You're looking at all the posts published under the tag Cryptocurrency.
/ Investing

Behavioral vs. Mechanical: Ideas to Evaluate Cryptocurrencies

Behavioral vs. Mechanical: Ideas to Evaluate Cryptocurrencies

It's easy to fall into the trap of seeing the crypto space within a mechanical framework. After all, Bitcoin and blockchain is just an amalgam of code, maintained on a decentralized network, and supported through a literal army of machines permeating across the globe. The architecture and design of crypto and blockchain matter a lot. However, it is easy to get lost in the engineering of this nascent technology and lose out on the bigger picture of actual utility and function. No matter if this peer to peer cash system is seen as a currency by some or as a store of value by others, one thing is evident: people buy, sell, and use Bitcoin for different reasons.

As the cryptocurrency ecosystem continues to mature, more and more players in the traditional finance space have latched on. With Wall Street execs observing and commenting and even bankers, researchers, analysts, and economists making their presence known, imparting their thoughts and speculation, nearly everyone has an opinion on digital currencies. They have their own perspectives, and those perspectives are much older, built upon decades of our time’s best economic minds, like Friedman, Hayek and Keynes. After all, money has existed far longer than the digital currency boom of 2009 and will continue to exist long after. That means, like good cryptography, these ideas have withstood the test of time, and as a result, we should carry the weight of their expertise with us when re-envisioning our economic ecosystem

In crypto circles, the current breakdown of cryptocurrencies is structured mechanically. In the case of stablecoins, they fall  into three neat categories which will help us understand their functions better:  

1. Fiat-collateralized (Centralized)
2. Crypto-collateralized (Decentralized)
3. Non-collateralized (Algorithmic)

However, these 3 mechanical classifications only tell you part of the narrative, and from an investment standpoint, a very small and potentially unremarkable part. For example, knowing that TrueUSD or Tether simply collateralizes fiat (US Dollars) and puts dollars on the blockchain doesn’t tell you very much as an investor. The mechanical component really leaves something to be desired when you want to know how a market might receive a coin, let alone behave once it’s released into that market.

A look at Tether ($USDT) showcases this. Tether recently had a period of heavily negative news. The news was inescapable and it focused on the fact that Tether was not being fully backed by US Dollars (USD). Mechanically, Tether stated that every 1 USDT would be backed by 1 USD. But when it was revealed that this 1:1 backing was not true, what happened? The price of Tether stayed the same. Why? Let’s look at what users care about when using Tether:

They could buy at $1
They could sell at $1
They had confidence they could do this whenever they wanted

In short, what makes Tether useful for investors is not whether it’s actually, mechanically backed 1:1 with the dollar. What matters is liquidity. This is behavioral and it’s how the coin behaves that caused it to retain it’s usefulness and therefore value.

Let’s key in on that word: Behave. It just so happens that a very valuable framework stems from how things behave. Instead of using a mechanical filter, what would happen if we used a behavioral classification. How would it be received if we put coins into behavioral buckets instead of mechanical ones? Let’s apply a few ideas and see how new buckets might provide us with additional, important information.

Inside vs. Outside Money

To start, let’s look at the fundamental differences between inside vs. outside money. Understanding whether a coin is an inside or an outside money can tell us about how the coin functions and behaves. For example, fiat-collateralized digital assets are inside money. You have an inside money anytime an asset is backed by a form of private credit (an “IOU”). Simply stated, inside money is collateralized. TrueUSD, for example, is an inside money. For every 1 TrueUSD, there is a corresponding liability of 1 actual US Dollar, assuming the system is working correctly.

Bitcoin on the other hand is an outside money. Ampleforth’s Amples (AMPL) are also an outside money. Outside money is not collateralized. Outside money is also a net asset for the private sector. There are different performance characteristics between outside money and inside money, with some being advantageous at times and harmful in other instances. That's why it's critical to understand if a digital asset is an inside money or an outside money, much like its crucial to know what a layer 1 protocols consensus mechanism is - PoW or PoS for example.

Rules vs. Discretion

Another view which can shed light on the behavioral side of things surrounds rules vs. discretion, with advantages and disadvantages to each approach. To outline some potential disadvantages, discretionary policies have the vulnerability to have subjective applications, which can introduce errors in terms of subjective timing, scope and participation. Discretion in the traditional finance world is often regulated to give protection to consumers. An example of this could be transparency about how an interest rate can change and by how much. In the decentralized world with no strong authorities, there's no guaranteed regulation except for rules-based code. Contrastly, rules-based policies can have the potential disadvantage of being too rigid, not allowing for unique action in times of full blown crisis.

The important take-away in either event is to understand what type of digital asset you are dealing with, which will provide you with an indication of how the asset might perform in a given scenario. As an investor, you may achieve a  more predictable performance out of a rules-based digital asset than a discretion-based digital asset.  

Maker DAO is in the news as a result of their discretionary policy. According to a Coindesk report borrowers are unhappy with exponentially increasing stability fees (basically, interest rates) in extremely short time frames. These stability fees are set via a vote, and the people casting votes are arbitrarily doing so based on their own discretion. They have passed rates that are 40X higher than they were mere months ago in order to prevent a negative outcome for their token. However, the outcome is increasingly negative despite their best efforts. The uncertainty surrounding how the chosen few will vote only adds to the problem.

This information is  - necessary - for an investor to know.

A discretion-based system may fail to act when action is needed, and may act when inaction is best. A rules-based system will act exactly when the rules dictate, irrespective of whether or not action is prudent. In a discretionary system, additional, sometimes unpredictable variables are added in the form of subjectivity, which are eliminated in a rules-based system.

It becomes increasingly important to know how digital assets behave. Be sure to understand if a digital asset is rules-based or discretionary if you want a full picture of that digital asset.

Tying It All Together: A More Complete Picture

Having a complete awareness and knowledge of asset classification and behavior provides a more useful, fuller picture of a digital asset.

Framing a digital asset under the lens of behavior and mechanics helps guide one to ask better questions to determine if the digital asset is the right one to invest in. For example, with the right behavioral lense, you can better understand the impact of how coins enter or leave the system. You have an idea of what to ask- are new coins entering through minting/selling? Buy-back and burn? Collateralized Debt Position (CDP)? If it’s through CDP we can apply another lens to determine another question we need answered- If it is CDP how is demand for CDP and stablecoin balanced?

Additionally, taking into account behavioral characteristics helps you to question other important ideas, such as what assumptions about the underlying economy does the protocol of a digital asset rely on? For example, if a project relies on bonds, there must be a long-term underlying growth for that bond market to make sense. Other questions will arise as well, such as what information is propagated into supply, if any? If that’s not the case, is supply scheduled deterministically? If it is scheduled deterministically, what might that mean for the future of the digital asset? Mechanically, that answer is simple - you know for example that Bitcoin will only have 21 million coins ever. Behaviorally, how will a fixed supply affect the price and performance of that digital asset? Clearly, the behavioral characteristics of a digital asset are important to consider.

Hopefully this has provided you with a few new ideas and additional lenses with which to view digital assets. Knowledge and information are powerful, so I hope this additional framework helps you in the future while evaluating digital assets.

/ Ampleforth

Ampleforth is not a Stablecoin... (And that’s OK!)

Ampleforth is not a Stablecoin...            (And that’s OK!)

When people think of Stablecoins, they have something very specific in mind. A Stablecoin is meant to remove volatility. A Stablecoin is something you can use for payments. A Stablecoin is something you could use as a base trading pair on an exchange or as a refuge from positions in other digital assets. A Stablecoin is a stand-in for the dollar on the blockchain.

While Amples may be used for such tasks at some point in the far future, they are absolutely NOT stablecoins today. (And that’s OK!) Here’s why...

A Stablecoin removes volatility

Ampleforth does not try to remove volatility from the system. In fact, by design it allows volatility. Movements from the price target is the primary mechanism that engages the supply policy.

A Stablecoin can be used for payments

Until Amples have reached any kind of economic price-supply equilibrium, other stablecoins will be easier to use for payments and should be preferred for that use case. Dollars will be even easier still. Using Amples for payments will be about like using BTC or ZCash for payments, as we expect both price and supply to be volatile at launch.

A Stablecoin can be used as a base trading pair

Since Amples will likely be volatile, you’d be better served trading with a stablecoin (or the dollar) against Amples, instead of trying to use Amples as a base trading pair itself.

So Ample is not a stablecoin… Why was it created?

The Ample is an asset we’ve never seen before--it’s a Smart Commodity Money that incorporates price directly into supply. When supply needs to increase, it doesn’t go to any special group--it goes to everyone universally. Same for supply decreases.

Since commodities are naturally fair and independent, Amples were designed to uphold those same principles. Ample supply is governed strictly and automatically by rules, with no discretion on supply policy decisions. There are no added transaction fees, stability fees, or interest rates that need to be balanced with the market. There are no central collateral balance sheets that need to be maintained. There are no regular votes on monetary policy. Amples are never minted and sold, or bought and burned. Amples are fair, direct and independent, with no special class of stakeholders.

Amples will move differently

We expect that Amples will move differently from other digital assets, making them uniquely useful as a way of diversifying risk in a broader portfolio of assets or as a collateral asset in decentralized banks like MakerDAO.

Amples are macroeconomically friendly

Amples are a commodity money that doesn’t suffer the same deflationary drawbacks of fixed supply currencies.

Amples can scale economically

The Ampleforth protocol is an outside money that doesn’t rely on any collateralized debt. It can scale to a global ecosystem without having to lock up exogenous assets.
In short, Ampleforth is not trying to recreate fiat money on the blockchain. It is a new formulation of a smart, synthetic commodity money that we believe to be the next natural experiment after Bitcoin. In the beginning, it will likely be useful for diversifying risk within a portfolio or as an uncorrelated reserve asset. Much later, it could become an alternative to central bank money.

/ Ampleforth

1971 Nixon Shock: The End of the Bretton Woods System

1971 Nixon Shock: The End of the Bretton Woods System

In 1971 United States monetary policy changed in a major way. President Richard Nixon announced that the US dollar would no longer be redeemable for gold or other reserve assets. This effectively ended the Bretton Woods system and with the end of that system came a new period in US and global history.

This was an important moment in history, but it’s also important to understand not just what happened, but how the instruments at the center of the story, gold and US dollars, operate. By understanding their functions, as well as their limitations, we can begin to look forward with a plan to overcome their shortcomings.

This video dives into what exactly happened in 1971, and what compelled the US government to take the bold action they did. It also discusses the advantages and disadvantages of gold and dollars as both long term stores of value and mediums of exchange.

We still have gold and dollars. But this summer, we will have something that learns from their failures. We will have the first synthetic commodity money: Amples. Please check out our website and Red Book to learn more!

/ Cryptocurrency

On Pursuit of... Idealism

On Pursuit of... Idealism

This is a post on my decision to join Ampleforth: what it is and why it is so special. Equally as important, this is a brief exploration of one human continuing to find themes that echo and magnify within his life.


As T.S. Eliot once wrote: “Do I dare / Disturb the universe?” Eliot was a young man of 22 when he wrote his haunting “The Love Song of J Alfred Prufrock”. How many times I poured over these lines as an undergraduate at Yale, I cannot begin to guess - I related to T.S. Eliot: as a young man he seemed ‘wise beyond his years’, he had also hated university (specifically Oxford) and throughout his life pursued perfection in his art form (he produced meticulous work but at low volumes). I wanted to be a poet, or a musician, or an astronomer - drawn to the purity of chasing passion and meaning. Computer science was something for robots like my parents - too rigid. But as Senior year approached, the economist (i.e. rationalist) in me took over, I considered Finance and Consulting, though my heart was in neither. Looking back, this was a time of struggling with honesty - I was not honest with myself or others on what I wanted in life.

Flash forward five and a half years - I’m packing two bags in my 325 sq ft West Village apartment (well it’s technically a studio and it’s in Greenwich Village, but it’s always more romantic to say West Village). I’ve stuffed a carry-on with my laptop and a check-in bag full of personal things, scratch that, just mostly full of work clothes. In my phone app is a one-way ticket to Beijing. Some of my friends and family think this is burnout or an existential crisis, but in reality I am just getting good at being honest.

Who is Ampleforth?

Now it’s late 2018 and I meet Evan and Brandon at a coffee shop. We (FBG Capital) are meeting with portfolio companies to push them to list: it’s as enjoyable as pulling teeth out. However, Evan and Brandon are different from others we are meeting, they appear refreshed, relaxed and certain - they are looking to list. The team clearly believed in their idea and project - and could give a damn what the market was. I am intrigued, having heard about Ampleforth under its old moniker, Fragments. The crypto-investor community in SF is small and Fragments had generated quite a lot of buzz with its invention of an ‘elastic supply protocol’ in early 2018. I returned home that night to read up on the whitepaper and website, sucked into the vision that was presented to me. To my luck, our interactions were extended by on-going support FBG was providing to Ampleforth.

As I came to know the people behind the project, I quickly realized a combination of three things that was rare among the 100+ other projects I had come across:

  1. Integrity & Professionalism - The team exhibits a level of integrity and professionalism that can sometimes be lacking in the darker corners of our beloved crypto-space. Starting from Evan & Brandon and continuing to the rest of the team, there is a genuineness to the actions and direction of the project: honesty is abundant.
  2. Realistic - The team shines as one of the most ambitious blockchain projects, but has paired this with a heaping dose of realism. They understand the limitations in the short-run, and embrace this - turning it into an opportunity to leverage as they grow towards their ultimate goal.
  3. Optimism & Sense of Fairness - Pursuing a grand vision requires a healthy mix of optimism and strong foundational beliefs. Though Ampleforth focuses on money and monetary economics - a boring and overlooked subject to most folks - Evan and Brandon have developed an intense passion and core belief in fairness. Mixed with an optimistic view of the world, the combination is a refreshing and inspiring change-of-pace. It is what drives the project relentlessly towards creating an “ideal money”.

But enough about the people behind the project, let’s get to the star of the show...

What is Ampleforth?

Ampleforth is a digital-asset-protocol for smart commodity-money. Founded with a mission to create fair, politically independent money, the protocol’s creators noticed that commodity-monies like gold and silver are naturally fair and independent.

Unfortunately, commodity-monies cannot efficiently respond to changes in demand, making them a poor substitute for central-bank-money. To address this shortcoming, the project's founders designed a synthetic commodity-money that propagates price-information into supply, much like how thermal expansion propagates nearby kinetic energy into a material’s volume in the natural world.

It's kind of like thermal expansion... but on the blockchain

Let’s unpack this: The Ampleforth protocol is a protocol with an absolutely scarce amount (i.e. fixed supply) of native tokens, called Amples. These Amples can be thought of as a commodity, sharing qualities similar to Bitcoin or other natural resources (e.g., gold or oil). However, one distinct characteristic makes Amples different: they always seek a price-supply equilibrium, and will automatically enter a state of unrest until they find one. In a way, it is a ‘smart’ version of a commodity - a smart commodity! To illustrate this, here is a simple example:

//Equilibrium 1:
Alice has 1 Ample worth $1.

//Demand Doubles:
Alice has 1 Ample worth $2.

//Equilibrium 2:
Alice has 2 Amples each worth $1.

The vice-versa scenario occurs when the price decreases (i.e. Amples contract). To summarize: when demand changes, the system seeks a new equilibrium point by universally expanding to, or contracting from, balances and holders. It is the elastic supply protocol.


It’s 2016 and I spend my birthday alone in the W Hotel Downtown Atlanta. My shirts and suits hang in the closet while I watch TV (maybe Yukon Men while daydreaming about moving to Alaska...?). I stare at my work laptop, where I’ve begun writing and collecting a series of poems I hope to one-day publish, something like Frank O’Hara’s Lunch Poems collection, but shittier… way shittier. I’m considering getting an MBA and finding a line of work that allows me to find the intersection of “analysis and creativity”... a direct quote from one of my discarded business school application essays. I wonder if I can find a career-path with the depth and richness that only poetry and music seem to possess.

Flash forward again (like a Christopher Nolan movie), I’m in Beijing at my Liangmaqiao apartment. I’ve fallen in love with the city despite the smog, the crowds and the fact that I moved overseas utterly and completely alone - not a single friend or relative within ~5 hours of Beijing. On the phone is my Director, (boss, friend and mentor), who is speaking excitedly: he’d very much like for me to stay in Beijing, and not to consider business school or returning to the USA. I spend a night turning it over in my head and decide it’s a leap I’m willing to take - he’s shown me the ropes of the crypto-world -- what an amazing opportunity to learn from someone who was an early investor in Ripple, is close with Jihan Wu and works with the board of Circle. He’s had me analyze various exchanges for potential acquisition by Circle and also diligence BitPay’s Series B. Even more, I seem to have found my calling: a space that matches my level of imagination, my feelings as an ‘outsider’+‘underdog’ and most importantly, my deep-rooted desire for meaning. The next day I sit down with the Partner at the pristine IDG Capital offices near Jianguomen. He shakes his head and says no, there is no future for me in China - there will never be a road for me to Partner. The scene fades to black. Maybe I should learn to be more realistic...

Why is Ampleforth Special?

I can do this in a simple list, Ampleforth: (1) Solves the deflationary problem of Bitcoin and other natural resources; (2) Addresses the ‘killer use case’; (3) Has a realistic approach to both short- and long-term time horizons; and (4) Is innovative and requires the blockchain

  1. Deflationary problem of Bitcoin (BTC):

This is a well known and discussed phenomena about Bitcoin. With a defined absolute quantity of 21 million BTC, Bitcoin’s supply is capped, and thus deflationary. As demand naturally increases (e.g., increasing population of the world, increasing adoption of the blockchain) in conjunction with an inelastic supply, the price of BTC will rise. In a story similar to Japan’s deflationary spiral, this force may become so strong that eventually no one will want to spend Bitcoin even if it is universally accepted. This means one day Bitcoin might be increasing in value so much that in the time it takes for you to pick up a pair of jeans then pay for it, you’ve lost money by simply transacting in BTC. Better to “HODL” than “SPEDN”!

Amples avoid this issue through its elastic supply protocol, as demand increases or decreases and the price changes, the automatic (or rules-based) protocol will adjust in a predictable and transparent manner. This applies a gradual pressure to bring the market to a new equilibrium point, albeit at the same/similar price but a different quantity (the total market capitalization could now be higher or lower). Oversimplifying: the Law of Supply and Demand allows Ampleforth to maintain around a target price while scaling in-line with the market demand and overall usage/adoption of the token. In this way, it has innovated and improved on the pivotal foundation Bitcoin has laid.

2. The killer-use case of the blockchain:

Those who consider themselves ‘crypto-insiders’ are likely familiar with the term “the KILLER use case”. It grew to a crescendo near the end of 2018 and has largely quieted as we’ve seen DApp users rise (although slowly) and deployment of DLT in traditional industries. However, in any debate around the ‘killer use case’, we must not forget Satoshi’s original white paper - "Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System". The original vision for the blockchain was a ledger for electronic cash. In this sense, the purest form of the killer blockchain use-case appears to be supporting a peer-to-peer digital cash, but not just any cash: one that does not rely on any central authority.

In this, Ampleforth once again checks the box. In its long-term lofty vision to create an ‘ideal’ or ‘fair’ money, it is tackling what I consider to be the Holy Grail of the blockchain space: a non-sovereign currency. The current monetary system is obviously integral for society as we know it, but also exhibits flaws. To use an anecdote: back in 2015 when the European Central Bank (ECB) was in the midst of austerity programs impacting citizens of Greece, Portugal, Italy, Spain, etc., a protestor disrupted a press conference by throwing confetti on Mario Draghi (President of the ECB), screaming “End the ECB dictatorship”.

Confetti has never been so scary

What was this all about? The protester was highlighting the ECB as ‘illegitimate’, Mario Draghi is arguably the most powerful man in Europe, being able to impact millions of citizens across multiple countries with his decisions, yet he is not elected ‘by the people’. This represents some of the issues around what economists call a discretionary monetary system: central banks work with imperfect knowledge (do we trust a single individual or committee of individuals to tell us what is best vs a robust free market?), and are prone to self-interested behavior (i.e. it is hard to say that central banks’ policy decisions are completely divorced from the influence of public or private interests). In the end, I think the system is not perfect, and will likely not be completely replaced, but we should at least have an alternative option so we can hedge our risk or ‘vote’ with our own choices. Would you rather live in a world with only one choice? Or maybe two or more?

Now, it is important to pause and understand that Ampleforth is not purporting to replace the existing financial system, it is merely providing an alternative option. As F.A. Hayek noted in his oft-quoted essay “The Denationalization of Money”, competing currencies can be a positive as free markets and competition lead to innovation and improvement. If this seems too far-fetched and in the future for your taste, then read ahead to…

3. Realistic short- and long-term goals:

There has been a late-2018 Morgan Stanley report circulating with a graphic describing the ever-evolving Bitcoin/Crypto thesis:

Source: 2018 Morgan Stanley Report on Bitcoin, Cryptocurrencies and Blockchain

Though the graph is closely tracking the market’s attitude towards BTC, the market’s evolving thesis itself has clearly not been so sharp. The collective thesis has moved in the order of Digital Cash → Financial System Antidote → Replace Payment System… → New Institutional Investment Class. What has happened is we’ve started with a grandiose vision for Bitcoin, which has slowly deflated overtime to settle on its reality: a new and orthogonal asset class. Rushing too far ahead (i.e. Digital Cash), is like a runner getting ahead of his or her body: face meet ground.

As an alternative framework, I propose the non-delusional and more realistic vision of how the crypto thesis should evolve:

Source: 2019 Report from Richy's Brain

In the short term, Amples are a new investment class, high risk-high return - this use-case has been under our nose the whole time, for at least 10+ years. They should be volatile and uncorrelated with the traditional market; therefore, an interesting portfolio diversification tool (read more on this topic here, from our Growth Lead). Only in the medium- to long-term will Ampleforth begin to shift the paradigm of money, but a whole host of steps must occur first (see graphic above).

To summarize: Ampleforth’s vision means in the short-run, it will have a high risk-return profile as a new and uncorrelated investment asset. The issues with Bitcoin was it was hailed as ‘digital money’ far too early… as its very first use case. This is not only isolated to Bitcoin, many crypto projects dive in head first assuming we are in the deep end of the pool, only to realize it’s in fact the kitty pool and the bottom is concrete. The reality is ‘digital money’ is the end of the crypto-rainbow. To arrive at this achievement will require the hurdles of becoming a unit of account, store of value and medium of exchange. Ampleforth understands this, and the best part of this realization is that Ampleforth has a balanced approach: it has not given up sight of the ultimate goal - re-defining what ‘fair’ and ‘money’ means.

4. This innovation actually requires the blockchain! (Not to be underestimated...)

To be more scientific with our description of Ampleforth, Amples are a synthetic commodity. Until now, synthetic commodities have mostly been left in the realm of monetary economists ‘theorizing’ from ivory towers. Since the arrival of Bitcoin, the floodgates have opened for synthetic commodities coming to the market (though the general public is likely not aware or familiar with this concept).

Given its short history, synthetic commodities are the cutting edge of monetary economics and the evolution of ‘money’ as an instrument or technology. To this end, Amples are innovative as they are able to apply a rules-based monetary system directly and equally to all balances, addressing issues of deflationary and inflationary pressures through the elastic supply protocol. Additionally, synthetic commodities like Amples avoid the ‘supply shock’ effects that natural commodity monies face.

Until now, there was no possibility Ampleforth could have been created - the blockchain is integral and absolutely necessary for this project. As such, it passes the most elemental and important hurdle of a blockchain project: it actually requires the blockchain. Amples are pushing the envelop along multiple edges, challenging what we think of as investable assets, synthetic commodity moneys and of course, cryptocurrencies.


I’m lazily glancing at a nice brownstone across the street as the sun sets, I’m on the phone with my parents in an apartment in NYC, I tell them I have an opportunity at a fund in China who invests in this crypto stuff. They think it’s crazy - I’ve got a stable job at a reputable firm.

I’m looking out the window at the coal-fired smog clouds from my apartment in Beijing, I’m on the phone with my parents and I tell them I’m coming home and applying to business school. They’re glad I’ve gotten over this hump.

I’m staring at a blank wall as I chat with my parents - I didn’t get a single business school interview (750 GMAT? Yale? Hello, is anyone home?). I tell them I’m going to move to SF, I can’t quiet the voice that tells me this is a sign that crypto is my calling, that it’s the real deal and a part of my story.

I’m on the tarmac in Shanghai, taking-off for Haikou. Moments earlier I was on a Wechat call practicing pitching myself in Chinese with my parents. After landing, I take a Didi for an hour to meet Vincent, the founding partner of FBG Capital. When he greets me, he does so without a smile or nod, and takes me to breakfast. I’m not sure if he likes me - remembering the last time I sat across the table from a Partner in China - but I get the job and become their one and only man in SF (plus all of the Bay Area for that matter).

I’m shivering because the crypto winter is in full force and firms are making cuts. Bad news seems to crowd CoinDesk - the market precipitously dropped again only two weeks ago. Outlook is at a low when I walk into a coffee shop to meet these Ampleforth guys who seem strangely optimistic…
                                                            … a few months of close collaboration have passed
and over a drink I ask Evan why he is doing this. Without pausing he says that we can choose the things and legacies we leave behind, that lines of code can be like whisps of thoughts for future generations to remember us by when we are in the ether. I can tell that is an honest answer. Long ago I’ve started to think of computer code as poetic and the blockchain as strangely rhythmic. I realize I've stopped writing poetry since joining the blockchain space, or have I? I am certainly more optimistic now, as I laugh and start to think...

Parting Thoughts

“Do I dare / Disturb the universe?” To me, blockchain represents the audacity to challenge what we know and believe. After spending years as a consultant for the financial services, I have seen how executives on Wall Street and Main Street think. To be frank, they are damn good at preserving the current order, but will usually shy away from pushing too close to the bleeding edge. Our current financial system is obviously absolutely necessary, but is also extremely inefficient. On top of this, one of the most stagnant areas to address is that of money. What is it? How do we use it? Most people would have immediate answers to these questions, treating them as a priori truths; however, I think with the entrance of Bitcoin and now Ampleforth, the door has opened to adding a much needed jolt of innovation to such an old tradition. I sincerely believe that blockchain technology and the cryptocurrencies it supports will play a transformational role in the traditional financial system. The daily lives of everyone will be impacted, and I want to be a part of that driving force.

In regards to Ampleforth, the opportunity, the timing and the team - the decision was natural. Not only do I believe that Ampleforth is a promising project, but also an amazing platform to educate everyday citizens (i.e. non-monetary economists): a way to help people realize that it is an amazing time to be alive with innovations occurring in such a long-ignored area. Hopefully we can do this while raising the bar around the intellectual rigour and discussion within the crypto space, focusing on ‘economics’, not just ‘tokenomics’.

Let’s re-define what ‘fair’ means.

Follow me on Twitter, connect with me on LinkedIn, or message me on Telegram.
For more in-depth information on our project and the team, visit our website and read the Redbook and Whitepaper at:

Ampleforth's Blog and Telegram group are the best ways to closely track our progress and updates.

About Me:
With a simple handshake on a street in Guangzhou, Vincent propelled me to the position of Venture Partner at FBG Capital. He has given me a chance when others have said ‘no’. Fittingly, I think Evan, Brandon and the Ampleforth team are allergic to the word ‘no’.

As Venture Partner, I will retain my position (albeit in a minor role) at FBG, primarily assisting in portfolio company support and deal sourcing where the opportunity presents itself. Effective immediately, I will be full-time as Chief Business Officer of Ampleforth - inspired by the honesty, realism and optimism of the project.

/ Bitcoin

Don't Roll Your Own Econ

Don't Roll Your Own Econ

Don't Roll Your Own Crypto Econ

Decentralization was always an interesting thought, largely unachievable at scale until the advent of the digital world and peer to peer (p2p) technologies. These p2p technologies opened the door for a new digital revolution in Bitcoin. Since Bitcoin was created tens of thousands of individual blockchain projects, Dapps, and tokens are currently being developed. Every day more and more of these projects are launched, live and functioning. Like most burgeoning industries, there will be an extremely high attrition rate, and many projects will fail. Some of the mistakes that cause projects to end in bitter failure are easily avoided. Although digital assets are new and cryptocurrencies, including Bitcoin, are at the bleeding edge of technology, we can look to the past for some time tested lessons and concepts that can help us avoid simple mistakes.

One of those time tested ideas was pointed out in an article from late 2017 by Ethereum developer Nick Johnson.The article is a phenomenal read, and certainly a strong piece for anyone who may be interested in cryptocurrencies and cryptography. In the article Nick pointed out very serious concerns he had at the time with IOTA’s viability as a cryptocurrency. One of the most important lessons from the piece was what Nick states as rule 1 of cryptography - don’t roll your own crypto. It’s enticing for some teams to think they are beyond the blocking and tackling of basic rules like this as they aim to innovate and push the envelope of current technology. However, the lesson can not be ignored, and teams should not fly in the face of battle hardened and time tested cryptography. Read more in the article, but a grossly inappropriate TL;DR explanation would be that cryptography is under constant attack, and only crypto that has been mercilessly pressure tested and held its ground can serve as secure crypto you can depend on.

Let’s not get it confused, innovation in blockchain is one of the things that makes it great and the future of digital assets so bright. We need teams to innovate and invent in order to usher in advancement and better tech. However, there are areas that are ripe for innovation, and there are areas that are solid. Just like cryptography, sound economic principles are foolish to mess with. Just like the relentless attacks that proven cryptography has endured, economic principles have weathered many storms over long periods of time. Economic principles that work have survived and flourished with changes in administrations, changes in bull and bear markets and even changes in dominant government systems.

At Ampleforth, we’re innovating and creating, and we’re doing it with strong base principles in place. When it comes to economics we’ve sought out a team of advisors with the expertise and experience to not only avoid pitfalls, but truly innovate. Among the group of top level minds we're lucky to consult with are the Hoover Institution’s Niall Feguson and Manuel Rincon Cruz. We’ve also brought in the guidance of experts from Pantera Capital such as Paul Veradittakit and Joey Krug. Joey’s insights from his work at Pantera and Augur help us bridge the blockchain world with the business world in a way that few can. Our team takes a responsible and balanced approach to the creation of our technology by leveraging decades of experience in several fields and the result is a protocol that is proving to be one of the most unique projects created to date.

Reliable and established principles in economics and technology are the foundation of what we are building at Ampleforth. For more detail on the Ampleforth protocol and the innovations we’re making with synthetic commodities and ideal money, please check out our website and whitepaper, and stay up to date by following our Twitter!