You did nothing wrong. I know you might be disappointed, and perhaps even angry, because taking profits is what every (decent) advisor recommends. Now, this advice seems to have made you 'lose' a significant amount of money that could have made a difference in your week or month. I understand.

https://share.lens.xyz/p/0x02142f-0x2b

You're a creator. You changed the pricing of your art, your source of revenue, from a volatile but comparatively more reliable currency ($MATIC) to a new, super volatile community one ($BONSAI) to be part of the movement and support the community. You put your earnings at risk, and I get it (if you did none of that, then this message isn't for you).

But hear me out: you did nothing wrong, and you haven't lost money. I know it feels that way, but this feeling is called FOMO (Fear of Missing Out), and it's the most dangerous sentiment in a bull market. When you see people around you boasting about earnings that seem like 'easy money,' you question, 'How can I be part of this? I don't want to miss out.'

But the truth is, in a bull market, a lot of people lose money. I'm talking about real loss—people betting their salaries on a meme token and selling everything when there's a drop of 20-30%, only to feel FOMO again when the same token surges another 100%. Where do you think volatility comes from? In a speculative market, many lose so a few can profit (it turns into a bear market when the normies' losses saturate and start to flow to the big players, as we've seen in the last cycle).

So, you've done nothing wrong. You practiced portfolio management. Keep doing that, keep delivering, and you'll thrive. The biggest money maker in finance is called 'compound interest,' and it's a long game. The $BONSAI team is exploring different forms of rewards for its community, and others will do the same, in many forms. Some methods will feel more fair, some not, but building and staying true to a good community will always be rewarding, I promise you that.

Now, a personal opinion: no, I wouldn't exclude BONSAI traders from the airdrop because I'm strongly against finance-induced FOMO. This tricky feeling has destroyed many lives, and I would never discourage people from taking profits and rebalancing their portfolios. The airdrop criteria could be even more restrictive, focusing on participation and engagement within the community. However, I also know that airdrop eligibility is incredibly difficult to manage and will never please everyone.

I also believe the BONSAI team and, especially, the community are doing a great job. I've collected and discovered so many incredible artists since the BONSAI fever! It's not a competition, but, compared to the DEGEN community I see on Farcaster, I believe the BONSAI community is much healthier, thanks to the apps that do an amazing job with quality filtering and YOU! Creators who have embraced this movement and are making your art available in a token that can fluctuate 30% up or down in a day. You're amazing.

Keep building. Keep balancing. Keep growing. 💜🩵🩷

This post is collectible for free, so you can always read it whenever you need a reminder of these words.

• Newcomers (<20 followers): These are the fresh faces in the forest.

• Explorers (20-200 followers): Represented by a Backpack, indicating readiness for adventure and the gathering of knowledge.

• Pathfinders (200-400 followers): Represented by a Map and Quill , denoting their role in charting new territories and documenting their findings.

• Navigators (400-1000 followers): Represented by a Golden Compass , highlighting their advanced skills in guiding others and discovering new areas.

• Forefronts (>1000 followers): Represented by a Mastercraft Axe , emphasizing their leadership in clearing obstacles and pioneering new paths.

Do you want to know the path Forefronts have carved to reach this milestone? Well, let's investigate!

Navigating the Trails: A Deep Dive into the Charts

Embarking on a journey through the dense foliage of the Lens Forest, I've meticulously gathered and analyzed data spanning a six-month period, from late March to early September 2023. This exploration focuses on the vibrant activity of profiles that, as of September 4th, boast more than 20 followers.

As we delve deeper into the charts, we'll uncover the habits and patterns that define each segment, shedding light on the pathways they've treaded in the vast expanse of the Lens Forest.

Average Daily Mirrors by Segment

Mirrors are Lens's equivalent to reposting or re-amplifying content. Our Forefronts, with their strategic moves, amplified content twice as much as Explorers and Pathfinders during April to May.

Mirroring, at its core, is a multifunctional tool. It can serve as a nod of agreement, saying, "I stand by this statement and credit its creator." For burgeoning content creators, a mirror can be a beacon of support, amplifying their voice in a vast digital forest.

Yet, mirroring transcends mere content echoing; it's a tactical move. Consider the power of re-amplifying your evergreen content. Platforms that rely on timelines can be unforgiving to such content.

Original post: https://lenster.xyz/posts/0x0f85-0x1b1b

You might invest hours crafting a meticulous tutorial, but if it's not pinned, it risks being overshadowed as time progresses. Periodically revisiting and mirroring your standout content can breathe new life into it, ensuring it continues to resonate and reach new audiences.

Average Daily Comments by Segment

Comments are a direct measure of community engagement and interaction. Good quality followers are built with both way actions, when you create content and engage back with people that engage with you. Here, we easily see that’s a category where our Forefronts master: when building their followers, they had 3 times more commenting activity than Navigators!

Engaging with others, diving into discussions, and supporting fellow adventurers is as crucial as shining the spotlight on your own content. It's not just about voicing your thoughts but listening and responding to others.

Average Daily Collects by Segment

Collects indicate the value and appreciation of content by the community. In my opinion, it’s the top reaction regarding support and content appreciation. And here again the Forefronts lead the numbers, but not as much as we would imagine.

Keeping in mind that some collects are paid, one might think that those that invest more in collects have better feedback. But as we saw in the section above, real interaction is probably worth more than just distributing Matic around.

Another interpretation is that, while other interactions are prevalent in traditional social media, "collects" distinguish Lens from the rest. The community is still in the early stages of exploring its full potential.

While the predominant use is the paid collect, serving as a product purchase or a means to fund new initiatives, additional functionalities like token gating and bookmarking are emerging.

I'm excited to witness the community broaden the applications of Lens collects!

Average Daily Reactions by Segment

Reactions provide a quick gauge of content resonance and sentiment within the community. On Lens Protocol, reactions are likes and dislikes (we can basically disconsider dislikes because most apps don’t even expose this feature).

The amount of reactions from Forefronts, since before they became Forefronts, it’s impressive. Even recently, they have reacted basically 2 times more than Navigators, the adventurer category right below.

Consistent, genuine reactions can elevate a profile's stature within the community. It's about showcasing your profile through genuine interactions and not just inorganic clicks.

Average Daily Posts Published

Posting frequency can indicate user activity levels and their content contribution to the platform. The exclusive content you publish showcases who you are and what you do.

So here we see that, while again Forefronts and Navigators are top content creators in volume, the difference is not that much. Good quality content is what matters.

Quality trumps quantity. A compelling post can echo for weeks, outshining multiple average ones. It's about crafting a narrative that resonates with the audience.

Additionally, keep in mind that mirroring can rejuvenate valuable content that might have been overshadowed in the timeline.

Percentage of Main Content Focus by Segment

When considering the content preferences of our Lens Adventurers, the importance of visuals becomes clear. As many marketers can attest, visuals enhance virtually almost every type of content. Whether you're sharing a poem, a song, or a crypto price analysis, it's worth considering if images could further illuminate your message.

Visuals are more than mere decorations; they play a pivotal role in enhancing comprehension. However, it's crucial to strike a balance. Always use discernment to ensure that any added visual element complements rather than detracts from your core message.

One notable observation from the chart is the relatively fewer video producers on Lens compared to other social platforms. Delving deeper into the reasons behind this trend could offer intriguing insights.

Original Post: lenster.xyz/posts/0x01b356-0x0664

On a related note, content from Phaver often appears as “NULL” in the BigQuery database. While the specific pattern behind this remains elusive, it's evident that many of our Forefronts frequently utilize the Phaver app.

Daily Snapshot of Profiles in Each Segment

The journey through the Lens Forest is dynamic, with profiles evolving and progressing through different segments. Let's take a snapshot of how the distribution of profiles across segments has changed over the analysis period:

From the data, we can observe a decrease in the Newcomer segment, dropping from 57.28% to 49.58%. This indicates that a significant portion of users have progressed to higher segments. However, it's worth noting that while many have advanced, 49.58% of users remain in the Newcomer category by the end of our analysis period. This suggests that while many are progressing, there's still a substantial group that remains in the initial stages of their Lens Forest journey.

Do you want me to analyze retention data next? Specifically, looking into the number of profiles that became inactive in each segment and when? It would be interesting to delve deeper into why some adventurers might decide to halt their journey in the Lens Forest. If you have any insights or theories on why people might choose to be less active on Lens, I'd love to hear them!

Average Posts & Interactions Before Reaching 1000 Followers

Finally, if you are in the path of becoming a Lens Forefront, here is a summarized of the path Forefronts before us have craved before reaching their 1000 milestone:

• Average number of posts before reaching 1000 followers: 312.29942418426106

• Average number of interactions before reaching 1000 followers: 1612.942631058358

Interactions here are a sum of mirrors, reactions, collects and comments. So keep strong, fellow adventurers!

Comparative Analysis with Traditional Social Media

One of the big questions that surround a lot of people just observing Lens is: is investing time in Lens worth it? Well, while it’s indeed still a small and tailored community, I went to check some comparable data with legacy social media.

When analyzing the entire platform, Lens boasts an impressive engagement rate per post (by follower) of around 2%. This is a common metric when comparing effectiveness of actions among different social media, and it means that, for each post you publish, you should receive an average engagement relative to 2% of your followers. So if you have 2000 followers, you should get around 40 engagement per post.

When compared to traditional social media platforms, this number is significant. For context, last year's engagement rates per post by follower for major platforms were:

• Facebook: 0.06%

• Instagram: 0.47%

• Twitter: 0.035%

• TikTok: 5.69%

Willing to understand further this engagement rate on Lens, I plotted the individual metric based on the amount of followers. Analyzing the cart below, we can see that Lens have a growth engagement limit, probably related to the amount of users. Remember that less than 1% of profiles are Forefronts, so it’s hard to expect huge engagement growth for Super Forefronts like >5000 followers.

But Lens is proven to be, right now, really good for smaller creators! Small profiles are experiencing engagement rates a few times bigger than the total amount of followers they have! So the next step is just a matter of converting engagement into followers. But the content delivery is being fairly made by most apps algorithms.

Original Post: lenster.xyz/posts/0x01c807-0x1a

However, it's essential to remember that Lens's controlled access and smaller size foster a stronger sense of community, which could be a factor in its higher engagement. Observing TikTok's numbers, there's a potential opportunity for high-quality short videos on Lens, especially as mobile content continues to dominate the digital space. Although I would personally expect Lens not to follow the “infinite timeline” trend that has been a real danger to so many younger people, but that’s a subject for another content.

Key Insights

• Forefronts Lead in Engagement: Profiles with >1000 followers have consistently engaged with the community, a trend they maintain even after reaching this milestone.

• The Untapped Potential of Collects: The unique feature of collectable content at the heart of a social graph presents opportunities that extend beyond standard NFT collections or mere post bookmarks.

• Image Dominance: Image-focused content is the preferred choice, especially among Forefronts, with 56% of their posts centered or enriched with images.

• Video opportunity: While all segments posted 8% of video-focused content, I see an opportunity to be explored here.

🌲Conclusion: The Path to Becoming a Forefront in the Lens Forest

The journey through the Lens Forest Diaries has illuminated the behaviors and strategies of those who've ascended to the status of Forefronts, achieving over 1000 followers. Their consistent engagement, frequent content creation, and active community participation stand out as defining characteristics.

However, the forest is vast, and there's always more to uncover. While follower count offers one perspective, it's essential to recognize the diverse tapestry of creators within the Lens ecosystem. From artists to market analysts, and musicians to digital art enthusiasts, each brings a distinct flavor to the platform. The data is rich, and I'm eager to delve into more nuanced insights in the future.

If you've found value in this exploration and are keen to journey further with me, consider supporting my endeavors by collecting this mirror entry or my Lens post. I'm in the process of developing a platform for deeper insights, and early access will be granted to Lens Forest Diaries collectors. Stay tuned for more!

Also a big thank you to the previous supporters of this project: @dduarte 💜, @stani, @chaoticmonk, @punkess, @pedrovilela, @ryanfox, @carstenpoetter, @dmcsvn, @nader, @metaverse3, @jamesfinnerty, @mazemari, @cybershakti, @andonney, @81444, @lanadingwall, @cmn__, @0x327, @66868, @cryptolad

💗

A heartfelt thank you for accompanying me on this expedition. For more insights and adventures, explore other editions of the Lens Forest Diaries:

• Inaugural chapter of "Lens Forest Diaries"

• Lens Forest Diaries #2: OpenLens Edition

For quick insights into Lens data:

• Correlation Heatmap

• Lens Engagement by Day of the Week

Beyond the forest, I delve into core Ethereum news, game design, and AI. If these topics resonate with you, subscribe below for updates on my latest musings!

🌱 Lens: @definn

🐦 Twitter: @definnTheFarmer

Join me as I share the steps I took and the prompts I used to create a captivating video that showcases the artistic exploration I embarked upon.

nft://137/0x353B56A208e29e94b95a1D6A342110685FA880e6/?showBuying=true&showMeta=true&size=small

FYI: The NFT above is a 20 edition Lens Protocol Collectable, available for only 1 MATIC! You can check the original post at Lenster and get a 40% mirror referral.

Setting the Stage with a Midjourney Prompt

To begin my artistic journey, I selected the following prompt: “An illustration of a cute girl, super closeup on the face, in the style of Pendleton Ward from Adventure Time.”

This prompt allowed me to explore different styles within Midjourney, beyond the typical photography style.

The “closeup” type of image is extremely important to give us room to create different surroundings but with a fixed character. Tweak your prompt until you get a good close-up.

Exploring the Four Seasons with Custom Zoom Out Prompts

Next, I wanted to capture the essence of the four seasons. Using custom zoom out prompts with an aspect ratio of 3:2, I ventured into different landscapes:

• “In a snowy environment --ar 3:2 --zoom 2”

• “In a sunflower field --ar 3:2 --zoom 2”

• “In an environment full of autumn leaves --ar 3:2 --zoom 2”

• “In a paradisiac beach, with dolphins in the distance --ar 3:2 --zoom 2” (note: dolphins request didn't work well)

• “In a paradisiac beach --ar 3:2 --zoom 2”

Introducing the Glass Orb Concept

During my exploration, I noticed a slight warping effect caused by Midjourney as I kept zooming out, see image below. To address this, I devised a simple solution: placing the entire scene within a glass orb.

Prompt: “In a glass ball --ar 3:2 --zoom 2.”

This approach not only mitigated the warping effect, but also sparked the idea of multiverses. The glass orb became a gateway to endless artistic possibilities.

Expanding the Multiverse with Glass Balls in the Forest

Eager to delve deeper into the concept of multiverses, I introduced additional glass balls within a realistic forest scene, after zooming out the first one a couple of times.

I wanted that each glass ball represented a different season, further enhancing the interconnectedness and enchantment of the artistic narrative. Cracking this prompt wasn’t that easy, a lot of tests were made until I got almost exactly what I wanted.

In the end, the prompt that worked better was: “With other glass balls nearby, representing winter. --ar 3:2 --zoom 2”.

Encasing the Forest in a Universe Orb

To heighten the sense of wonder and interconnectedness, I encapsulated the forest within another glass orb, drawing inspiration from the iconic universe orb in the movie “Men in Black.”

Here I did a trick: Since I was already planning to make this orb fit into a cat’s eyeball, I actually generated this image below first, with a 2:3 aspect ratio. Then, from that image I generated the 3:2 picture above just to fit well in the final animation.

Changing the aspect ratio during custom zoom-out opens a lot of intriguing possibilities.

The Enigmatic Cat Eye

As a lover of felines, I couldn't resist incorporating a cat character into my artistic exploration. I focused on illustrating a captivating cat's eye on the outside of the multiverse glass balls forest, and coming back to the 3:2 aspect ratio.

Through iterations and variations, I perfected the cat-eye illustration, mirroring the iterative nature of the artistic process itself. The prompt I used was: “Inside a cat's pupil. Blue iris. Super close-up. --ar 3:2” with some fur variations.

Revealing the Cat and Traveling Through the Seasons

With one of the enigmatic cat's eyes as gateway, I unveiled the cat character with a couple of zoom-out and embarked on a journey through the seasons.

Realism blended seamlessly with fantasy as the cat traversed different seasonal landscapes, creating a captivating visual narrative.

Framing the Paradisiacal Beach Artwork

The beauty of the paradisiacal beach scene inspired me to frame it within an artwork. The flowers, the cat, and the ocean in the background revealed a beautiful composition after a zoom-out.

So, I added a frame!

Exploring Other Worlds

Driven by curiosity, I took the framed artwork on a cosmic tour of landscapes. At first, I tried a voxel art forest, but it didn’t make it to the final piece because I thought it was too much forest.

But the outputs were great and I definitely want to explore voxel more in the future.

Look at this zoom-out of the first output 🤩

Beautiful but no….I’m fine with tropical flowers for now. To create a contrast, I decided to give deserts a chance (yeah I know, I’m a nature person, didn’t even think about a city or modern landscape 🤦‍♀️).

With different art styles, including pixel art, Minecraft-inspired scenes, hyperrealistic vistas, and a nod to Katsushika Hokusai's style, I ventured into a world brimming with diversity and artistic expression.

Bringing it Full Circle with the Red Hood

As my artistic journey drew to a close, I felt a desire to create a meaningful connection. The final prompt featured a man with a red hood holding a painting against a black background.

This poignant image symbolized the culmination of my artistic exploration and the profound impact art can have on our lives. And the red hood links to our first character in the beginning.

Post-Processing and Editing in CapCut

After completing the prompts in Midjourney, I turned to CapCut for the post-processing and editing phase. Capcut is a powerful editing tool that allowed me to enhance and refine the visual elements of my video. Here are some of the features I utilized:

1. Alignment: I aligned the individual images generated by Midjourney to create a seamless visual flow. This ensured that each frame transitioned smoothly into the next, maintaining the coherence of the video.

2. Synchronization to Music: To enhance the emotional impact of the video, I synchronized the images to a chosen song, with “epic” theme. I timed specific transitions and visual cues to align with the beats and rhythm of the music, improving the viewing experience.

3. Zoom 1 Entry Animation: Between the zoom-out scenes, I employed Capcut's "zoom 1" entry animation to add a subtle and visually appealing effect. For most images I set the movement to last almost as long as that frame.

4. Clean Cuts: During the sections where the chosen character (the girl, the cat, or the frame) traveled through different seasons, I opted for clean cuts. Clean cuts involve directly transitioning between frames without any additional animation. This technique created a crisp and impactful change between the different landscapes.

5. Varied Frame Durations: To maintain viewer engagement and avoid monotony, I carefully adjusted the frame durations throughout the video. By varying the length of each frame, I ensured that the pacing remained dynamic and engaging, capturing the viewers' attention.

The combination of these CapCut features allowed me to craft a visually stunning and emotionally captivating video.

The editing process was a meticulous endeavor, ensuring that every frame and transition harmonized with the overarching narrative I had in mind.

By sharing my creative process and the prompts I used, I hope to inspire fellow AI artists to embark on their own artistic odyssey 💖.

Thank you reading this far and following me on this journey. If you want shorter drops also find me at:

🌱 Lens: @definn

🐦 Twitter: @definnTheFarmer

No, I didn't crop the image. TVs weren't always widescreen, young padawan. It was (and still is) a lot of fun to play alone and explore all the challenges that the Mushroom Kingdom had to offer, but it was even more fun to invite a friend to join the adventure and be Luigi (the console owner gets priority to be Mario, obviously).

With the internet and the popularization of online gaming, collaboration became even easier and filled with new possibilities. We formed teams to invade enemy bases in DotA, built entire civilizations in less than an hour to destroy a friend's civilization in Age of Empires, and even managed our own football teams in Fifa.

But, at least in my case, it was with the rise of mobile games that I realized a more complex economy emerging in games. Who hasn't paid a little something to keep playing Candy Crush after running out of lives for the day? Just me? Definitely not. In 2021 alone, this free game generated over $1.2 billion in revenue, standing shoulder to shoulder with another giant: Free Fire.

When I started delving deeper into NFTs, the connection with games seemed obvious at the time. If thousands of people were already willing to spend money on outfits and dance moves in Fortnite or stylized weapons in Counter-Strike, transitioning these items to on-chain NFTs seemed simple. But I was mistaken, just like many others who bet on the sector in 2021-2022.

The revenue model of free games may seem simple, but the truth is that it accumulates years of experience in the study of game psychology and economic models.

The Psychology of Games

In a world where social networks and short content are reducing people's attention spans, the gaming industry keeps growing. How is it that a young person who can't watch an entire movie without getting distracted by their phone can concentrate for hours playing Overwatch? The truth is that games are one of the most engaging and immersive forms of entertainment.

There are several reasons why people spend hours playing games, but I'll highlight three that are most common:

• Testing skills: games allow you to develop and test various skills such as reflexes, problem-solving, navigation, and logic. And most importantly, the feedback is nearly immediate, which is very different from real life. When a game is well-designed, with a good balance of learning curve and challenges, it puts the player in a state of flow, with constant progression and feedback that is psychologically stimulating and satisfying.

• Acting independently: who hasn't complained about games that exaggerate with tutorials, causing a slow start (where the gameplay is guided by the game until you supposedly learn all the commands)? Hello Skyrim, I'm talking about you. Players want to feel in control of the game and its decisions, to experience true immersion. Striking the balance between the learning curve and gameplay control is an art, gradually perfected by game studios. Furthermore, there is a growing number of games that fully embrace this aspect, such as open-world games like Minecraft, Zelda: Breath of the Wild, and The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt.

• Connecting with others: humans are social creatures, and even in the pre-internet era games were already bringing people together. Today, it's possible to connect with others and even make new friends through game chats and voice channels in multiplayer games. A close friend of mine is a developer for Gartic, and all the games in the franchise excel at exploring social mechanics.

I bet you can identify these aspects in your favorite games, whether they're indie titles (released independently) or AAA blockbusters. The great challenge lies in balancing the psychological aspects with, obviously, the monetization of the game, because studios and developers don't live on photosynthesis.

The Economics of Games

There are various ways to monetize games. In the 1980s, arcades used coin-operated machines that allowed players to have a few rounds. This business model was a success in its time. In the United States alone, around 10,000 machines generated $5 billion in revenue (equivalent to $12 billion today).

This simple model, like that of Pac-Man, incorporated all the aspects mentioned earlier: the games were easy to learn, difficult to finish, challenging, and displayed high score rankings (creating a social aspect of competitiveness). I still remember the feeling of seeing that "continue?" screen when trying to beat Metal Slug.

This is a powerful mental trigger to make someone spend money: "If I don't insert another coin NOW, I'll have to start over. And I only have 3 seconds to make that decision."

The 1990s were marked by the famous Console Wars, featuring Nintendo, Sony (Playstation), and Microsoft (Xbox). As the machines made their way into players' homes, the monetization model changed. Players bought the console and they bought the game, meaning the investment was made in advance. If they didn't like the game... tough luck, it was already paid for. And if a studio spent a huge amount of money and the game didn't sell well... tough luck again.

That's when the "fractional" release approach started to be tested, with the introduction of downloadable content (DLCs) and expansion packs. This allowed studios to release a game with a smaller budget and gradually expand it based on demand.

With the internet and the popularity of mobile games, distributors realized the potential to create more complex economies. By offering the game for free, the community could be developed more rapidly, and revenue would come from microtransactions. That's how PUBG and Free Fire became popular.

This is just a tiny summary of a complex and fascinating history, illustrating the path that game developers have traversed before reaching the current monetization models. The demand is there, with the gaming market projected to reach around $160 billion by 2050, but this forecast isn't so optimistic for blockchain games, the so-called GameFi or Web3 Games.

In 2022, the sector experienced an 80% crash, going from $24 billion to $7 billion in market capitalization, even after massive investments from funds like Galaxy Interactive, Immutable, and a16z. "Web3 Games" was the crypto sector that received the most investments in a year. What went wrong, and what do investors expect for the future of GameFi?

What's missing in GameFi?

If you're a gaming enthusiast like me and have played some of the popular web3 games, there's a good chance you already know the answer. In fact, 79% of players surveyed said they hate NFTs.

And if you're not a gaming enthusiast but were drawn to web3 games by the opportunity to make easy money, I'm sorry to say, but you're part of the problem.

The simplified answer to this question is that the big web3 games are boring. Incredibly boring. They don't challenge us intellectually, they don't provide us with any independence or immersion, and the interaction with other players is limited to Discord channels discussing prices.

The complete answer is not so simple. Not all web3 game developers are scammers trying to make easy money. Selling NFTs as items for a future game was a fair way for developers to raise funds for their projects. However, financial speculation causes many projects to die before they can progress through the development stages.

Today, traditional game development aims to balance the experience in three aspects: challenge, gratification, and economy.

The excessive focus on the game economy is not a recent complaint from gamers, nor is it exclusive to GameFi. The controversy surrounding pay-to-win games, which affected titles like Diablo Immortal and Star Wars Battlefront 2, shows that players don't like it when gameplay is affected by the economy. Buying a cute outfit in Fall Guys is one thing, but buying XP in Marvel's Avengers, literally purchasing experience points, is another.

Similarly, if a game exaggerates the proposed challenge to the point where players feel incapable, they may abandon the game. For console games, this is acceptable, as seen in the Dark Souls or Cuphead franchises, which became famous for their difficulty and generated great streaming and content. The money has already been spent on purchasing the game. Now imagine if a free-to-play game, dependent on the sale of cosmetic items, had a difficulty level similar to Cuphead. That's what happened with Fortnite.

There was a time when Fortnite players became so skilled that they were driving away new players. Nobody wants to stay in a shooting game without being able to land a single shot. The company had to create bots to help beginner players progress and not give up on the game.

On the other hand, the lack of challenge and excessive focus on economy and gratification seem to be the focus of major Web3 game releases, the so-called play-to-earn games. Imagine the reaction of game enthusiasts when they saw that the revolutionary Web3 gaming sector was proud of Axie Infinity. It was a dull game, practically a financial application or disguised gambling.

Another movement that contributed to the tarnishing of the GameFi sector was STEPN, which popularized the move-to-earn concept, promising rewards for... walking. The problem with these games was their focus on the motive for playing: making money. While years of studying and advancements in game psychology helped create models to make us spend money on games, the GameFi sector thought that making money would be a good motivator. The equation doesn't add up.

Despite attracting thousands of users with this premise, the attracted player profile is not profitable. They are essentially mercenary "players" seeking to profit from the system to the maximum and will abandon the game without hesitation when it is no longer profitable. Such a user profile will never be beneficial for a game.

What Does the Future Hold for Web3 Games?

A lot has already been invested in the sector. Despite the massive drop in market capitalization last year, the GameFi sector received the most investments in the crypto space in 2022, which means there is still much to be done. It's important to note that the price correlation of the GameFi sector is directly tied to the overall crypto market, and it's uncertain whether this correlation is inevitable or needs to be corrected. After all, the traditional gaming market is not affected by the global economy.

The research team at Galaxy believes that the key is to create a tokenization model for in-game items without sacrificing the game's control over its market. If all transaction fees are paid to OpenSea, the game will have monetization problems. Furthermore, it's essential to include experienced individuals in game development teams who understand the gaming market, consumer behavior, and the psychology behind games, and can balance the elements of economy without only attracting profit-seeking mercenaries.

One example mentioned by Galaxy is Sorare, which, to me, without delving too deep, seems like a mix of Cartola and a collectible World Cup album. It's free to start, and it gives you the opportunity to collect rare player cards to build your dream team and compete with friends.

On the other hand, The Block's research team believes in fully on-chain games. According to their latest report, it won't be possible to migrate the current game economic models to Web3 because market control is crucial for the sustainability of traditional games. A new paradigm and new models need to be created for games that are completely on-chain, where every action is a transaction on the blockchain. This requires investment and the development of scalability solutions.

I couldn't find much material from a16z about their game investments (probably embarrassed by Axie Infinity) but, while exploring their portfolio, I noticed they heavily invest in new development studios like Mythical Games and metaverse brands like Yuga Labs. The a16z team responsible for GameFi investments includes notable figures such as David Baszucki, the founder of Roblox; Jason Citron, the founder of Discord; Marc Merrill, the co-founder of Riot Games; Mike Morhaime, the co-founder of Blizzard, among others. So, they probably know what they're doing. You can see their complete portfolio here.

Additionally, I came across an interesting and comprehensive study by a16z on AI (Artificial Intelligence) and games, where they clearly express interest in investing in companies that bring innovative AI solutions to NPCs (computer-controlled characters), generative open worlds, and more.

Conclusion

The truth is that there is still much to be researched and discussed about games in Web3. If you're an investor who fell into the hype of buying tokens related to the sector, I'm sorry. If there's one thing that 2022 taught us, it's that big crypto investors are not always right, and the more arrogant they are, the harder they fall. I think there are more promising sectors to invest in right now, such as Decentralized Social Media.

But that doesn't mean that everyone is wrong. In my opinion, we are in an experimental phase, perhaps analogous to the crash of the gaming industry in 1983, which led Atari to bury around 700,000 game cartridges to clear inventory.

Perhaps Axie and STEPN are the ET games of the 80s: lots of hype, but terrible games. And it's up to the industry to set everything on fire and start from scratch. Well, not exactly from scratch, but from years of accumulated experience and knowledge in the field.

The truth is, we don't want to play games to make money. We want to experience that excitement we felt when we opened a brand-new Super Nintendo box. Or receive that Steam notification when our friends are online playing Counter-Strike.

We want to spend money on something that challenges, entertains, and brings us joy.

✍️ This is a translation of my original post in Brazilian Portuguese for Bankless Brasil

Since Merge, the Ultrasound Money became one of the most popular analytics website to track post-Merge data. But have you explored all charts and data available in it? I’m sure there is some alpha you’re missing, and I’ll help you out.

⛽ Gas Tracker

Right in the top-left corner (and tab name) we have the Gas Tracker.

Did you know you can activate price alerts here? It's a good tool for NFT speculators, since high gas prices usually mean a (badly designed) mint is going on.

📉 Supply Chart

Now the fun begins: the Supply Chart. The go-to-chart of BTC Maxis trying to feed the narrative of “Ethereum didn't deliver its ultrasound promises”. The supply data shows the balance of emitted ETH minus the burned ETH since the Merge, hence, the supply change.

This is what happens when we toggle the “simulate PoW” button. So yes, since The Merge the supply has increased but, here, we see the comparison with PoW emissions. And with BTC. The ETH emission post-Merge is ridiculously smaller than BTC’s.

The emission rate is not fixed, so the %s on the chart represent an average since merge.

🪙 Issuance

Going further down the website, we can explore more in details every single aspect and variables that influence ETH supply growth rate. Here, we can simulate the yearly burn rate according to past data. The time frame that is chosen when we load the website is 1 day.

It's important to understand that ETH is being burned way before the Merge, since the London Fork that happened on Aug 5th 2021 and activated the EIP 1559. You can check historical data on Etherscan if you want to test higher timeframes. The numbers match. I've checked.

The Yearly Issuance is a calculated estimation. For PoS issuance, the main variables are: Total ETH Staked Online Validators Ultrasound constantly reads both values from the chain and calculates a yearly projection. And here, again, we have the “simulate PoW” option.

📒 Bonus: ETH Emission Estimator Spreadsheet

I've created an “ETH Emission Estimator” spreadsheet using the information right from Ethereum's GitHub, that contains detailed information on emission. Feel free to clone it and simulate a few scenarios. Slashing and burning will be included later.

https://t.co/Fl16ky3mdC

📈 Supply Growth

Finally, we have the Supply Growth. The calculation here is simple: it takes the emission, subtracts the burn (avg from the chosen timeframe) and calculates the emission rate on top of current ETH supply. So, the Supply Growth rate depends on the following assumptions.

• The amount of staked ETH will remain basically the same trough the year;

• The amount of online validators will remain constant;

• The activity on-chain will remain constant (this parameter is the most volatile one).

That's why simulating scenarios is so important.

🚧 Gas Market

The “Gas Market” widget shows the average base fee from the last hour. In current emission conditions, 15 Gwei is the minimum base fee for burning to exceed emission. It's the ultrasound barrier. Btw this is an estimation that is not always true for all blocks.

We can't change the time-frame here, meaning that these numbers are useful for in-time burn rates.

❗ Remember: network usage (therefor, ETH burn) is highly volatile, so estimating different scenarios is highly recommended.

For a higher timeframe, you can check Etherscan.

⚖️ Supply Projection

The Supply Projection charts are a bit tricky. It took me a while to understand, and now I'll help you out. The first one loads the Issuance Rewards according to current amount staked, and the Burn Rate according to average burn rate SINCE THE BEGINNING OF THE BEACON CHAIN.

Yes, this is what the “all” means: if you scroll back to the burn “speedometer” and change the timeframe to “all”, this is the burning rate being considered in the 200y projection chart. But here shown as a percentage on top of the supply.

If you want to simulate the Supply Equilibrium with an average burn rate closer to today, just slide it to the left. And remember: burn rates are directly tied to network usage and are quite volatile. Try to simulate scenarios with high and low usage.

The 2y chart is a zoom-in from the above, showing more details on supply split between wallets, contracts and staking, according to historical data. The projection on this chart assumes that the amount of ETH staked and locked in contracts will stay the same.

It's also useful to simulate different scenarios. If we assume that the amount of ETH staked and locked in contracts will grow 1%/y (a conservative growth of the ecosystem) and the emission will reduce 1.36%/y, the ETH in circulation will be: 71% in 2y 56% in 20y.

🔥 The Burn

The indicators are a breakdown of the same estimation we've seen in the “Supply Growth” section. If you choose the same timeframe and multiply the “Burn Total” number to match a year, the numbers will match. And we can convert the numbers to USD using the current price.

The Burn Leaderboard and Categories are useful to break down network usage. Fun Fact: In the last 30 days, new contract deployments alone were responsible for more than 800 ETH burned.

Burns per Block is self-explanatory. Watching this widget for a few seconds, you'll notice that blocks generated with same gas price can burn a hole different amount of ETH. Why? Because of block sizes. Larger blocks will burn more ETH, even with smaller avg gas prices.

🏦 Total Value Secured – TVS

TVS: Total Value Secured. These numbers represent: Ethereum's marketcap ERC20s' marketcap NFTs' marketcap.

I personally don't see the point in analyzing these numbers separately, neither have seen this metric around apart from in the Chainlink community. But the Security Ration (the ratio of TVS/Amount Staked) is an interesting metric to follow historically.

It follows one of the beauties of the PoS system: the monetary aspect of the chain currency participating directly in the decentralization, by the staking mechanism. So smaller this number is, we have more validators securing the network and more ETH out of circulation.

➕ Monetary Premium

The Monetary Premium section is complex in terms of concepts, and I'll explore it in depth in another day. For now, you can check: the projected APR for validators (run a node!) how is Ethereum positioned in the market in terms of P/E, compared to other companies.

🔬 Issuance Breakdown

Finally, the Issuance Breakdown. Where does each ETH in existence come from? 50% of all ETH was distributed during the initial crowdsale. But now there are more than 2M unique addresses that hold ETH, being the Beacon Chain contract, the largest holder.

🖼️ POAP

Ultrasound team has just released their POAP! From the 5000+ Twitter fam, only 1559 were chosen to receive it, based on the amount of fam followers. The 1559 number is a mention to the famous EIP 1559 that introduced the burn mechanism to Ethereum.

However, all of this has led me to another philosophical and scientific question: Are AIs conscious, or are they anywhere close to achieving consciousness?

Let’s dive into the fascinating world of AI consciousness and the Turing Test problem through the thought-provoking Chinese Room example.

The Turing Test

In 1950, Alan Turing proposed the Turing Test as a way to evaluate a machine's ability to exhibit intelligent behavior indistinguishable from that of a human. If a machine can pass this test, it's considered “intelligent.”

The test was groundbreaking at the time and remains a significant milestone in the field of artificial intelligence.

John Searle's Chinese Room Thought Experiment

John Searle's Chinese Room thought experiment challenges the idea that a machine can truly understand or possess consciousness. This experiment is interesting in terms of analyzing if models like GPT or other AI models are genuinely intelligent or not.

Imagine a person in a room who doesn't speak Chinese. They receive Chinese characters through a slot, consult a rule book, and send back characters as a response.

The person doesn't understand Chinese but can still produce coherent answers. Now replace the person with a computer. It can process and respond to Chinese characters without understanding their meaning.

The question then arises: Is this true understanding, or is it just syntax manipulation?

Searle's Argument

Searle argues that passing the Turing Test doesn't mean a machine truly understands or has consciousness. It only demonstrates the ability to simulate intelligent behavior, not possess genuine understanding.

This raises questions about the nature of AI consciousness. Can an AI ever truly understand, or will it always be limited to syntactical manipulation? Check this 2013 TED talk where Searle explores the definition and knowledge around consciousness:

A few key points to emphasize from it include::

1. Consciousness is a biological phenomenon: John Searle emphasizes that consciousness is a biological process that occurs in the brain, much like other processes such as digestion or respiration.

2. Subjectivity: Conscious experiences are subjective, meaning that they can only be directly accessed by the person experiencing them. This aspect of consciousness makes it difficult to study, as we cannot directly observe or measure another person's conscious experiences.

3. The importance of understanding consciousness: Searle stresses that understanding the nature of consciousness is essential for understanding ourselves and our place in the universe. It is also important for comprehending the potential and limitations of artificial intelligence.

4. Consciousness and artificial intelligence: Searle argues that while AI systems can be incredibly sophisticated and useful, they do not possess consciousness. To create a truly conscious AI, we would need to replicate the biological processes that give rise to consciousness in the human brain, a challenge that is not yet fully understood.

The Broader Debate on AI Ethics, Responsibility, and Rights

The Chinese Room example and overall consciousness debate opens the door to debates on AI ethics, responsibility, and the potential rights of AI entities. As we continue to make strides in AI development, the question of AI consciousness and understanding remains an ongoing philosophical debate, but it seems we’re not there yet, as smart as ChatGPT looks like. We need to crack our own consciousness before replicating it.

Many people believe that humanity is doomed if AI achieves true consciousness, but this is a topic for another discuss