis. The Fed's monetary policy in the years leading up to the crisis created an environment conducive to excessive risk-taking and the formation of asset bubbles.

• The 2020 COVID-19 Recession: While primarily caused by the pandemic, the Fed's subsequent actions, including massive quantitative easing, have raised concerns about future economic instability. The unprecedented scale of monetary intervention has led to debates about potential long-term consequences, including inflation risks and market distortions.

Federal Reserve Quotes Acknowledging Their Role in Recessions

If you think these are all just cherry-picked data points, here is an entire section of members of the Federal Reserve admitting their part in the recessions that they’ve caused.

1. Regarding the Great Depression: Ben Bernanke, in a speech for Milton Friedman's 90th birthday in 2002, said: "I would like to say to Milton and Anna: Regarding the Great Depression. You're right, we did it. We're very sorry. But thanks to you, we won't do it again."

2. On the 1970s Stagflation: Former Fed Chairman Arthur Burns, in his 1979 lecture "The Anguish of Central Banking," admitted: "...the Federal Reserve System had the power to abort the inflation at its incipient stage fifteen years ago or at any later point, and it has the power to end it today. At any time within that period, it could have restricted the money supply and created sufficient strains in financial and industrial markets to terminate inflation with little delay."

3. Regarding the 2008 Financial Crisis: Janet Yellen, in a 2010 presentation, stated: "For our part, the Federal Reserve failed to recognize the full extent of the risks and their potential to cause catastrophic consequences for the economy."

4. On the Volcker Recession (1980-1982): Paul Volcker himself, in his 2018 memoir "Keeping At It," wrote: "I was fully aware that there would be pain involved, but felt we had little choice if we wanted to break the inflation psychology."

5. Regarding the Fed's role in economic cycles generally: Former Fed Chairman William McChesney Martin famously said in 1955: "The Federal Reserve...is in the position of the chaperone who has ordered the punch bowl removed just when the party was really warming up."

These quotes demonstrate that, at various points in history, Fed officials have recognized the significant impact of their policies on the economy, including their role in causing or exacerbating recessions. However, it's worth noting that these admissions often come years or even decades after the events in question, when the officials are no longer in a position to directly influence policy or face any repercussions due to it.

The Fed's Alignment with Private Interests

Several factors indicate that the Fed often acts in the interest of private banks rather than the general public:

1. Bailouts: During the 2008 financial crisis, the Fed provided trillions in secret emergency loans to banks, raising questions about priorities and moral hazard. These loans, made through various emergency lending facilities, were not fully disclosed to the public until years later, and only after significant pressure from Congress and the media. The scale and secrecy of these bailouts raised questions about the Fed's priorities and its willingness to protect banks at the expense of taxpayers.

2. Regulatory Capture: The "revolving door" between the Fed and the private sector can lead to policies favouring bank profitability over financial stability or consumer protection. Many Fed officials come from the banking industry and return to it after their tenure, creating potential conflicts of interest. This phenomenon can result in a regulatory environment that prioritizes bank interests over public interests.

3. Profit Motive: As profit-making institutions, Federal Reserve Banks may be incentivized to keep interest rates higher than necessary to increase income. While excess earnings are remitted to the U.S. Treasury, the profit-making nature of the Fed can potentially conflict with its regulatory and monetary policy mandates.

4. Lack of Transparency: The Fed has historically resisted full audits and disclosure of its operations, fueling suspicions about whose interests it serves. While the Fed argues that full transparency could undermine its effectiveness by subjecting it to short-term political pressures, critics contend that this lack of transparency shields it from necessary public scrutiny.

5. Uneven Impact of Policies: Fed policies often benefit asset holders while negatively impacting wage earners, contributing to growing wealth inequality. Low interest rates and quantitative easing tend to inflate asset prices, benefiting those who own stocks and real estate, while potentially leading to lower returns on savings accounts and fixed-income investments, which disproportionately affects middle-class and lower-income individuals.

The Discount Window and Quantitative Easing

The Fed's discount window and quantitative easing programs have been criticized for:

• Providing cheap loans to banks, essentially subsidizing private profits. Banks can borrow at low rates from the discount window and then lend at higher rates, potentially creating a form of arbitrage.

• Lack of transparency in operations. Details of borrowing from the discount window are often kept secret, limiting public oversight of these operations.

• Enabling moral hazard by providing a safety net for risky behaviour. The availability of emergency lending facilities may encourage banks to take on excessive risks, knowing they have a backstop.

• Exacerbating wealth inequality by inflating asset prices. QE programs have driven up the prices of stocks, bonds, and real estate, primarily benefiting those who already own such assets.

• Sustaining zombie companies, potentially hampering economic dynamism. By keeping interest rates low and providing ample liquidity, QE has allowed unprofitable firms to continue operating, tying up resources that could be more productively used elsewhere.

• Creating uncertain long-term consequences due to unprecedented money creation. The full impact of these policies on inflation, market stability, and economic growth may not be fully understood for years or even decades.

Constitutional Concerns and Lack of Accountability

The Fed's structure and operations raise significant constitutional questions:

1. Unelected officials (regional bank presidents) have significant power in monetary policy decisions, potentially violating the Appointments Clause of the Constitution. This arrangement appears to conflict with the requirement that principal officers of the United States be appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate.

2. The Fed's ability to create money and set interest rates gives it enormous power with limited direct accountability to voters. Unlike elected officials who can be voted out of office if their policies are unpopular, Fed officials are insulated from direct public accountability.

3. Attempts to audit the Fed or increase Congressional oversight have been consistently resisted, fueling suspicions about potential conflicts of interest. The Fed has argued that increased oversight could compromise its independence and effectiveness, but critics contend that this resistance to scrutiny is more about protecting the Fed's power and its relationships with private banks.

The Fed's Role in Economic Inequality

Fed policies have contributed to growing economic inequality by:

1. Disproportionately benefiting those with access to cheap credit. Low interest rates allow wealthy individuals and large corporations to borrow money at very low cost and invest it in higher-yielding assets, an opportunity less available to average citizens.

2. Inflating asset prices, primarily benefiting the wealthy. QE has driven up the prices of stocks, bonds, and real estate, assets predominantly owned by wealthier segments of society.

3. Prioritizing inflation control over wage growth, often curtailing wage increases for workers. The Fed has historically raised interest rates at the first signs of wage growth, fearing inflationary pressures, even when corporate profits were high.

The World's Most Powerful Financial Institution

The FOMC's influence extends globally, affecting traditional equities and cryptocurrencies:

1. Global Market Maker:

   • Dollar dominance impacts global trade and international markets. FOMC decisions directly affect foreign exchange rates and international debt markets.

   • Sets the tone for global monetary policy, influencing other central banks. When the FOMC shifts its stance, many other central banks often follow suit.

   • Decisions on quantitative easing or tightening affect global liquidity, impacting emerging markets and speculative assets, including cryptocurrencies.

2. Impact on Equity Markets:

   • Interest rate sensitivity affects equity valuations. Lower rates often lead to higher equity valuations as investors seek higher returns.

   • Drives sector rotations based on policy changes. Different sectors react differently to FOMC policies, leading to significant market movements.

   • Causes market volatility around FOMC meetings and announcements. Traders and algorithms parse every word for clues about future policy directions.

3. Cryptocurrency Market Influence:

   • Affects liquidity conditions in crypto markets. Expansionary policies can lead to increased investment in crypto assets.

   • Impacts overall market risk sentiment. FOMC actions can encourage or discourage risk-taking, affecting high-risk assets like cryptocurrencies.

   • Influences dollar strength, which often correlates inversely with crypto prices.

   • Shapes the inflation narrative, affecting Bitcoin's perceived value as a hedge against inflation.

4. The Power of Perception:

   • Forward guidance shapes market expectations. Even subtle language changes can cause significant market reactions.

   • The "dot plot" moves markets despite being non-binding and often inaccurate.

   • Public appearances by FOMC members can cause market volatility, with their comments scrutinized for hints about future policy directions.

Conclusion: Unparalleled Market Influence

The FOMC's role as the world's most powerful financial institution stems from its ability to shape market realities through both concrete actions and market expectations. This vast influence raises critical questions about the concentration of power in the hands of a small group of unelected officials.

As citizens and stakeholders in the economy (especially if you're American), we must demand:

• Greater transparency in Fed operations and decision-making.

• Reform of the Fed's structure to reduce the influence of private banking interests.

• More robust Congressional oversight and regular, comprehensive audits.

• A reevaluation of the Fed's mandate to ensure it truly serves the public interest.

Only through such measures can we hope to create a monetary policy framework that truly serves the needs of all Americans, not just the financial elite. The power to create and control money is too important to be left in the hands of an institution that has repeatedly demonstrated its alignment with private interests over public good.

Further Reading:

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_the_Federal_Reserve

• https://www.hoover.org/research/fed-failures

• https://www.americanbanker.com/podcast/buy-the-people-why-everyone-loves-to-hate-the-fed

• “The Lords of Easy Money” by Christopher Leonard

• https://prospect.org/economy/2023-04-06-federal-reserve-independence-problem/

• Some Historical Reflections on the Governance of the Federal Reserve by Michael D. Bordo

• https://streetfins.com/what-history-tells-us-about-the-recent-fed-rate-cut/

These past few weeks have been challenging in a way that I didn’t envision. Similar to the concept of Crisis of Faith, it’s seemingly getting harder to navigate the medium of crypto without, at some point, questioning “What’s even the point of all this?”. Between all the celeb launches, the convenient line "Sahil told us a lie” before the chart commits seppuku and the never end complaints lobbied from mom’s basement, it’s hard not to take a look at the metaphorical mirror and say “What are we even doing here?”.

The reference point for your journey in crypto varies and matters a lot. You could go the purist route of “Satohi’s Vision” or the full 180 and fall into the “Financial Nihilism” school of thought. Such is the nature of nascent industries and this just so happens to be one of the bigger ones experiencing the ebbs and flow of the diverse participants.

Unlike most other industries, however, pseudo-anonymity is built into the medium itself. It’s a “Judge me by my deeds, though they are few, rather than my words, though they are many” kinda deal. This is one of the underlying and somewhat unspoken rules for the participants in this place and it’s one of those things that can only be proven to be true with actual skin in the game..

Web3: The Emperor's New Clothes

Let's cut to the chase: Web3, as it stands, is more hype than substance and has been for nearly 4 years now. It's the fintech world's equivalent of a startup with a $5 billion valuation and no product (which is exactly what web3 is)

The Web3 Reality Check:

• "Giving actual power to the users" often means "We’re gonna add NFTs to our asset flip game that you need to even get to the loading screen" (Yes, Gala games, i’m looking at you)

• "Decentralized solutions" frequently translate to "centralized platforms with extra steps"

• "Revolutionary technology" usually equals "A project that can't scale beyond CryptoKitties"

Here's the kicker: after years of promises, VC funding, and enough whitepapers to deforest the Amazon, what do we have to show for all the Web3 hype? It's mostly a bunch of JPEGs with an abandoned roadmap and half-baked dApps that make Web2 look like a technological utopia. But sure, pop off with the APE ecosystem, Moonbird making a comeback (fr this this time) and the latest Doodles exhibition.

The hard truth? Most Web3 projects are selling digital snake oil (but somehow worse, you get moonbirds-themed fanny packs). They're promising to reinvent the internet but can't even figure out how to make a UI that doesn't look like a colour-blind raccoon on a bender designed it.

Crypto: Where the Ponzi is Part of the Charm

Now, let's flip the script and talk about good ol' crypto. Unlike its pretentious cousin Web3, crypto has a refreshing honesty about it. It's like that friend who tells you that yes, those jeans do make your ass look fat, but hey, at least you're rich in Bitcoin so import some custom-made jeans from Japan instead. There is a LOT of overlap between crypto and web3 with the types of dApps and protocols but there is still a key distinction between them; intent.

Crypto Reversal

1. Transparency in Degeneration: Everyone acknowledges it's a casino, but at least the odds are on the blockchain for everyone to try and join the fun

2. Experimental by Design: It's not a bug, it's a feature. Everything's in the beta alpha stage and that's okay

3. Open Access to Money Games: Previously hidden financial instruments are now available to the masses. Actual Democratization, but make it a lot more degen

In crypto, almost everyone knows they're spinning a wheel. But it's a wheel where the mechanics are open source, the probabilities are (somewhat) known, and anyone can play. It's bringing the thrill of Wall Street to Retail Street, just with more memes and less insider trading (Maybe not for the Cabal though, nothing is perfect).

The Trust Paradox: Finding Honesty in a Sea of Anonymity

Here's where it gets interesting. In a world where trust is supposedly key, we've somehow found more honesty among anonymous anime avatar accounts than in the LinkedIn profiles of Web3 "visionaries” with business school prestige.

Why Anon Culture Breeds Trust:

• No reputation to protect means no reason to lie and you’re based on the archive of your journey

• Skin in the game: These degens are playing with their own money

• Crowd-sourced BS detection: Say something stupid, get featured on smoltings name and shame account.

It's a bizarre world where "TrustMe69420" often gives better financial advice than a guy in a suit who is a certified CFA. But that's crypto for you – expect the unexpected, and always check the liquidity pools.

The Raw Truth: Why Crypto Culture Wins the Trust Game

Crypto culture, with all its memes and madness, simply feels more trustworthy than the polished promises of Web3. Here's why:

1. Honesty About Risks: No one's promising you the moon. They're just inviting you to strap in for the rocket ride. Whether that journey takes you beyond the moon or something akin to the catastrophic Challenger launch is part of the journey.

2. Open Experimentation: Everything's a test, and everyone knows it. Fail fast, learn faster and earn some stories along the way

3. Community-Driven Development: Ideas are battle-tested in the Thunderdome of CT (which now that I write it out may not be the best of ideas)

4. Rapid Iteration: In crypto, a week is like a year in traditional tech. Evolution happens in real-time and you need to keep your finger on the pulse to not be a bagholder of a project that people have already sold their airdrop tokens of

5. Accessible Financial Tools: Complex financial instruments are being recreated and made available to everyone. It's risky, but it's a risk anyone can choose to take.

The Path Forward: Building Real Value in the Crypto Space

So, where do we go from here? How do we navigate this chaos and build something worthwhile?

1. Embrace Transparency: Be upfront about risks, potential rewards, and the experimental nature of projects. Rather than promising guaranteed returns, promise an adventure that will have twists and turns along the way

2. Focus on Real Problems: Instead of trying to "revolutionize" everything, tackle specific issues that blockchain tech is uniquely positioned to solve. This is the biggest issue. While almost all things *can* be on the blockchain, that doesn’t mean they need to be

3. Community First: Build with and for your community. They're your best asset, your harshest critics, and your most valuable feedback loop.

4. Iterate Rapidly: Launch, learn, and improve. Perfection is the enemy of progress in this space.

5. Educate: Help newcomers understand both the potential and the risks. An informed community is a resilient one and a core part of CT. You will get things wrong a lot but with that also comes a compounding effect of absorbing newer knowledge faster.

Conclusion: The Future is What We Make It

The crypto space, for all its flaws, is one of the most exciting frontiers in tech and finance. It's messy, it's risky, but it's also full of potential. While Web3 promises a revolution it can't deliver, crypto is quietly building a parallel financial system that's open to anyone brave (or crazy) enough to participate. Risk is a design feature here.

As we move forward, I’d urge you to focus on building value & experiences, not just hype. Let's create systems that are open and accessible, not just decentralized in name. And most importantly, let's keep that spirit of radical transparency and community-driven innovation alive.

Remember, in crypto, we're all explorers in uncharted territory. There's no roadmap, no guarantee of success, but that's what makes it exciting. We're not just watching the future of finance unfold – we're actively creating it, one block at a time (Unless you’re Cardano, then Charles can simply buy more naming rights for buildings instead)

So, strap in, anon. The road ahead is bumpy, but the journey will be nothing short of an epic needing to be told.

thanks to @_tolks for feedback & editing

Alright, anons, gather 'round. We're about to dive deep into the rabbit hole that is Crypto Twitter (CT). You might've come across an article recently that painted CT as a "schizophrenic cesspool" that contains as much value as a $SAFEMOON NFT.

Let’s break it down, shall we? First, though, I‘d urge you to read his article titled “The Rorschach of Crypto Twitter” in its entirety.

Introducing the VC who couldn't

There is a very popular quote that floats around in the CT space

Now, let's talk about the elephant in the room – or should I say, the bear in the market. Our original author (Matt) seems to have joined a crypto firm right before the market decided to take a swan dive off the high board, execute a triple axel, and belly-flop into the pool of pain. Talk about bad timing, right?

Imagine walking into a casino, putting your life savings on red, and then watching the ball land on green. That's basically what happened to our author, but instead of a roulette wheel, it was the entire crypto market. No wonder they're seeing Crypto Twitter as a schizophrenic cesspool – they're probably still dizzy from the market rollercoaster.

Now in all fairness, this can quite literally happen to anyone and we‘ve all bought the top of a coin that we all thought was going to go up higher. Public professional sites with LinkedIn also have a different set of norms to adhere to and more often than not, your professionalism is also noted. For all we know, Matt could have a secret CT account that is more receptive to CT as a whole having been ingrained in this culture. However, I do have to question the gloom and doom take that offers no solutions and calls everything “a skem”. There is only so much that we can go off of and we also have to question the intention of the article in the first place, which is probably my biggest gripe with this.

But here's the thing: CT, like the crypto market itself, goes through more cycles than your local laundromat. What looks like a dumpster fire during a bear market can transform into a hub of innovation and excitement when the bulls start running (again, see SOL). It's all about perspective and sifting through the “barrage of noise that makes signal virtually an impossibility” at the end of the day. Sounds like a skill issue.

Remember: The projects everyone's calling a scam might be the next blue-chip (or not, DYOR)

The key is to stick around, curate your experience, and remember that in crypto, today's FUD is tomorrow's FOMO.

So, while our friend might be seeing CT through the fog of a brutal bear market, the rest of us know better (surely). We've been through winter before, and we know that spring always comes – usually right after you've panic-sold everything.

1. "No One Knows Anything" - Isn’t that the Point?

Our original author seems to think CT is a wasteland of ignorance. Newsflash: that's the whole point. CT isn't about knowing everything; it's about knowing just enough. What flavour of information you seek out is what you receive in droves. That can be shitposts, Astrology for Men technical analysis, narrative discussions or the flavour of the week (L1’s and L2’s ad infinitum).

Think about it:

• Where else can you find a blockchain dev from Tokyo shitposting with a DeFi researcher from New York at 3 AM about what e-girl is better?

• CT is akin to a 24/7 global conference but most people are shitposting and their messages are trying to be decoded by underpaid analysts at JP Morgan after Dimon flipped the switch and says he loves crypto now.

• Remember when everyone and their grandma became an expert on rollups overnight? That's the beauty of CT.

"CT isn't about being right; it's about being part of the conversation. And sometimes, that conversation leads to actual innovation. Wild, I know."

2. Alpha Exists, But It's Not What You Think

No alpha on CT? Please. Alpha isn't just about getting the next 100x gem before everyone else (well, it’s mostly that but not all the time). It's about understanding the pulse of the market, the memes that drive it, and the narratives that shape it.

Real alpha on CT is about:

• Spotting trends before they become trends (SimpliFi, anyone?)

• Decoding the cryptic tweets of project leads (looking at you, Vitalik)

• Deciphering which narratives are about to pop off (AI & RWA coins, I see you)

Remember $PEPE? That wasn't just a meme coin; it was a masterclass in memetic engineering (I just made this up). If you were on CT, you probably saw it coming. If you weren't, well... enjoy your stablecoin yields on protocols that definitely won’t rug you for a profit, I guess. If CT is a “schizophrenic cesspool” with no alpha, maybe just leave? Maybe adjust the user controls of what you’re seeing?

Moreover, as you choose your niche to follow in CT and all you see are bad trades and no one winning, you also have to question the types of people you’re following and question that maybe you’re not following people who can add value to you. If this is the same approach (following the herd) you take for VC investing, you need to question what value you’re adding to the company you’re backing except capital (which is the notion that is all too common for VCs and what most hate too).

3. The Lemming Effect: Your Secret Weapon

Our critic sees the mood swings on CT as a weakness. I purport it as a superpower. Being able to ride the waves of sentiment is what separates the greats from the, well, our critic in question.

CT as Your Personal Sentiment Indicator:

• Timeline full of rocket emojis? Might be time to take some profits.

• Doom and gloom everywhere? You're looking at a juicy buying opportunity.

• The key? Emotional distance. Use these swings as data points, not diving boards.

"It's not about avoiding the lemming runs; it's about knowing when to join them and when to jump ship. That's the real alpha, and you won't find it in any whitepaper."

4. “Builder's Paradise” - "Weird" Al Yankovic (or Lil Bubble)

One glaring omission in the original article? The builders. You know, those crazy folks creating the future while the rest of us argue about the coloured candles.

For builders, CT is about:

• Getting real-time feedback on your latest smart contract (as long as it’s not Certik)

• Finding that one dev who can fix your spaghetti code at 2 AM

• Staying updated on the latest tech without having to wade through 50-page whitepapers

• Having the ability to ping a globally distributed, chronically online audience for feedback

The builder community on CT are the real MVP. It's where ideas go from "wouldn't it be cool if..." to "holy shit, we actually did it." And sometimes, those ideas change the whole game. We’ve seen it time and time again and I doubt this changes.

5. Learning, Unlearning, and Memeing

In the fast-paced world of crypto, if you're not learning, you're extinct. CT is like a university on steroids, minus the student debt (though more PTSD).

CT Education 101:

• From "What's a wallet?" to explaining complex DeFi strategies in weeks

• Tuition paid in attention, lessons available 24/7 (sleep be damned)

• A firehose of information, misinformation, and the occasional god-tier shitpost to tie them together.

6. The Human Element: Finding Your Crypto Fam

While our original author dismisses the desire for community as somehow inferior to the pursuit of returns, I believe that they're missing the forest for the trees. CT isn't just about making bank (although that's nice); it's ultimately about finding your tribe.

CT Connections Can Lead To:

• Job opportunities that make your friends jealous (when you’re not laid off in the bear that is)

• Collaborations that birth the next big protocol

• A support network for when the market decides to take a nosedive

Take a look at the Monad cult community. They've turned a purple Pepe into a rallying cry for EVM acceleration as an example of what a community can start as and turn into. Berachain took the same formula and now they have “Vape 2 Earn” protocols being built on their infrastructure. These ideas don’t have an outlet to exist outside of CT and that’s why their existence here makes this space all the more unique.

7. The Meme Economy Is the Real Economy

Do you want to know the true value of a project? Don't look at the TVL, the TPS, or whatever other acronyms the DeFi purists use to invest in (imagine missing the SOL trade because you replied “ghostchain” or “no TVL” to anyone who said the memes, community & devs were still committed in the first half of 2023 (s/o tolks)): Look at the memes & community.

Memetic Backed Value (MBV) 101:

• Quality of memes ∝ Strength of community

• It's like technical analysis (It’s nothing like technical analysis, this works)

This isn't just shitposting; this is MBV in action. And if you're not paying attention to it, you're missing out on the most important & purest distilled-down metric in crypto (and arguably the internet in the 21st century).

Conclusion: Embrace the Chaos

Crypto Twitter isn't perfect. It's messy, it's chaotic, and sometimes it feels like screaming into a void littered with countless contract address shills on cryptic accounts. But you know what? That's exactly why it works.

So the next time someone tells you CT is useless, just smile and nod. They're probably the same people who thought Bitcoin was a scam in 2013. Meanwhile, you'll be riding the waves of the next big narrative, armed with nothing but memes and the unshakeable conviction that comes from being part of the world's most entertaining echo chamber.

"Remember, in the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king. And in the world of crypto, the memelord is god. Choose your inkblot wisely, anon. The future is what you meme it to be."

Thanks to @_tolks for feedback and editing

This is a semi-follow-up to an older P1 post titled “Designing Better Game Economies”, which you can read here:

It’s been almost two years since that post went live which was also around the “pico-bottom” for the industry. Having come from the insanity of the Bullrun and a slew of failed “web3 games” which frankly butchered up their entire product simply because of bad tokenomics or in-game economy, that piece was meant to help developers and designers not run into that problem by understanding the basics.

(Quick note from Future Editor Boffin. This was initially typed out in early March but I’ve decided to keep it in to show how much can change in just 2 months)

Now, however, things are different. The markets are roaring upward and a stone's throw away from breaking ATHs, the sentiment all around can be described as hopeful and there are eyes on the various different budding sectors throughout this crazy niche of ours. This of course includes the Crypto Gaming sector.

As I sit here typing this out while taking too many “regular breaks” between getting this piece done and trying to grind my levels in the latest game I’m playing (Limbus Company), I keep coming back to one main point. Normal economies for the most part are really *fucking* boring. I don’t want an “accurate” representation of that in the video game I’m playing (crypto, web3 or even normal games). I want to play games that I find fun and currently, chances are 9/10 that’s an indie game.

AAA Gaming has been getting “less fun” for quite some time too. Every other game is a live-service game promised to be supported for years to come with new content but as you’ll know most have failed miserably because live-service is a substitute for a “chockfull of microtransactions”. Even the standalone games are hit-and-miss. For every successful standalone game we have like Hogwarts Legacy, you have equal (if not more) failures like “Suicide Squad: Kill the Justice League. Hell, we’ve recently seen the entire controversy of “Sweet Baby Inc” (or GamerGate 2.0 as some are calling it) and the negative effects of forced diversity for the sake of “looking good”. It’s a whole thing which you can see for yourself.

Funnily enough, this issue is closely related to this post which is doing rounds on CT about crypto not being “diverse enough”. I believe this to be a moot point simply because crypto is as meritocratic as it gets. You’re not judged for the things you can’t change (sex, age, gender, geography, education) but for the output and value you give to others. PageOne is the culmination of this “authenticity moat” and is a good example to use.

Between me, Tervo and Tolks, P1 consists of posts about the industry as active on-the-ground participants. You don’t know who we are, what we do IRL, how old we are, where in the world we’re based, what our religious beliefs are or anything of the sort. We’re a bunch of online anons who met in a Discord server and banded together to talk about the industry in a no-bullshit “web3 manner” (which has caused much more harm than good).

Despite not knowing anything about us except for the work we’ve put out, we’ve grown this newsletter throughout the bear market into one of the most reputable independent crypto newsletters out there. I can ramble about this topic to no end (and may even be a future article) but this distinction between “Crypto” and Web3” needs to be emphasized.

While I’m still a big proponent of the gaming intersection and am looking forward to the different projects that we’re going to see launch with their own "unique spin” on whatever genre they have decided to tackle, I’ve frankly had a change of heart on the overall segment of “Web3 Gaming”.

Crypto gaming enhances the scope & breadth of a game which can run without any NFTs or Tokens.

Web3 gaming repackages proven and very profitable (predatory) monetisation opportunities and makes it run *with* blockchain assets.

How do we measure or quantify this “fun” though? If we choose to define each game as its separate economy, where does the fun come into it? I believe we need to take a sandbox approach for this. Despite what most people will tell you, economies within a game are meant to be fun and engaging. This can be achieved by incentivizing certain behaviours behind different “currencies” (which I’ve discussed before). Often, these economies are either too generous or too stingy, leading to unbalanced gameplay. That’s the consensus anyway.

But hold on to your horses. What’s wrong with an imbalance? Does it make for a worse experience? That depends on which side of these imbalances you view. If the imbalance is coming from the side of the game developer being too stingy, then yeah, it’s a system which is pretty BS. If you’re under-levelled and you need to grind out some XP for an hour or two before the game gets “fun again” while you could make the argument that it’s allowing players to savour the game and not do everything in one go, it’s a weak argument. Survival games are the worst offenders of this where most of the time is spent grinding for resources, yet it’s the least liked or memorable part of the game. If you recall your top 5 gaming moments in any gaming genre, would grinding for resources or “setting yourself up” be in them? I’d wager no.

In economics, there is a term called “Homo Economicus” (or Economic Man) which is the portrayal of humans as agents who are consistently rational and narrowly self-interested with their end goal to achieve the optimal outcome. It’s on Homo Economicus that most of economic theory is based. You would be forgiven for thinking this is a decent foundation but then you need to ask yourself why there is such a big divide between academia, the “markets” and the everyday participants? It’s because the core theory of economics, the economic man, is based on a faulty hypothesis. Humans by nature aren’t rational nor do they always chase the optimal outcome.

If you’ve talked to any normal person, you’ll realise very quickly that most people do not opt for a “utility maximisation” mindset in anything they do as they’re more like to be “utility satisficers”. In simpler terms, “this is good enough” is more likely than “this is the most efficient way to get the most value”. This is without even getting into the topic of what value even means to most people. For some, it means getting the $1 McDonald's menu while for others it’s getting a rare watch for the same price as a house deposit. If everyone were indeed as rational as economics believes people are, sales & marketing tactics that target emotional receptors would be considered an extortionate waste of money.

Imbalance in games isn’t a bad thing, and I’d go further and say that fundamentally all game economies are imbalanced, especially the fun ones; they’re the most imbalanced. It’s all to service the “power fantasy” trope which undermines most of the games we play. Wanting to be stronger, faster, richer, smarter or whatever verb you want to be. It can be an escape from the usual and a big part of the drive as to why people play games.

Looking at it from that lens, why would you want to base your entire game on reality? A case can be made to base the starting economy in reality but then allow players to break the limits of said established economy to service the players. This is a good approach (and pretty much the entire premise of series like Solo Leveling) but if these “blockades” can only be breached by the ability to defeat the pay-wall, you’re setting up a foundation for a Play-to-Win Game (which is even more egregious if the game is that of a PvP nature). They’re very effective, don’t get me wrong. The ability to destroy your enemies because you spent a mere $0.7 on your mobile wallet is enticing, but there is no stopping or an “upper limit” to this behaviour. It’s a money sink to the truest definition of the word.

This is how I view the majority of Web3 gaming. To take a lot of the predatory practices of monetisation within games and dial them up through the use of blockchain assets like tokens and NFTs. Sure, you could sell these expensive items when you don’t play the game or quit it, but if the game never takes off, establishes a dedicated audience that is slowly growing or worse, never releases. All of the “freedom” you were promised suddenly doesn’t matter because there is no market for it.

The worst offenders of this are Gala Games, which I’ll straight go ahead and say how this company is still functioning is beyond my comprehension. When the co-founders aren’t suing each other, the company is too busy “buying game studios” to integrate web3 & blockchain assets and then just not doing anything with them.

Introducing “Grit”, the premier blockchain web3 battle royale where the “town ain’t big enough for the both of us” is the slogan. They’re partially right there, as the game servers haven’t been live since March 2024, though there have been 0 players since July 2023. The last time any team member spoke in their discord server was in March 2024 as well. This is one of the final messages that was sent by a team member, which is, very telling.

If you delve a bit deeper and look at the official blog posts they’ve made, the last one was published in May 2023, and it outlines how the “NFTs” in the game will be used.

You can buy the consumables. Now, you may be wondering what kind of consumables they are. Are they purely cosmetic? You should know better by now, but no. You can buy health packs that will heal you “for a lot of health” for $5 (not $GALA tokens) and you can only use this 5 times. Meaning, that each heal comes down to $1.

If you look at the chain stats, you’ll see exactly why this attempt at a cash grab didn’t play out. In the entire time this “game” has been live, the total volume generated is less than $3k with less than 20 “participants” if you can even call it that.

This unfortunately isn’t a one-and-done case. On the official Gala Games website, there are 18 separate games listed, ranging from “Live” to “In development” for both brand new and already established IPs like “The Walking Dead” and “Battlestar Galactica”.

Mind you, Grit is listed as a live game, so take from that what you want.

Coming back to the idea of power fantasy, the thing a lot of the “web3 game studios” seem to miss is to make the players feel good or more importantly powerful in a game that doesn't have to do with anything blockbuster or the “moment to moment” gameplay, as much as it does with giving the players agency within a world with a set of “contextual rules”. The issue with web3 games is that if players were given this agency, it wouldn’t be good for the actual $token ecosystem which they’re trying to make work.

I’ve had a change of heart with most of the implementations I’ve seen of blockchain with games. I don’t think most games are enriched or the experiences are made better simply because of the presence of such assets, in fact, I never thought that was going to be the thing that truly sends us forward. I’d hoped to see actual game studios, making actual good games and then utilising this new tech in a manner that would make sense but I’ve yet to anyone present this case.

We have games like Parallel that do the “most right” so far (though I admit I’m biased), but we can’t only have one or two games that are good examples when there have been *hundreds* announced with some having secured funding into 8 figures and have nothing to show for it. When you decide to make a game with “Blockchain assets”, you need to be on par with the games that exist *without* these blockchain assets and then you have to prove that this new system of backend tech is a net positive for the games space. We’ve yet to see that, especially at scale. You can’t compare yourself as “doing good” against other web3 games that are working as barely a website and declare yourself a pioneer.

Maybe we need existing game studios to take risks from the “core games” they make and show all the native builders how it’s done, which would just extend their monopoly further. That is exactly what CCP game is doing with Project Awakening, an eve-online-like experience but with the backend being run via the blockchain.

The quick run-down is that Eve-Online is a futuristic sci-fi MMORPG that takes place in a player-driven, persistent world with a space travel setting called New Eden. The game is open-ended gameplay. There is no focus on predetermined grinding, levelling up or a storyline identical to everyone else. There are no levels and little vertical progression to it. It’s a sandbox to the max and is enhanced by a player-driven economy which at least for the past decade has been releasing detailed monthly economic reports as well. You build or do what you want to, and while this makes Eve-Online have a higher barrier to entry and a steep learning curve, it also allows for some of the most unique stories ever told in gaming due to this open-ended nature.

CCP is the *only* game studio in the world that is equipped to build something like this, having been the custodian of Tranquility (the name of the main server instance) for over 2 decades at this point and a player-run economy for just as long. This style of games while it doesn’t attract a large number of people, still has a dedicated audience and the type of games that the studio knows how to make.

With Crypto and blockchain being as experimental as they are, I had hoped to see a budding and vibrant scene of “indie/experimental games” blowing up and constantly innovating. While we have some in terms of 100% on-chain games like SkyStrife, there is still a criminal lack of experimentation as we see in the actual gaming indie scene (which is where all the biggest innovations in recent gaming have come from). The other approach is to be like OhBabyGames and not include any blockchain assets at all. That’s going swimmingly well as they’ve already had partnerships with SpongeBob, Invader Zim and Fillan (one the Biggest names in Vtubing)

People are fed up and tired of modern Triple-A gaming and Mobile gaming monetisation practises, yet that is the exact thing I see a lot of “game studios” here seem to be going for. While it could act as a path towards profitability faster than other methods, the goodwill and connection to the core audience are severed. In the worst-case scenario, you could end up as Grit with less than 3k in volume yet an aftertaste of “never trust anyone from this company again”.

Thanks to Tolks & Tervo for their help with editing and cleaning up this article.

If you’ve made it this far, thank you for reading and I hope this has been a useful read. You can follow me on Twitter (and now Farcaster) to let me know what you think about this post & don’t forget to subscribe to Page One for your essential crypto readings!

While I didn’t get a substantial airdrop for either Celestia or Dymension (skill issue, I know), many did and they’ve profited handsomely from it. I’ve seen quite a few close friends and mutuals on the timeline having made 5-6 figures from this airdrop alone.

If perchance you staked your entire $TIA airdrop on the day claims went live, not only have you profited from the price appreciation and the APY, but you were also made eligible for at least 5 more airdrops which in turn is most likely going to make you eligible for more airdrops.

“Something something, flywheel is working & in full effect” - Abe Lincoln, 2048 (probably)

A surprise to most people was holders of “Pudgy Penguins” getting airdropped (at the time of writing, Feb 25th) around $10,000 in $DYM for holding a pudgy penguin. This wasn’t limited to one per address but rather 1 for every instance of a penguin. You can do that math.

Mind you, these are the same NFTs which were trading for below 1 ETH in June 2022 when ETH was priced at $1,800. Had you bought and just held a Penguin from then, your penguin would now be worth over $35,000. Rumours now are that Pudgy Penguins holders will be in for a very profitable year as they’ve been confirmed for several other airdrops throughout 2024. Being in the huddle has never been comfier.

One thing that both of these “trades” have in common is that the people who won didn’t luck into it. While there will always be some people who get “lucky” a large majority of them made an excellent investment knowing the r/r.

Our very own UpOnly co-host, (Hi Cobie) published an article on his substack back in 2021 titled “Trading the metagame”. If you haven’t already read it, you’re doing yourself a massive disservice. You’re post-rich self in the future will thank you.

His article is centered around finding what the “Meta” is and trading that. Meta is just another word for (in this instance at least) what currently has the collective mindshare. This could be ETH killers, AI coins, GameFi or any other number of rotating metas. Looking at an ongoing meta, the cool new kid on the town is “Modular Money” which is what Celestia and Dymension are a part of. While I do not know the intricacies of each service nor do I need to understand what makes this rollup service better than the next one, the thing is, I don’t need to. This isn’t the article to do that.

Cobie’s approach is what I would consider one side of the coin. Playing the metagame that is occurring well and identifying it early on to make the most gains. However, that’s not the only sustainable approach.

The other side of the coin would be “narrative hunting”. Rather than playing the metagame, the other approach would be to bet on what will become the meta and buy winners in those categories.

Diving into this rabbit hole you will quickly realize that there are a lot of sub-sectors that are not only promising but equally as complex and thriving in their mini-ecosystem.

To succeed you need to discern very quickly what is “noise”, what is pandering for a higher valuation vs actual innovation and how to properly place a value on the core idea & the underlying tech. You not only need a constant source of information for the newest projects but also the capacity to understand them and most important of all, bet on what narrative has the highest chance of taking off and scaling. It’s a lot like seed investing but in a PvP market where no one gets preferential treatment. The only thing that differentiates you is how early you get in and how much you put in. Then there is also the question of securing profits against other people who also want to optimally exit for the highest % gains.

As you can imagine, betting on the wrong narrative can and has completely wiped out a lot of smart people with the ever-so-relatable line:

At its core, while Crypto and Blockchain tech are fundamentally freeing & open for everyone without any prejudice, it equally houses some of the worst UI/UX. To decode the Future of France you need a Ph.D. in Crypto-linguistics.

This is a vault that Yearn.Finance is offering for people to deposit their tokens and earn yield. Try to figure out what you need to deposit here at a glance.

It wasn’t until the end of January that I believe I stumbled onto something fundamental in trading narratives in the most crypto-centric possible way; Anime Waifus.

Isekai.Money becomes relevant as they’re adding a “Layer of Ease” over the complex world of DeFi Money Blocks. Not only can you chase better yields but now you don’t have to know what the underlying token is nor what the exact steps are.

It’s easing friction for the end user. For the mass adoption of tech, the tech needs to be simple to use; Mind numbingly easy to use.

Think of all your Web2 interactions from social media to banking. A few clicks is all it takes to do 95% of the actions and people are used to that standard. Ease of use and comfort over everything else. If the product you’re launching as a competitor product isn’t better in UI/UX or gives you an outsized improvement over the existing product, you will have a very tough time gaining traction.

Using the example of GameFi, if you were around for the last bull market you would remember “DeFi Kingdom” (DFK) and its token $JEWEL. That was an earlier attempt to simplify many of the DeFi concepts in a game wrapper which they incentivised through this token. Simple? Sure it was simpler than pure interactions with AMM but not too much. We had other projects that launched after DFK iterated and improved its offering and one such project would be SpartaDex.

As this space is still in its nascent stages and has a lot of eyes, you can tokenise and incentivise usage through this “-fi fication”. You’d think that PURE simplification is not a profitable endeavour in this space at all; Everything that launches with a “-fi” needs a token for simplicity's sake. Not at all for speculation and the profit of the dev team, VCs or early participants. Go figure.

This model has been so profitable in fact that we even attempted to incentivise walking and it was dubbed “Move-to-Earn” (M2E) and the leader in its category “StepN” even reached a market capitalisation of $2.2B at its peak.

Taking a step back and fundamentally seeing “narratives” for what they are, they are bets on what industry you envision (and subsequently bet on) getting popular, both for existing users and the ones that will join or be converted. You have most likely heard of these narratives as well.

“GameFi”, SocialFi”, “DePin” so on and so forth, each offering an improvement over their web2 counterparts by accessing or unlocking something which hasn’t been possible before so, here is my new proposal for not a new but rather an overarching narrative; a metanarrative.

If you’re scrolling through Twitter, in a telegram “alpha group”, discord server or just hear anyone talk about a narrative, your mental model now has another “lever” which you should be able to use.

Does this narrative help with simplifying an overarching problem? What is this narrative trying to achieve and what are the chances it catches on? Usually, if something is notoriously difficult to navigate but it’s a big enough market in its own right, chances are there will be a market for it.

DeFi was a narrative which turned into an entire industry. TardFi is inherently opaque and complex to use, so let’s open those systems up to make them transparent and allow people to build on top of it.

We’re currently in the middle of an “AI Narrative”, which should be very easy to understand as to what kind of problems they’re simplifying. Rug.ai is making trading infrastructure tools, Paal AI collects data from users & “gives them a voice” to be understood, CT’s favourite coin Bittensor powers decentralised AI (as opposed to what OpenAI does) & IMGN AI is powering an uncensored AI generation platform.

If the last bull market is anything to go by (and most of the time, they usually get crazier), then you’re going to witness a *lot* of narratives & sub-narratives come and go. You’re simply not going to be able to catch them all because your attention liquidity is much better concentrated into one or two areas and work with a group that understands the same concept while they focus on other niches.

A must-read blog post going into this crazy bull cycle is Squad Wealth. It would be best if you worked in a team of some sort to capture & organise information you wouldn't have otherwise and act as a “buffer” for your own bias. While you may be sure that one narrative is “absolutely going to happen”, someone else may not agree and ask you details or questions about it that you may not have considered. If everyone leaves satisfied, you’ll know better what is a “worth it” trade and what isn’t. You won't be able to answer questions or if it gets really busy with multiple “hyped launches” a day, you will quickly need to present a 1-sentence thesis from everything you will have learnt and hopefully honed in.

That’s where a mental model like this will help you, and ultimately what the basis of this piece was supposed to be, to provide clarity.

Hopefully, you kill it this cycle, anon.

Thanks to Tolks & Tervo for their help with editing and cleaning up this article.

If you’ve made it this far, thank you for reading and I hope this has been a useful read. You can follow me on Twitter (and now Farcaster) to let me know what you think about this post & don’t forget to subscribe to Page One for your essential crypto readings!

As always, thanks for reading! Follow me here and reach out at contact@pageone.gg

In Economics, a popular concept known as the “Efficient Market Hypothesis” (EMH) is a controversial idea. It states that "share prices reflect all available information and consistent alpha generation is impossible.” In theory, stocks always trade at their fair value on exchanges, making it impossible for investors to purchase undervalued stocks or sell stocks for inflated prices.

While there is ample academic evidence to support the core theory, there is equally as much “free market” evidence that discredits the EMH. As a crypto market participant, I of course fall into the latter camp as inefficiencies are as abundant in crypto as arguably any asset class in history. Crypto is also (clearly) an asymmetric bet on a better, more efficient internet and monetary system despite what the European Central Bank or Elizabeth Warren would desperately claim.

Asymmetric bets, by their very definition, can’t be efficiently priced. At the core of this idea lies the main problem; how is the ‘information’ viewed by the participants? We all know the phrase ushered by John Maynard Keynes, “The markets can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent.” This opens up a brand new dynamic set of questions:

• What dictates how the participants in the market view potential news?

• How long are you willing to wager on a “mispriced” asset?

• How long can you remain solvent against the herd of the markets?

The market is essentially a living and breathing being. Despite endless efforts from a countless number of the world’s smartest and wealthiest people, the markets continue to evade anyone who tries to codify and understand its abnormality. These same “inefficiencies” pose problems in being represented by models and have turned the markets into what is lovingly referred to as a “PvP Arena”; The winner of which profits in an outsized way.

One of these PvP arenas is prediction markets which are open markets that enable the prediction of specific outcomes using financial incentives. Prediction markets, more colloquially known as betting markets, allow anyone to quite literally put their money where their mouth is on various topical things ranging from everyday sports events to political elections and even the outcome of wars. Due to how you take part in prediction markets (financial stake + reputation) only those knowledgeable in the said sector or “experts” of their communities are attracted here (or at least, that’s the consensus).

There is a growing merit to the idea too. Traditional means of “information seeking“ aren’t usually monetizable beyond the sector you’re a part of. In prediction markets, if you spot an inefficiency and have the relevant knowledge, you can win big. Secondly, because of said structure, the scope & breadth of information represented in the markets also rises significantly. This is evident in the US Election forecasting data study conducted by David Rothschild where he looked at the 2008 presidential elections.

In it, expert forecaster Nate Silver was pitched against the Iowa Electronic Markets (IEM). Nate had built his model from more or less general polling data but the IEM didn’t have information restrictions. As a result, the IEM incorporated information from wherever they found useful while also addressing any biases they felt were present in Nate’s model ultimately leading to the IEM performing better.

Prediction markets however are heavily regulated (due to their financial nature) and there is only “so much” you can create markets on in that framework. Luckily for us, crypto is the test bed of innovation and this remains true for prediction markets too.

As it currently stands, Polymarket is the biggest prediction market in the world that hosts everything from crypto and politics to even pop culture and war outcomes. However, given the nature of prediction markets and seeing what they can potentially power, to leave it at just betting over “which main character gets arrested by Q4 2025” isn’t the best implementation of the tech.

The ramifications and potential of prediction markets grow when you see the results of prediction markets’ ability to accurately represent real-time events to a high degree. We’ve even seen Prediction Market Dating and to kick things up a notch more, in the most Silicon Valley Tech Bro move I’ve personally seen, “The Prediction Market Dating Show” which describes itself as “a surreal musical odyssey of romance and live betting”.

When we’re not focused on these edge cases and want to make better use of the underlying market system, this is where Futarchy comes in. Proposed by Robin Hanson as a futuristic form of government, the one-liner explains the idea perfectly:

The idea builds upon the core premise of these information markets with a slight twist. This is called “Conditional Prediction Markets”. Individuals would not vote on whether or not to implement particular policies, but rather on a metric to determine how well their country (or charity or company) is doing. Then, prediction markets would be used to decide the policies that best optimize the metric.

Given a proposal to approve or reject, two prediction markets would be created each containing one side of a market corresponding to acceptance of the measure and one to rejection. Depending on which market wins, the losing market will have their trades reverted and depending on the metrics of the winning markets, the trades will be paid out accordingly. Due to the nature of this system, the measure of success or “perceived value” is evident almost as quickly as the markets are created.

Prices in prediction markets reflect the probability of an outcome. So if the pass market has a price of $0.75 per share for Option A and $0.25 for Option B, this is the market telling you that they believe Option A has a 75% chance of winning. This is the main premise of Futarchy. Traditionally in governmental voting, you have "voter apathy" and "rational irrationality" but Futrachy aims to have a much more rational market which incorporates all kinds of information.

Secondly, due to the financial nature of reducing these irrational inefficiencies, over a longer period, these markets will weed and filter out participants who have a “higher % win rate” vs lower, which forces the participants to evolve. In gaming terms, think of a prediction market in its early days as your “placement matches”, where you play against players with all kinds of skills. However, the more you win and grow, the more you get placed with other players of a similar calibre which evens the skill ceiling and makes the game more competitive. The same principle applies here.

In theory, this seems to be the perfect blend of “public” participation and professional analysis, however, there is a downside to this model which may be big enough to outright not make this model work.

Should a single person (or entity) want to manipulate the markets, they can with an obscene amount of money by pushing the prices they want of “yes” and “no” in their favour. Then we have the issue of the financial nature of these being a double-edged sword. All markets by nature are “reflexive”, the buying of an asset goes up when we see others buying it too. This is very evident in crypto with phrases like “Monkeys Ape Together”, the practice of “Whale Wallet Tracking” and even “Influencer Shills”. While the premise of Futarchy is based on rationality, the participants are anything but and this “gap” between the two also leaves the door open for manipulation of the markets.

Secondly, and this is something which I resonate with, it’s very hard to differentiate between the “noise” and the actual impact of a policy being implemented, especially on a longer-term scale. If you were around for the “WAGMI” era of crypto last cycle, you will remember this music video from Randi Zuckerberg.

This is what being 100% engulfed inside of an echo chamber looks like, where the noise can not be differentiated between the actual impact long term. While you may have the “more rational” participants betting on the correct outcome, the noisy crowd can make that vote fail and we wouldn't have known until 2-3 years later that “WAGMI” wasn’t the best of ideas. My good friend Poof has been working on analysing the insanity that was the 2021-2023 period of NFTs which looking back just goes to show how hard it is to differentiate from noise. Check it out here:

poof.gripe

The 2021-2023 NFT Retrospective - Chapter 3: Mausoleum for a Burned Ape

Do you remember PXN? What about FLUF World? What about Raid Party? Or Ragnarok? Impostors? Valhalla? NFTiff? DefiApes? Seekers? Meebits? HyperBears? We spent well over $7B on minting NFTs and with secondary sales. Many of these had no future, and we should have known better, but there is a silver lining somewhere in this pain… I swear…

Read more

2 years ago · poof

In the beginning, I mentioned “how is information” perceived, and this gets translated further. In my previous article, I mentioned that growing up through the schooling system in the UK is heavily contrasted with that of the US (through the lens of school uniforms) and this can be expanded further. Not only will there be differences in the consensus of how that information is perceived, but there is also going to be equally as much debate into how that information or “metric” is captured. Any policy can be made to look good using the right metric after all.

This also leads to a situation whereby more manipulative participants, adopting tactics like the “Motte and Bailey Fallacy” become a concern.

[The Bailey] represents a philosophical doctrine or position with similar properties: desirable to its proponent but only lightly defensible. The Motte is the defensible but undesired position to which one retreats when hard pressed.

Finally, if you’ve been paying attention, you’ll also have realised that prediction markets are a zero-sum game. By design, it’s irrational for you to participate in them. What this situation leads to is the participants who are willing to participate are not going to be experts but rather speculators who *think* they can trade on what the markets expect not what they believe will happen. This is referred to as a Keynesian beauty contest; judges are rewarded for selecting the most popular faces among all judges, rather than those they may personally find the most attractive.

Between these pros and cons and the matter of money involved, you’d usually be hard-pressed to find a system like Futarchy implemented “in the real world” but luckily for us, we can experiment with ideas like these to see if they’re just good on paper or do they scale?

Meta-DAO wants to put the idea and implementation of Futarchy to the test and we’ve already seen some interesting results come from it. Proph3t (Co-Founder of Meta-DAO) posted an interesting case where he wanted Proposal 3 to fail for his profit and outlined all the ways how he could’ve manipulated the markets to reach his goal. They have big ambitions too. In their introductory post, they envision business proposals and operations proposals along the area axis with the scope axis containing projects and direct actions.

Interestingly to me (as this only cleared a few days ago), was the failure of Proposal 9. Agrippa (The proposer) outlined his vision and execution plan for implementing “multi-modal” support. As of writing, Meta-DAO only supports “Yes” or “No” markets, and this proposal passing would’ve allowed for multiple “mutually-exclusive outcomes, one of which is fail and the rest of which are other things.”

This would’ve been a huge quality-of-life addition to the DAO as the proposals would no longer be “binary” along with more nuance in the prediction markets of different implementation odds too. He talked about what the value add would be for the DAO, his qualifications, how he talked to the Proph3t in person about this, and gave a brought time scale with “trenches” on him hitting deadlines before the compensation was given to him. Yet, it didn’t pass. Why? Because the compensation he set for himself was too high as he didn’t want to be paid in USDC, he wanted to be paid in $META.

Considering this from Agrippa’s perspective, I would argue that he was rational throughout. He possesses the relevant skillset, a clear value add for the DAO, recognised the connection between the two and then took a speculative gamble on getting paid in the governance token rather than $USDC (profiting highly if it goes up but also losing a lot more if it drops below). However, when I looked at the discussions happening *within* the discord server during this, the overall sentiment was this “We like the idea but because you’re asking for compensation in $META, it means you get paid a lot more than others usually will.”

The image below was Proph3t’s response to the proposal which I would say is quite rational as well. What is there to stop someone else from coming in and bidding a marginally lower "compensation package” and underbidding Agrippa? Nothing, but at the time of writing, no one else has come forward with a similar proposal to build a multi-modal system.

This is why I find crypto fascinating. The idea of Futarchy has been around for over a decade and while it’s been talked about and debated, no one has built out this system. In crypto, you can put these ideas to the test and see first-hand how *actual, global* participants will react. Earlier I mentioned that I don’t personally believe in the Efficient Market Hypothesis (despite having a Masters in Economics) and this is why; it never considers the human aspect of who is behind the screens. In crypto, the *only* part I would argue that lasts and is memorable is those exact human elements.

This is one such experiment of that “human element” meeting “professional analysis” and I think it’s going to be an interesting one to keep an eye out on for that mix alone. This is the future I’d love to see in the space, that of unbridled experimentation.

If you’ve made it this far, thank you for reading and I hope this has been a useful read. You can follow me on Twitter (and now Farcaster) to let me know what you think about this post & don’t forget to subscribe to Page One for your essential crypto readings!

tl;dr: ETF demand overwhelms, ETH’s strength, crypto x AI test pump, UNI’s fee switch & the growing SEC pressure, BTC ordinals explosion & higher for longer

BTC dominance 52% | ETH dominance 19% | DeFi TVL $82B |

Total Crypto Market Cap $2.08T | Stablecoin Supply $139B |

Whew, it feels good to be so back. Both through writing and the price appreciation of our precious tokens. The obvious underlying reason for the continued momentum has been the speculation and demand for BTC, and to a continually growing extent ETH, ETFs.

The decade+ wait of spot BTC ETFs have now been trading for ~30 days and their debut has been a massive success. While initially throttled by GBTC’s liquidity unlock, net inflows to BTC ETFs have drastically surpassed even the most bullish projections. The “sell the news” crowd was initially correct as BTC traded from an approval high of ~50k to 38.5k in the following two weeks subsequent approval, but steady inflows have since enabled BTC to climb back above 50k.

As the calendar turned from January to February, observing the flows into the ETF products along with declining GBTC outflows provided a clear picture that BTC and the entire crypto market were headed higher.

As BitMEX’s data shows, the net inflows began significantly increasing throughout the second week of February. Between February 8th through the 16th, inflows amounted to $3.22B and net outflows have occurred only once since January 25th. Since the products’ launch on January 11th, the cumulative net inflows now sits at a total of $5.51B despite the forced selling of GBTC and the closing/unwind of market participants that had been positioned long into the approval.

Simply put, every possible metric surrounding the launch of BTC’s long awaited spot ETFs signal that the market is headed higher. This doesn’t mean that the repricing higher occurs in the next hour, day, week or even months but what it does mean is that the market currently has a substantial underlying bid while previously massive amounts of GBTC selling are diminishing. Always remember, higher for longer.

Currently, BTC (50.6k-52.99k) & ETH (2.88k-3.03k) are breaking out of the relatively tight ~5% ranges they were previously consolidating in but the general market sentiment somehow appears almost fearful. I’m not sure how it’s possible but there’s a clear price to sentiment mismatch that I will continue to take advantage of by shoving every possible dollar into the market.

Where that money has been concentrated over recent weeks is AI tokens on both ETH & SOL, ETH & BTC ordinals. Since BTC’s spot approval, ETHBTC is up ~16%+ in a clear sign the market is positioning for what’s next. If you had prior doubts, it’s now absolutely clear market participants are onboard with running back the BTC ETF trade with ETH.

I have some slight hesitancy in the ETH ETF will undoubtedly be approved takes I’m not going to ever fight the trends and narratives the market creates. If you’re tradfi, one of these ETF issuers, or any market observer what is your core takeaway from the month+ of BTC ETFs? The obvious answer is that you start accumulating ETH and doing everything in your power to ensure that spot Ethereum ETFs are approved on May 23rd.

The insane volume traded and initial inflows translates to massive fees collected which creates an incredibly enticing carrot for Larry, Fidelity and financial institutions throughout the entire tradfi ecosystem to rally behind. We’re now 3 short months away from the white hot market having the additions of the BTC halving and an ETH ETF approval. Stop fighting the trends, embrace the new structure and realize that the long-term outlook for the space has never been better.

In a market-shocking move, a governance proposal from the Uniswap Foundation appeared Friday morning titled, “Activate Uniswap Protocol Governance”. More specifically, the proposal which will open for UNI holder votes on March 1st, proposes to “upgrade the protocol such that its fee mechanism rewards UNI token holders that have delegated and staked their tokens.”

While there has been endless speculation and governance initiatives along this same line the past, this proposal, to share fee revenue with UNI delegators and stakers, comes directly from the Uniswap Foundation. The UF’s weight was clearly felt through the market reaction as UNI quickly repriced from $7.16 to $12+ while UNI’s market cap expanded from $5.4B to $9.2B in a brief hour. As a result, UNI is now the 16th most valuable token by market cap and adding, but most importantly (so far) keeping, ~$3B worth of market cap appreciation signals a likely governance approval.

As mentioned, UNI fee switch proposals are not a new thing (discussed & proposed since at least 2022) but the market’s reaction & the UF’s influence in creating the proposal are clearly being bought in a classic “this time’s different” scenario. Uniswap Labs, the entity behind Uniswap, has previously blacklisted tokens & addresses, created decentralized alternatives to their front end, said they may share wallet addresses and user information with third parties if litigated or subpoenaed and have shot down any comment, discussion or potential proposal on the “fee switch” for holders as it’s been considered a nonstarter mostly due to antiquated US regulations.

While UNI could’ve hypothetically adopted this model years ago, they simply haven’t entertained that option until now. Protocols sharing revenue with token holders, particularly US based entities, is a potentially massive step forward for the entire crypto ecosystem and UNI, as a market leader, sets the example for countless other protocols.

Admittedly, I’m potentially reading too far between the lines but the significance of UNI’s proposal is clearly being bought with billions of real dollars (sort top performing coins by 7d & 24h and you’ll see DeFi tokens, led by UNI, flooding the list). The UF’s proposal could also fail while meaning absolutely nothing but the market reaction and broader implications are worth considering (and no, it’s not a new paradigm for DeFi tokens pls don’t go buy them after they’ve all gained ~20%+ in the past 24h). This proposal, imo (not a lawyer & NFA), puts further burden on the SEC and slightly improves the likelihood of an ETH ETF approval in May as the regulatory body is increasingly pressured.

UNI’s, and subsequently all applicable tokens, potential fee switch adds subtle pressure to a SEC that is dealing with scrutiny from all angles. This week, Legit Exchange and the Crypto Freedom Alliance of Texas filed the first proactive lawsuit against the SEC by a crypto market participant as they are, “seeking a declaration that secondary market sales of digital assets are not the sales of securities.”

In addition to that lawsuit and UNI’s proposal, optimism continues to grow around Coinbase’s odds of the SEC’s allegations being dismissed and Kraken joined the fight alongside Coinbase and Binance filing a lawsuit of their own.

More importantly, it’s not just the crypto sector that is increasing pressure. Larry Fink is saying we should tokenize everything, the largest bank lobbying groups are joining forces to urge the SEC to repeal the erroneous SAB 121 rule that currently prevents US banks from engaging in the custody of digital assets (“As Bitcoin Rallies, Banks are Pushing US Regulators to Change Crypto Guidance”) & Morgan Stanley is highlighting stablecoins’ ability to strengthen the US dollar’s global dominance by saying,

“Dollar backed stablecoins are set to have a profound impact on the financial sector, potentially reshaping how money is moved across borders. Rather than challenge the dollar’s dominance, their continued evolution and growing acceptance by mainstream financial entities underscore their potential to significantly alter the landscape of global finance and in fact reinforce the dollar as the dominant global currency.”

We’re seeing growing signs of what we’ve been screaming about to what were perceived as deaf ears but it would appear as if they were always listening. This is going to shock you, but as soon as there’s a semblance of regulatory clarity (thankfully enforced by the rule of law of the US courts), financial service companies, banks, and the entire tradfi behemoth want their slice of the crypto pie (aka fees collected on custody & trading products).

Elsewhere, Ethena, the protocol behind the synthetic, decentralized dollar USDe, launched on mainnet this week to a flurry of conversation around its yield projections. Ethena takes stablecoin deposits and returns USDe at the target value of a dollar along with a juicy yield of 24% APY. That APY fluctuates weekly based on the protocols core function of generating yield through the previously large fund dominated trade of cash and carry arbitrage executed through using yield generating staked ETH as collateral to short ETH perpetual futures while collecting the funding rate + stETH yield.

The enticing APY combined with an impressive cohort of backers & the current markets infatuation with points (shards in Ethena’s case) has led to substantial demand. Ethena’s liquidity pools have reached their initial caps, the market cap of USDe has grown to ~$421M in 6 days and Ethena now makes up 5.61% of global ETH open interest. The shard (points) campaign launch is planned to run for 3 months or until USDe reaches $1B of supply (42.1% of the way there after 6 days).

Since Luna’s collapse, people are rightfully dismissing anything that promises high yield attached to a dollar deposit but comparisons between Luna and Ethena are incredibly misguided. While there remain risks to USDe, which are generally applicable to virtually everything in crypto, the team has, imo, properly highlighted them and provided backtested data that should quell the loudest skeptics. FWIW, I’ve personally deposited capital into the protocol and the trend of Ethena’s arbitrage strategy yielding “synthetic dollars” along with other yield bearing stablecoins will only grow moving forward. Ethena and its rapid growth should be the signal to gain a grasp of this sector now more than ever.

Looking ahead to this week, we have ETH Denver taking place and Blast’s highly anticipated L2 launch taking place. Some other things I’m constantly monitoring include:

• BTC Ordinals — It was an impressive week for the BTC ordinal ecosystem as the volume transacted approaches $100M over the last 7d. I’ve previously written about ordinals eventual revival and feel more convicted than ever around that thesis. Fading ordinals in their still infant state will haunt people for years to come. NodeMonkes, the first original 10k pfp project inscribed on BTC, led the way as floor prices reached 0.4 BTC (~$20k) while the other top collections including Bitcoin Puppets, Quantum Cats & RSIC also repriced higher.

• LINK, ONDO & RWAs — Larry’s leading the way with his “tokenize everything” comments. The takeaway from this should be identifying protocols that benefit from the growth of real world assets coming onchain. RWAs, DEPIN & AI are the categories that should see some of the largest growth over the next few years.

• Solana Token Programs — Solana Labs announces new token extensions that “unlock rich native functionality designed for complex behaviors, without compromising on security or scalability”. Potential use cases include new base layer programmability for gaming, DAOs, DeFi, stablecoins, private transactions, optional KYC enforcement, payments & more.

• Crypto x AI — OpenAI trying to raise $7 trillion dollars & Sora’s launch sent Worldcoin and the crypto x AI narrative into hyperdrive. The initial frenzy has since calmed but AI as a general trend & mindshare capture will continue to be up only. The entire AI crypto sector market cap sits at only $17.4B making up sub 1% of the total crypto market cap of $2.1T. There will be endless vaporware to avoid but if I could only long the marketshare of one specific crypto through 2025 the AI sector would be a close second to BTC ordinals.

• Farcaster — I’ll save any ramblings as essentially every newsletter and/or podcast has covered it in recent weeks & simply say that if you have yet to join, change that. Frames sparked the frenzy and while hype endlessly front runs utility in crypto, Farcaster genuinely feels like the first, non-financialized crypto product that could go mainstream. My esteemed colleague terv has started a /replyguys channel that has grown to 8k+ people, read more on that here.

As a reminder, I’m always reachable @_tolks or at tolks@pageone.gg. If you want to sponsor the newsletter & reach an audience of 12.5k+ active market participants, pitch a guest post, tell us about your protocol or to collaborate on anything in general, you can always reach us at @PageOneGG.

funding:

• Hack VC raises $150M for new venture fund focused on crypto & AI

• a16z invests $100M in ETH restaking protocol EigenLayer

• RW3 Ventures raises $60M for early-stage crypto fund

• Analog, blockchain interoperability protocol, raises $16M @ $120M valuation

• DePHY, DePIN infrastructure company, raises undisclosed amount @ $40M val

• Lava Network, infrastructure for modular chain data access, raises $15M Seed

• Architect, crypto trading infrastructure for institutions, raises $12M Seed

• Fordefi, self-custodial MPC wallet company, raises $10M

• Helius, SOL-based developer platform & infra provider, raises $9.5M Series A

• Helika, AI-powered data/analytics for crypto gaming, raises $8M Series A

• Blueprint Finance, native onchain credit protocol, raises $7.5M

• Superform, cross-chain yield marketplace, raises $6.5M Seed

• Flood, order flow management protocol, raises $5.2M Seed

• Superfluid, ETH-based token streaming protocol, raises $5.1M

• Inco, modular, privacy-focused L1, launches testnet, raises $4.5M Seed

• Ultiverse, AI-powered gaming platform, raises $4M through private token sale

• NodeShift, decentralized idle compute platform, raises $3.2M Seed

• INIT Capital, liquidity hooks DeFi money market protocol, raises $3.1M

• Fuzzland, AI-powered smart contract analysis, raises $3M Seed

• Citrea, zero-knowledge BTC rollup, raises $2.7M Seed

news:

• Circle, USDC stablecoin issuer, confidentially files for IPO; Circle also announced they stopped minting USDC on TRON’s TRX blockchain

• USDT issuer Tether acquires $380M of BTC, now owns ~$3.4B worth of BTC; Tether’s reports $2.9B of Q4 profit, $5.4B of excess reserves in attestation report

• PayPal’s stablecoin PYUSD market cap reaches $250M+, sees ~70% growth over the past month

• Visa announces crypto loyalty rewards partnership with SmartMedia Technologies

• CoinShares exercises option to acquire Valkyrie Funds after ETF approval

• Coinbase continues global compliance expansion, partners with African stablecoin exchange Yellow Card

• Block explorer Etherscan acquires Solscan

• Brevan Howard partners with Libre Capital to tokenize their funds

• Bankrupt lender Celsius has distributed $2B worth of crypto to creditors

• MetaMask integrated into Robinhood’s trading platform allowing ease of crypto transfer & direct purchase

• Reddit now holds '“immaterial” amounts of BTC & ETH on its balance sheet

• Ripple plans to acquire Standard Custody & Trust Co. (along with their New York charter) to boost Ripple/XRP’s regulatory qualifications

• Judge approves FTX Estate’s motion to sell 8% Anthropic stake, valued at $1B+

• BTC miner Riot Platforms generated record $281M total revenue in 2023

• Judge approves FTX Estate’s motion to sell 8% Anthropic stake valued at $1.4B+, estate anticipates paying all claims back in full

tokens & protocols:

• ARB — Arbitrum’s Orbit (build L2/L3 chains using ARB) adds support for chains to use custom, or their native token, as the chain gas token; ARB DAO always approves between 25-45M ARB for protocols in Long Term Incentives Program

• MATIC — introduces AggLayer focused on unifying liquidity through ZK proofs

• HNT — partners w/ Telefónica to launch Helium Mobile Hotspots in Mexico

• SNX — deploys v3 of its perps protocol on Coinbase’s Base L2

• STRK — community approves vote to use STRK as native gas token

• FXS — announces FXTL airdrop snapshot will be taken on March 6th

• INJ — releases omnichain domain name service for INJ & SOL wallets

• SOL/FIL — SOL integrates FIL as decentralized storage provider for block history

• Tensorplex Labs — introduces liquid staking token stTAO

• RBN — Aevo, platform for derivs & options plans to open its OP-L2 to protocols

• ONDO — RWA/tokenization platform announces partnership with Aptos (APT)

• ACX — bridging protocol announces intent-based V3

• DUSK — L1 launches incentivized testnet ahead of eventual mainnet

• Berachain — officially launches long awaited public testnet

• Asteroid — Delphi & Astroport launch inscriptions protocol on ATOM

tweets:

Not financial or tax advice. This newsletter is strictly educational and is not investment advice or a solicitation to buy or sell any assets or to make any financial decisions.

The idea of culture is very prevalent in the web3 space. After all, you can argue that it’s this idea of a common tribe that gave outsized mindshare to various tokens & PFP projects that ultimately helped form the broader backbone community of Web3.

“Apes Strong Together”, “LINK Marines”, “Never been comfier in the Huddle”, “XRP Army”, “Dev died? Bullish” and countless other catchphrases throughout the years. At some point, these digital communities (specifically NFT projects) wanted to embody this culture which brought them together in a digital setting and extend that in a physical capacity. That’s where the name “Phygital” arises from; a concept that combines physical objects with digital ownership through NFTs.

BAYC (Bored Ape Yacht Club) were one of the first projects to have a token-gated merch drop. For their initial mint & roadmap, the BAYC founders stated that if 60% of the BAYC supply was sold (each BAYC minted for 0.08 ETH or $240 at the time), they’d unlock the “member exclusive BAYC merch store”. While the original “roadmap” has since become less important, BAYC laid out one of the first roadmaps that conceivably contained Phygital goods. Since then, almost every other NFT project has followed along similar lines in outlining a project roadmap.

Of course, BAYC’s roadmap was released back in April of 2021. Now, almost 3 years later, the landscape for phygital goods has grown exponentially. Not only do we have PFP projects with their own unique physical clothing offerings such as Creature by Danny Cole, Igloo.shop, & Cets to Haus but we also have more “brand only” focussed initiatives like 9dcc by Gmoney, BAD* ENVIRONMENT CLUB by Lite and mmERCH by Colby Mugrabi which reverse the script by bringing IRL culture on-chain. In addition, we certainly can’t omit Nike’s acquisition of RTFKT which remains one of the biggest named acquisitions in the space.

If you want to become a full digital native, there are services like DressX which markets themselves as “the largest metacloset of digital-only clothes”. After purchase, DressX will fit these avant-styled clothes on any photo of yours allowing you to post it on the various social media sites.

After the connection was made between Fashion & Blockchain, which has subsequently been proven, it wasn’t just Nike that wanted to be involved. Apart from luxury houses entering the foray like Gucci, Burberry & LV, we’ve also seen backend efforts being worked on such as the Aura Blockchain Consortium. Startups around this niche are thriving too with IYK raising nearly $17m to expand their core mission which they state as “IYK provides tailored building blocks to build your digi-physical wwworld”.

Before we progress further, a key distinction needs to be made. Projects offering merch or items behind a token-gated setting wouldn’t necessarily count as a “phygital good”. A phygital good only applies IF the item you physically have also has an NFT counterpart.

Tokengated Drops =/= Phygital Goods

Without a shadow of a doubt, both the appetite & demand for a phygital future are clear and the sector is primed for growth moving forward. However, we need to take a step back. For the keen-eyed reader, you will have noticed that most of the projects I’ve discussed sell their items to customers in a B2C (Business-to-Customer) setting. That’s not the issue. The issue arises on who the intended target audience is.

Phygital goods on the surface seem like a great idea. You can keep track of ownership and authenticity from the point of origin til the end of its life without the risk of “contamination”. This is the key argument used in favour of blockchain art, which notably eliminates centuries-long problems in the art world such as verifiable past ownership, future appraisal value, transportation and artist royalties.

With the same logic and benefits now being applied to phygital goods, unless you’re planning on selling these items, what purpose is being achieved for the end user that is buying these items directly from the brand except that of a marketing tool? What would you say is the purpose of such a piece of tech in fashion?

You could make an argument that this tech allows for the authentication of goods which helps the end customer because a lot of these goods are of a limited nature and thus going to be more valuable in the future. This would be a key tool in the “fashion-flipping” industry and it would help the customer who buys in the secondary market to know that the product is genuine.

After all, that is how the sneaker reselling industry operates and if you were around for the last cycle, there was an abundance of such “sneakerheads” who evolved from flipping sneakers with the use of custom bots to creating & using NFT-centered bots.

If you didn’t already know, the first & best NFT minting bots were created by the same people who create/update sneaker reselling bots. These are the same bot devs who bypass the security measures put in place by multi-billion dollar corporations who are actively trying to kill this endeavour yet continue to have difficulties with it. NFT flippers who didn’t adopt to this never stood a chance against the bots. This reason, botting, is essentially solely responsible for the creation/growth of “white-listing” NFT mints which are almost a given in today’s landscape.

Their success was so large, even the founders of prominent “flipping” groups like A Hidden Society launched their own PFP projects such as Sneaky Vampire Syndicate. To date the project has achieved a cool 22,800 ETH ($63m if we use Today’s ETH price) in trading volume.

For the most part, the participants in the sneaker reselling industry are on the younger side. With an abundance of free time combined with being adept with the relevant technology & software, & a lack of money with the potential of “earning money from your computer”, you can start to empathize with a lot of these participants behavior and understand why they’d enter the NFT/Phygital space. While a lot of these shoes retail for somewhat reasonable prices, the secondary markets have no such cap.

The allure of making money from your PC through shoes or any “hyped items” aside, the same people are engrossed in this industry and often want to own these same items. Factor in that 99% of the population will not secure these for the retail price and these items quickly achieve the status of Veblen Goods and become status symbols in their own right.

If you were to wear either these off-whites, Red-Octobers, Self-Lacing Mags or even something as relatively simple as the Dior Jordan Highs in any urban city or a high-density area you are bound to get a lot of attention, period.

With the existence of these grails, especially if you’re into reselling or just in a place where sneaker culture is popular (such as high school, university or a convention) “legit checks” (LCs) become an everyday occurrence. As the name implies, it is where your shoes are checked and seen if they are real or not so you can get judged on whether you’ll be praised for securing some rare kicks or you’re going to get clowned on for wearing fakes. Mind you, there isn’t a “fool-proof process” to determine whether your shoes are real or not because manufacturing defects & quality checks are known to be hit-and-miss, but it doesn’t stop this from happening.

For me (and I imagine this is true for most adults), most would not even begin to engage with these LCs because why would you wear something that you don’t like or isn’t your style? Does it matter if the items you wear aren’t authentic but you liked the style of it enough to get a replica (reps) for yourself?

Evidently, yes. It’s a conundrum within the younger demographic.

It’s a big enough problem that the producers of these reps are putting in extra effort to make these products as close to the real deal. Then, they work with the overarching rep community to better pass using community-sourced “Quality Checks”. In fact, they’ve gotten so good that you won’t get “called out” on them (which again, only matters to a very small subset of people).

The retail price of this shoe was $150. On the secondary market, these shoes sell on average for $1000. The replicas on the other hand cost $67 (w/o shipping, with shipping they’re $90-125).

Since the replica manufacturers have also been around for more than a decade, they’ve essentially nailed the anatomy of the “perfect shoe”; materials used, the feel, embroidery and even the sole down to a T.

For most people, $1000 vs $67 is a no-brainer deal. Both of these pairs look identical while having a difference of nearly $900. If you simply care for the design and look of the shoe, who is on the losing side of this trade?

Nike (nor Travis Scott in this instance) will never see a penny from the sale of this shoe on the secondary market. They’ve already recouped their costs and even profited from the retail pair selling out. The replicas look almost identical with some “differences” that can only be seen from a microscopic level, which is impossible to do if you’re wearing them and don’t take your shoes off for random strangers to LC you. The only person that would lose in this deal is the flippers themselves who are charging the exorbitant markup and will now have to sell these for less than the “secondary market fair value” but still multiples of the retail price they paid.

Again, this is a trade that most rational people will make but we’re not talking about most rational people and that’s the crux of this issue.

For the most part, the people who would care about the “authenticity of the products” are the ones who are selling these for a higher price than they bought or the person buying it from these secondary exchanges for elevated prices. After all, getting scammed is never a fun experience. But if you know the pair you are buying is fake and it’s cheaper, who ultimately loses?

btw, the shoe on the right was the retail (real) pair.

Having grown up in both the UK and Asia throughout my schooling years, it was almost an unwritten law that every kid would wear a school uniform until they attend college/sixth-form (the American equivalent would roughly be Junior High).

The reasoning behind this is also relatively sound. If every kid is dressed in the same clothes, then you would not be able to differentiate between which students come from struggling households and which are from wealthy. Not only would this help with the integration of kids from a younger age but it would be one less worry to combat bullying (wealth related at least). Again, if a kid is adamant about bullying, as the age-old adage goes, “where there is a will, there is a way” uniform or not.

From what I understand, this is not the case in other Western countries (though I’ll stick with the US for the sake of the example). Atlanta (the TV show) had an entire episode dedicated to this topic in Season 2 titled “FUBU”.

In a world where Social Media is neither new tech nor scarcely populated as it has been for the generation prior, this also fundamentally changes how people who have grown up with this as the norm interact with each other.

The power to blast anyone on a global scale, which previously was only local, changes the dynamic as well. Previously, if someone was “called out” for their shoes or clothes in a school setting, it would be contained in the local environment. Now, however, the risk lies in spreading throughout other communities beyond geographical borders to other similar communities where LCs are the norm.

Cat wrote about this topic back in 2021 in his article titled “ONLINE IDENTITY, NFTS, HUMAN REASONING, MARKETS” in which he very aptly states that:

Web3 is in a bit of a precarious state where the pendulum swings between “we’re going to be powering new and innovative experiences” to “we’re going to use Web2 principles for maximum extraction”. I’m personally a fan of the earlier statement but as I’ve highlighted so far, phygital goods are overwhelmingly swinging more towards the latter.

I’ve tried to identify a clear use case for Phygital goods which benefits the end user and aside from the luxury fashion space, I’m failing to come up with a clear “one line” thesis for them. Especially not at scale (which is the ultimate goal of web3 or purports to be).

The only case I came up with for phygital goods in the capacity of retail clothing is nothing short of a 1984 dystopian future where your identity is linked to the clothes you wear in a surveillance state with zero privacy. Yikes.

This issue gets compounded further when you ask the question “If I’m never selling my items, what’s the point of this?”. Aside from authentication, there isn’t anything that is being done or planned to fully utilise the medium.

This is an excerpt from a Decrypt article which was covering the ”10KTF x Gucci” collaboration mentioned earlier. In the 4 separate instances of “luxury drops” that have been listed here, aside from the utility of “spending more money on even more exclusive items”, what other value is being unlocked besides “on-chain Flexing”?

Even if we account for this lack of utility to being early in the adoption curve, how can we be sure that this technology isn’t developed in the future and doesn’t restrict users?

Can we be sure that a brand won’t blacklist certain “phygital” goods from people they don’t want to be associated with the brand after a sale has been made? While the NFT can’t be moved (it technically can if you program it that way), the image or “content” of it can be changed. This also isn’t something which is out of the question. Ferrari famously maintains a blacklist of celebrities who can not own a Ferrari because it “doesn’t fit their brand image”.

Coming back to more Crypto Centric brands that are doing their own thing, as mentioned earlier, 9DCC is creating a network of holders who not only use the chips for provenance but also in games that only other holders can play and engage with.

They’re very upfront about what they want, and how they want it and you as a consumer have a choice to take part in this. This is unique, achieves a very strong USP for the brand as a whole and more importantly is for users who understand the tech & how it can be used for novel experiences.

For a space that is obsessed with the idea of fostering a community, is the premise of building a community solely based on the value of their assets or their net worth a good foundation? To delve deeper, is developing tools, goods or services to alienate people not part of the community worth it?

For some, that’s going to be a resounding yes and that’s fine because you know what kind of deal or contract of sorts you’re entering into.

That being said, we have to be careful with the type of foundation being laid. The beginning of social media had humble roots too. The same sites are now getting questioned on their overreach and deliberate design choices to retain and extract maximum profit, even after knowing that these are going to negative impact on kids.

“Web3” finds itself in a similar state. The adoption curve is still very much in the early stages and this means that if we let a bad or harmful foundation evolve, we’re going to see the ramifications of it in the worst way possible in the not-so-distant future.

Thanks to Tolks & Tervo for their help with editing and cleaning up this article.

If you’ve made it this far, thank you for reading and I hope this has been a useful read. You can follow me on Twitter (and now Farcaster) to let me know what you think about this post & don’t forget to subscribe to Page One for your essential crypto readings!

While the internet is a vast place, we tend to find much smaller and concentrated segments of the void to reside where we ultimately spend most of our time. For some, this is due to enjoyment, while for others it’s learning. PageOne & Farcaster’s /replyguys could very well be one of those places & we deeply appreciate it if that’s the case ❤️. We have big plans for 2024, even if we’re starting them a month late, so expect routine coverage of the things you’ve come to enjoy from P1 moving forward!

Since I could use the internet, I can confidently say that only one website has given me continuous value and taught me how things work ; ̷4̷c̷h̷a̷n̷ Youtube.

YouTube is one of the most information-dense platforms on the internet as you can find hundreds, if not thousands, of hours of content on extremely niche topics from people very knowledgeable in their chosen fields who upload this knowledge at no cost, absolutely free for everyone to see. It’s essentially a “public good”.

One genre of videos I devour is that of Video Essays. This ranges from building Iconic Dioramas from scratch, the Influence of H.R. Giger's art style, Blueprint to killing a God or even NewJeans lore.

A couple of months ago, I came across a video essay on Financial History. More specifically, it was solely based on Mrs. Watanabe. That video is the reason for this article but I’ve been ruminating on this thought process for a while too.

Who is Mrs. Watanabe?

Mrs. Watanabe is not a single person. It’s a personification of the Japanese housewife speculators, who ultimately persevered enough to affect international markets. During the economic downturn in Japan in the 1990s, most families were affected with a severe lack of money ultimately leading to the interest rates in Japan falling close to 0. As a result, the little amounts they did have were now not growing either.

In Asia, it’s very common for the women of families to be in control of everything “home” which includes household spending/saving. They’re homemakers and anything that affected the sanctity of their families was an issue. Taking matters into their own hands, they embarked on their journey to financial empowerment and from that they utilized an investment strategy known as “Carry Trading” in the Forex markets.

In a nutshell, they would borrow money with a very low interest rate (in this case, the Japanese Yen) and they would use that to invest in a stronger currency with higher interest rates (which was mainly Australian Dollars). The difference in interest rates would be their profit and it wasn’t long before they started to earn meaningful amounts (often more than their husbands). Collectively Mrs. Watanabe controlled over 54% of the Japanese household assets (through cash or bank deposits). As such, it wasn’t long before hedge funds around the world began to copy-trade Mrs. Watanabe (in a similar fashion to those tracking anon ETH addresses).

How impactful are Mrs. Watanabe? It’s estimated that they account for 28% of global currency trade.

Mrs. Watanabe have matured over the years too. Back in 2017 (when BTC was declared legal tender by the Japanese Government), 40% of all Asian crypto trades were based on the Japanese Yen. Mrs. Watanabe likely fueled more of the now decade+ crypto rally than one might think while most people are still unaware of their existence.

What lessons can we learn from Mrs Watanabe?

1. Constant Learning

   1. The success that Mrs. Watanabe achieved was mainly because they were open to learning and dedicated themselves to the financial markets. No question was too embarrassing to ask and no area was left uncovered. Mrs. Watanabe ultimately cared about learning to better themself, not to appear better for the sake of appearances.

2. Discipline and Risk Management

   1. While Mrs. Watanabe could’ve been like your average shitcoin purveyor and 100x leveragooor with a stop loss into the Yen carry trade, they were the pillars of their homes and opted for proper risk management with proper stop losses and healthy risk-taking. After all, they value the stability of their families.

3. Adaptability

   1. The markets never stayed the same and to only rely on one style of trading would not be sustainable. This was tested during both the 1998 Russian Currency Crisis and the 2008 Financial Crisis. Different situations call for different strategies as there is no one golden strategy that works for everything. This is aptly applicable to the current crypto markets as narratives and trends can shift in hours while the entire space operates in something akin to dog-to-human years when compared to TardFi markets.

4. Helping Your Neighbours

   1. Mrs. Watanabe, while starting individually, grew and compounded as a collective where their trades were not only monitored but also copied. It’s an ecosystem of like-minded individuals who share this experience.

Apart from being a story, you can tell your friends to pretend you’re well-informed, there are some lessons which should be applied to crypto. Starting to piece together the lessons we learn from Mrs. Watanabe, you’d be surprised to find out that these kinds of ecosystem spurts occur all the time, and many of them you may even recognize even if you didn’t know it:

• The GameStop short-squeeze

• The 2011 Eve Online “Summer of Rage”

• The Recently concluded SAG-AFTRA strike

Community alignment for a common goal and sharing resources to lift & support each other makes this work and it’s one of the best things to witness when they ultimately occur. Collectively for crypto, while you could argue a specific coin going up is fantastic, the energy behind that is selfish and it doesn’t inspire others in quite the same way.

The closest (I think) we got to this moment within crypto would be “P2E (Play to Earn) summer” through the scholarship program that the Axie community pioneered. For those unaware, a scholarship was possible because earlier members of the Axie Ecosystem had an abundance of Axies that they weren’t using. So while they would custody the Axies (in an address they controlled), they could give the connect game account (which would use an email & password combo) to play the game and any subsequent winnings would be shared between the player and the account owner.
To say it was mutually beneficial for both parties would be an understatement.

This is what ultimately allowed Axie Infinity to gross over $1B in revenue, becoming the highest-ever earning crypto game (which remains unchanged) as of writing this. While the effects of the bear market did not exclude the Axies, signs of market revival are here after nearly 2 years of consistent shipping from Sky Mavis; This is their 3rd crypto cycle after all. Only last week did we see one of the rarest Axies being sold for nearly $250k.

Ultimately, this is what I believe makes the space refreshing, unpredictable and inescapable. To be able to interact, talk and even befriend people from the unlikeliest walks of life connected through an industry which is built on the foundation of transparency and financial reform. Of course, the shitposts and memes are great too.

There exists no greater mind share of “playground” of information and experience as condensed and pure in energy as you can find within the confines of CT. Ultimately, I’d like to think that Mrs. Watanabe would be proud of an ecosystem that consistently works together, shares information publicly instead of behind paywalls and builds towards the greater good while constantly working on the path to secure financial freedom for themselves and their families.

I’d also like to thank Tolks & Tervo for their help with editing and cleaning up this article.

If you’ve made it this far, thank you for reading and I hope this has been a useful read. You can follow me on Twitter (and now Farcaster) to let me know what you think about this post & don’t forget to subscribe to Page One for your essential crypto readings!

Sources:

1. https://asia.nikkei.com/Business/Markets/Currencies/Mrs.-Watanabe-had-a-change-of-heart-in-2022-Bank-of-Japan-report

2. https://fbs.com/blog/trading-instead-of-cooking-a-dinner-240

3. https://medium.com/@nahian.momin/mrs-watanabe-a-remarkable-tale-of-financial-ingenuity-f3562f4d2295

4. https://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/15z89vf/til_mrs_watanabe_is_a_collection_of_thousands_of/

5. https://www.fxclearing.com/blog/mrs-watanabe

tl;dr: SOL’s dominant run, parallelization takes center stage, endless tailwinds remain, ETF approval imminent, inflows & core metrics remain healthy & *all* ETH is locked

BTC dominance 52% | ETH dominance 17% | DeFi TVL $104B | Total Crypto Market Cap $1.8T | Stablecoin Supply $131B | SOL dominance 2.75%

Happy New Year & cheers to everything in store for 2024 to all!! Apologies for the brief hiatus, but after an exhausting sprint throughout the entirety of Q4 I took the most time away from screens in the previous week then I have since before covid (damn that was almost 4 years ago).

Anyway, it’s hard to comprehend how back Page One is & we’re deeply focused on dominating 2024 through the same thing we’ve always done: provide an inside, no bullshit look at what we’re doing/seeing without the usual newsletter fluff and/or corporate wrapping. So with that out of the way, let’s dig in.

It’s been a month (apologies again) since my last writing as I’ve instead hyper focused on the opportunities the market has endlessly provided since October 1st. On October 1st, I released a Round Tripping post that detailed the case for becoming hyper bullish by saying:

“While the endless range and time-based capitulation continue, there are several reasons to believe that BTC, along with the entire market, *should* finally push up and through 30k+…From my understanding, the likeliest outcome of the years long saga that is a spot BTC ETF finally concludes with the approval of numerous ETFs on/around ARK’s final deadline date of January 10th, 2024…Combining all of the above, we’re now likely ~3 months away from the first ever spot BTC ETF approval, ~7 months away from the BTC halving and potentially ~12-14 months away from spot ETH ETF approval. Does anyone really want to be selling coins at these prices? The time to be structurally bearish has come and gone.“

This isn’t to pat myself on the back, rather it’s a reminder of what’s caused the endless rally of the past 3 months while highlighting the unique nature of it providing a clear potential “end date” that is now a week away. This is of course also prescient because the entire conversation on CT for the past ~two weeks has been centered around what happens on and shortly after the ETF approval date? How deep is the sell the news event everyone seems to be anticipating?

As of this morning, James Seyffart tweeted the above image of the current state of the core 11 spot BTC ETF filers saying that all signs point to “approval orders in that Jan 8 to Jan 10 window.” Over the past 30 days, BTC had been oscillating in a ~10% range until yesterday as it broke the range to the upside and closed convincingly above 45k. So, what’s next?

IMO, the two key determining factors to answer that question unfortunately remain in the relatively unknown state. The first, what is the timeframe between ETF approval and the actual launch of the products? While there’s currently no set timeline, our favorite Bloomberg ETF analyst James Seyffart, thinks “the gap [from approval to launch] will be measured in days NOT weeks.” Additionally, options on the launching BTC ETFs should “happen quickly”.

Secondly, and more important for continuation of price appreciation down the line, what do the inflows to the various products look like? Of course, the answer to this question is impossible to know, but I’d argue the constant bid (until today) on COIN, MSTR & BTC miner stocks combined with the CME BTC premium, futures open interest & options open interest signals that not only is TradFi front running prices ahead of an eventual approval, but that they’re significantly short, mid and long term underexposed to an asset that is going to be endlessly shilled by the world’s largest financial institutions.

As for the endless shilling that’s going to occur, if the time to launch the ETF is days after approva, I’m not sure the broad market calling for a classic sell the news event is prepared for the onslaught of marketing and connections the issuers are waiting to deploy. Andrew Kang and others have said it better than I ever could, so I’d highly recommend viewing his tweet and the extended thoughts he’s quote tweeting.

On the other end of the equation, their are endless BTC holders that have bought throughout 2023 sitting on impressive unrealized gains and some of the most OG and respected traders/minds I’ve been lucky enough to talk to and read are convinced of a significant sell the news event. Additionally, an added wrinkle includes a Reuters report from last Friday noted that, “the SEC may notify issuers as soon as Tuesday or Wednesday that they have been cleared to launch the following week.” If confirmation is known sometime *this week* then the sell the news correction could be a bit more significant as there’s more time between eventual launch to offload. I realize presenting the two arguments without a definitive right answer might seem pointless, but both sides are worth considering.

In addition to considering, you could simply join me on the comfy side of realizing that no one is forcing you to sell to hypothetically buyback lower, no one is forcing you to trade the event, and essentially everyone realizes that this is one of the most impactful events in crypto’s history and you could simply hold spot, enjoy how far this still nascent space has come and look forward to the years of price appreciation ahead!

With that being said, if I had to make a prediction, I think that the approval will send BTC to ~50k, a retrace to ~40k for a ~20% down move will occur relatively shortly after but the time from approval to launch and onslaught of marketing/shilling from the world’s largest financial institutions will result in a relative V recovery back to 45kish leaving those who increasingly want to buy mid-to-low 30ks sidelined. Hold spot, relax, enjoy how far we’ve come, prepare capital to buy strong alt dips, realize that the asset class has never had a catalyst of this nature and internalize the statement of higher for longer.

While the market has been hyper-focused on the ETF launch and its resulting implications, there’s been endless lively developments throughout the core crypto ecosystems including:

• SOL’s World — relative outperformance has slowed since Christmas, but the story of 2023, & December specifically, remains SOL as its ecosystem enters the DeFi Summer of ETH stage; SOL metrics exploded throughout December as SOL 24H DEX volume flipped ETH for the first time ever, SOL flipped ETH in 7d & 30d NFT volume for the first time ever, Solana-based USDC becomes top stablecoin by transaction volume

• EVM Parallelization — as Keone, the founder of our friends over at Monad says, the list of parallel EVM chains as of 2 months was singular: Monad. As of today, that list includes: Monad, Avalanche, Polygon, Sei, Scroll & Neon — led by SOL’s resurgence, the focus on the need to optimize for parallelization has drastically benefitted NEON & SEI in recent weeks; expect this trend to continue throughout 2024 & put into hyperdrive from the eventual launch of our friends at Monad

• Inflows & Volumes — the weekly crypto asset inflows into crypto ETPs continues to remain healthy, albeit slowing a bit & the growth of the TVL of stablecoins + total market cap has remained uponly; stablecoin TVL is up to 100B from ~63B in September while the stable market cap has climbed 8B from the 2023 lows of ~123B; in addition, monthly crypto exchange trading volume hit $1.1T in December, breaching $1T for the first time since September of 2022. Binance led the way with a 39.3% share of total volume, quelling any doubts about their staying power after CZ’s guilty plea.

• BTC fees — as a result of the ongoing development of BRC-20s, inscriptions, and ordinals, the fees and long-term network sustainability of the network have gone parabolic in recent months with BTC miner revenue reaching ATHs in transaction fees and BTC convincingly passing ETH in transaction fees for a month+

  

• FTX Estate — Zaheer (@SplitCapital) & his team breakdown what the FTX Estate has sold through December 8th. Court documents show they’ve sold $1.8B worth of crypto & have somewhere around ~$1B left, likely denominated entirely in SOL (181M), BTC (661M) & ETH (187M); more importantly, FTX claims, once written to 0, are now trading as high as 73 cents on the dollar with every dollar returned to claim owners potentially further fueling the crypto asset class when reentered

• ETH Locked & Onchain Drought — after raising their recent restaking caps, EigenLayer now has 608k ETH (~$1.4B) locked in their protocol, Blast’s TVL has breached $1B, Manta Network has locked $300M & there’s another ~$67B (some rehypothecated through Eigen) of ETH being staked; as a result, the onchain ETH ecosystem has been quiet for the past ~2 months, something that should change with the launch and unlock of the protocols listed

• Points — there seems to be a growing fuss about the tireless nature of protocols launching points programs them, but they are clearly “this cycle’s top user acquisition tool like 2020’s yield farming without emitting highly inflationary tokens + leave some control to protocols for incentivizing user behavior as per their needs (revenues, ideally)” — imo after the shitshow that was the first 3 quarters of 2023, we should be generally thankful of the ever-growing number of points programs and future opportunities

• Airdrops — one of the key tailwinds I’ve noted in recent months is the plethora of airdrops reigning free money in various ecosystem participants. Since then, JTO provided a massive stimulus to the SOL ecosystem, something that Jupiter, Wormhole & Mrgnfi (+ others) will also do soon; StarkNet & LayerZero have also confirmed airdrops in Q1 of 2024 largely benefitting the ETH ecosystem & Celestia + Dymension have rewarded cross chain participants of ETH, SOL & ATOM, a trend that will only increase as the modular blockchain vision ever-expands throughout 2024

• Dencun — the next major ETH upgrade which includes EIP-4844 will be live on testnet January 17th, if testnet upgrades are successful it should be live on mainnet in mid-March; EIP-4844 introduces blobs & promises to eventually reduce L2 transaction cost in combination with protodanksharding — as a result of this news, and people positioning/rotating to ETH & ETH beta ahead of the narrative shift for the ETH ETF which we’ll explore more in depth on Sunday, Arbitrum’s ARB token has entered price discovery, Optimism’s OP has continually appreciated & MINA’s zk L2 is becoming a CT cult coin; expect this narrative to only grow in the coming weeks/months

As a reminder, the P1 team is always reachable at contact@pageone.gg. If you want to sponsor the newsletter & reach an audience of 12k+ active market participants, pitch a guest post, tell us about your protocol or to collaborate on anything in general, you can always reach us there or @PageOneGG.

funding:

• Wormhole, cross-chain bridging platform, raises $225M @ $2.5B valuation

• Web3 arm of Japanese messaging app LINE raises $140M

• Andalusia Labs raises $48M @ a $1B+ valuation; announces Karak Network, “the only ETH L2 with native risk management, restaking & AI infrastructure”

• DUST Identity, physical to digital authentication company, raises $40M Series B

• GFO-X, “UK’s first regulated and centrally cleared trading venue dedicated to digital asset derivatives”, raises $30M Series B

• Canaan, Chinese BTC miner manufacturer, raises $25M

• Dynamic Labs, wallet abstraction & authentication, raises $13.5M Series A

• Nonco, digital asset brokerage firm, raises $10M seed

• Coinchange, DeFi yield platform, raises $10M

• Lolli, BTC cashback & rewards company, raises $8M Series B

• OCEAN, decentralized BTC mining pool company, raises $6.2M seed

• Metagood, BTC ordinals marketplace, raises $5M seed

• MYX, decentralized derivatives protocol, raises $5M seed @ $50M valuation

• Wynd Network, decentralized web scraping network, raises $3.5M seed

• Gacha Monsters, Japan gaming startup, raises $3M seed from Animoca

• nftperp, perpetual NFT futures trading platform, raises $3M Series A

news:

• Saylor buys 14.62k BTC for $165M throughout December, files to sell $216M more of MSTR to presumably acquire more BTC

• Coinbase launching RWA tokenization platform licensed in Abu Dhabi, the project is built own its ETH L2 Base; Coinbase secures crypto licenses in France

• CF Benchmark launches Staking Reward Rate Series for institutional clients, provides investors with reward rates from PoS chains

• Custody firm Copper launches digital asset brokerage platform for institutional trading in the UAE

• Barry Silbert & Mark Murphy resign from Grayscale’s board

• FTX debtors granted approval to start selling $744M worth of Grayscale & Bitwise shares, mainly includes $597M worth of GBTC & $87M worth of ETHE

• Celsius begins opening withdrawals for some claim holders, 58.3k users holding ~$210M worth of assets will be able to withdraw 72.5% of their claims

• NYDFS approves Paxos stablecoin expansion to Solana, to launch on January 17th

tokens & protocols:

• MKR — planning to “redominate 1:24.00 (5c/token) & rebrand to a new name

• INJ — announces inSVM, the first Solana SVM rollup for the IBC/INJ ecosystem

• DYDX — begins distributing rewards (in USDC) accrued from trading to users

• JTO — Jito Labs airdrops their MEV + liquid staking protocol token on SOL

• WLD — announces World ID 2.0, enables apps to verify real users w/ World ID

• SEI — plans to add EVM support in v2 upgrade sometime in Q2 2024

• JUP — SOL aggregator/perps/dca/limit + more protocol confirms Jan. airdrop

• COIN — continues rally along side crypto & ETF hype, up 53% last 30 days

• RUNE — THORChain partners with Ordiswap (ORDS) to bring liquidity to BRC20s

• FXS — upcoming L2 will have “unique airdrop/points system”, launch in January

• SNX — governance votes to end token inflation, rollout buybacks & burns

• LSK — will transition to to an ETH L2 powered by Optimism’s OP stack in 2024

• METIS — ETH L2 launches $110M ecosystem fund

• EigenLayer — increases ETH staking deposit caps, TVL surpasses $1B

• Starknet — confirms STRK token snapshot, no timetable confirmation though

• Layer Zero — officially confirms token, says launch will be in “early 2024”

• Ondo Finance — RWA leader on ETH expands tokenized treasuries to SOL

• Symbiogenesis — Square Enix to launch anticipated browser-based ETH & MATIC game on December 21st

around the ecosystem:

• Messari’s Ryan Selkis publishes his annual Crypto Theses, now live for everyone

• Redphonecrypto’s annual 69 Dreams & Delusions for the year ahead

• Vitalik releases an updated ETH roadmap diagram for 2023 & beyond

• Vitalik also pens an excellent essay, “Make Ethereum cypherpunk again”

tweets:

Not financial or tax advice. This newsletter is strictly educational and is not investment advice or a solicitation to buy or sell any assets or to make any financial decisions.

If you’ve been reading PageOne for a while, you will know of an article I posted in March called “Community-as-a-Service”. If you haven’t already, I’d urge you to read it. Call me biased but I think it’s fantastic.

The idea of Community is an interesting one. It’s more often than not intangible and simply looking at the number of followers or members rarely provides a clear picture of a strong community.

Especially in crypto, if a project has a large community that only talks about the ticker price, they’re often regarded as delusional bagholders who are shilling their bags to the masses to realise profits. There's nothing wrong with that but that’s not representative of the “community” aspect we’re most interested in and want to explore. The delusional ticker price “communities” eventually become filled with jaded bagholders as the price constantly trickles lower, $SAFEMOON army roll call anyone?

As you will have gauged from the title of this article, this is all a funnel leading to what is arguably one of the most important things that have been created as a result of the internet; Memes.

While normally you would expect a “gotcha” moment coming from a passage like that, there isn’t a gag to be had. Memes are important. They’re indicative of a lot of things, which we’ll get into below, but to say that internet culture and to a bigger extent Memes inspire everyday culture would be an understatement. With so much talk about “Memes”, it would be a good time to define it. While I could use the 1976 Version by Richard Dawkins from his Book The Selfish Gene, I’m not an NPC. I’m going to break it down to what we mostly refer to as a meme in its simplest concept:

“A meme is the fastest way to put an idea in someones head”

If you really want to go down an esoteric rabbit hole, here is a video breaking down how President Trump came into power using Memes. This is also where the previous quote was pulled from and is an interesting watch regardless.

A week or so ago, I tweeted out the following and hopefully, you see where I’m going with this. Having worked on this a bit, this article is a cleaned-up version of the thesis, which I will now refer to as “Memetic Backed Value” or “MBV” for short. As a bonus for all the PageOne readers, I’ll be doing so with Bill, the Head Cultist at one of the most anticipated crypto protocol launches of 2024, Monad.

Why?

Both of us are Community Maxis.

“Boffin” I hear you ask.

“If you’re having conversations with head honcho Bill, wouldn’t it make sense to talk about fundamentals ofthe tech? Such as Monad’s decentralised goals, Portability & Core Composability, their parallelization of the EVM or how they aim to superscale for the future?”

I could, but every threadooor on Twitter has you covered to a level of detail which I never get into. I like to talk about the *actual* fundamentals after all.

Starting with the basics, what would Bill define as a community? In a tweet that talks about this, Bill explains what he thinks is a community.

Community is a conscious and steady effort over long periods and it’s usually centred around a core belief that is shared by the group. As Bill had a very clear vision of what he wanted in terms of community, I asked him what his initial plans were before Monad went public.

The Monad community plan is “community is the product”

The idea that the community itself should have intrinsic value - The relationships, the network, the entertainment etc.

However, community is an emergent force. You can’t just work “on” the community and plan from afar, you need to work “in” the community and react in real time.

Things need to be tested before they gain adoption.

Sometimes to expedite this process you can take tested ideas and implement them after tweaking slightly, and this is how we arrived at

EVM/ACC

What is EVM/ACC?

EVM/ACC is a branch of Effective Accelerationism, (Or e/acc as you might have seen on Twitter (including my username)). The basic idea of e/acc is that technology companies should innovate faster with less opposition from “decels” or “decelerationists” — folks like AI safety advocates and regulators who want to slow the growth of technology.

It’s another rabbit hole to get lost in (and hopefully a future P1 article), but for the sake of this article, EVM/ACC is all about accelerating the Ethereum virtual machine. Monad aims to support 10k+ Transactions per second, with the aid of parallel execution and superscalar pipelining. Hence, EVM/ACC. Pretty simple.

Coming back to the core concept of “A meme is the fastest way to put an idea in someone’s head” the guys at Monad (or even the community) have banded around Pepe, or more specifically, Purple Pepe.

Bill says:

Both (EVM/ACC & Purple Pepe) of these existed before Monad, they were lindy memes, and so with a little bit of tweaking we could utilise them to reflect our beliefs and community.

It’s incredibly hard to make a meme happen, as the majority of them emerge out of nowhere and can’t be forced. We did try top down methodology with mascot creation etc, but the purple pepe is very accessible and allows for quick creation and iteration from the community.

Memes in crypto aren’t anything new. Hell, a majority of the coins launched are meme coins (with a new shitcoin launched whenever something “happens”. $GFY, $BENANCE, $GROK and so many more) and this year alone we’ve seen $PEPE breach the $1b market cap, and $DOGE is the 10th most valuable cryptocurrency in the world. However, with these, there is a fundamental difference.

However, No one buys/holds these tokens because they believe in the technology or the “utility” they’re seemingly teasing. It’s simply speculating on “Numba go up” and “Wen rich”. There is a good article on this by Web3.com Ventures, whose article name is similar to the name of this article.

MBV is different from pure meme coins.

How?

After trying to answer this exact question since I originally tweeted my thesis, I believe the answer to be “Adaptability/Human Effort”.

We have the base meme and that’s good enough for most things. Make them as emotes or stickers, share them with your friends on some posts or even launch a shitcoin associated with it. That’s a pure meme.

Did you know that Molondak of Monad has a lore that is as old as time? Now you do.

MBV would be taking an existing meme and then repurposing it to fit the community. This is what Monad does very well with the aforementioned Pepe repurposification.

The core theme which is added is that of exploration. Exploring unchartered waters, exploring how to be better yourself, exploring the bleeding edge of innovation and of course, exploring what it means to be part of the community. It’s a brotherhood (or a cult, if we are to take Bill’s own words).

We kinda isolated ourselves by being locked and having stringent methods for getting in. This has allowed us to develop a really strong culture. There are also prevailing narratives and ideas about crypto that we are challenging, and so these things combine into an almost cult-like experience.

However cults tend to excessively control members, whereas we take the opposite approach. We just aim to provide a high quality substrate for interconnectivity and occasionally suggest directions of attention that are ideally enjoyable and beneficial for members to engage in, then anything positive that comes out of that is a bonus.

We also don’t really demand adherence to our beliefs, but rather let people come around to it in their own time. We’re very open in our support for all types of different and authentic crypto scaling methodologies, even if we do joke about people being a traitor for using them, lmao.

“What’s next for Monad?” I hear you ask without anyone except me muttering the phrase for this article I type out on my desk.

What’s the inside scoop that I’ve managed to nestle from an otherwise tight-lipped team? You know the old adage:

”Never ask a man his salary, a woman her age, or the core devs for the airdrop criteria”

Well, ladies and gents, you’ll be happy to know that I indeed have some alpha for you and to be eligible you need to head to the Monad discord server and just start being active. Ready? Here we go.

✨Virtual Christmas Hats✨

You’re welcome.

I had been having issues with how to end this article in a nice & rounded way and how can everything we’ve talked about be tied together? What’s the insight that is at the end?

Thankfully, Bill had an answer to that too

To get a true sense of the community and how strong they are, you need to in Gen Z terms:

 “Check out how fire the memes they using are, ong, fr fr”

The better the memes, the better the community around the project as a whole, and the more it’s worth for you to stick around.

I’d like to give a massive thank you to Bill for being my counterpart on this piece and for putting up with me in his DMs. I’d also like to thank Tolks & Tervo for help with editing this article.

If you’ve made it this far, thank you for reading and I hope this has been an useful read. You can follow me on Twitter to let me know what you thought about this post and don’t forget to subscribe to Page One for your essential crypto readings.