TLDR; Exploring two lesser-known blockchain use cases & investing in non-linear upside.
I bought two blockchain-enabled “things” last week.
Let me tell you what they are first, and then I’ll tell you why.
For the record, I think the why is more important, and I should probably start there, but I don’t want to bury the lead on what I bought and how ‘silly’ they sound, so here goes…
What.
$JeffBecker
🦄🚀👑🤑
Let me explain…
First, JeffBecker Coin: I started a free BitClout account, which is a social media platform that looks like Twitter and acts like E*Trade. Once you have an account, you also have your own cryptocurrency which can be bought and sold like a stock. When you sign up you’re given a small amount of cryptocurrency to use, so I invested my free fake money into $JeffBecker, which along with investments from followers, is now supposedly worth $1,200 just a few days later at the time of writing this.
Next, 🦄🚀👑🤑: I also bought a string of emojis on Y.at. Unicorn Rocket King Money-Face. I spent $7. It’s arguably now worth less than zero if you include the time I lost talking about it.
But let’s get into the why, and then I’ll explain my thinking on actually participating & “investing”…
Why.
Principle #1: Is it an Intelligent Risk?
This principle states that the upside, when compared to the downside, is materially higher. In BigCo world that’s usually >3X, in VC world we’re looking for >1,000X. In other words, invest $1 to make at least $3 or $1,000 respectively.
Principle #2: Does it have Undeniable Tailwinds?
This is about the market dynamics; growing sectors, technological advancements, predictions on how things will work in the future, bundling/unbundling cycles, etc.
Principle #3: Is it Easily Explained?
Easily explained is not be confused with simple. Even a complex idea can and should be distilled down to a meaningful and direct explanation.
Principle #4: Is it Counterintuitive?
Even though it’s easily explained, do most people agree or not? Ideally they don’t and then we can ask “what would have to be true for this to work?” See also: black swan theory.
Principle #5: Is it Fun and/or Can I Help?
I like to buy things that are fun, either because it leads to great conversations or I simply enjoy it. I also like to invest where I think I can add value and make a meaningful difference in the likelihood of success, ie. B2B SaaS.
Collectively, what this all amounts to is investing in things that have non-linear upside, momentum, and that I can personally have a positive impact on, or if not, at least have fun doing it.
Onto the purchases themselves…
BitClout
Having spent nearly a decade at LinkedIn, it remains my favorite social giant for the simple reason that it has always resisted the urge to monetize at the expense of member value, and has always cherished the Members First tenant of operating. I can’t say the same for Facebook or Twitter, and at times, their downstream impact makes you wonder if we’ve already surpassed the singularity.
This isn’t meant to be an ad for LinkedIn or BitClout, but imagine a world where the social networks were owned by its members. Where algorithms were transparent, or even open-sourced. Where you weren’t the victim of an echo chamber of ad targeting. Where you could make money simply for participating. And where, if your data is going to be sold, you can be the one who benefits from it.
Of course there are risks. Risks of propagating cancel culture and defamation, monetization of another’s likeness, and so on. Execution risks like the values and incentives of the founders, or an inability to list the coins on an exchange rendering them useless. Everything has risks.
To me though, the “social” side of media needs an overhaul. I don’t know if BitClout is the one, but it fits my principles and there’s nothing to gain from pessimism at this stage.
Y.at
This one is a bit more difficult. Why would anyone buy 🦄🚀👑🤑?
Well, the truth is this one probably falls more under the ‘fun’ category than anything else. That said, the principles still hold here and there’s one thing that remains true and that is, you need an online identity.
Identity is actually pretty disparate. Log-ins and usernames are different across platforms and their underlying data is even less connected in some cases. Even as I write this, I am logged in as jeffreylbecker, jeffbecker, jeffbecks, JLBex, vntristic, and a handful of email addresses across different companies.
Why?!
The answer is dumb. It’s because either A) I can’t get the same username everywhere, or B) I outgrew my handle, like an AIM screenname or high school email address.
Now let’s think about purchasing a universal username, like a string of emojis.
Specifically, purchasing one that is more secure than your typical password-protected setup (blockchain backend), and in a universal language that everyone on the planet uses (emojis).
As the world digitizes and globalizes, how will we unify and bundle all of our systems and access points? And that’s just one use case. Now think about all of the things those systems do for us; sending and receiving money, engaging in social media, playing games, chatting with friends, and so on and so forth. At the right scale, why couldn’t Y.at become a universal identity and mode of transaction and interaction? After all, something should.
Anyway, I’m not sure a string of emojis is the answer, but for $7, I’d be pretty happy to be proved wrong. And if I am, maybe I really would become the Unicorn Rocket King!
Yea, even I think that sounds super weird.
Hope you enjoyed the longer and more obscure MMM today. If nothing else, something to think about.
See you Monday.
Note: Neither BitClout nor Y.at are liquid at this time. I am not a financial advisor or lawyer, and this is not investing advice. I am simply having fun and speculating. Please do your own diligence before participating.