I might know how to write a single blog post (or not - I’ll let the readers be the judge of that), but I have absolutely no clue how to go about writing 30. Conversely, all programming languages have elementary operators to compare numbers < > , but can't natively sort an array. Of course, you could use a sorted -like function in any high-level language, but it would be calling a sorting algorithm under the hood. The merge sort divides the array into its most atomic form: an array of one element. Then, it conquers (i.e., solves the problem for each array). In that case, it's easy because an array of one element is a sorted array by definition. Finally, it combines all sorted arrays to obtain the final result. I will not spend more time on the topic because there are gigabytes of great resources online, and chat-GPT4o would be a far greater teacher than me.

All divide-and-conquer algorithms can be generalized under the following form:

procedure p(input x of size n):
    if n < some constant k:
        Solve x directly without recursion
    else:
        Create a subproblems of x, each having size n/b
        Call procedure p recursively on each subproblem
        Combine the results from the subproblems

The Master Theorem classifies the algorithms following this design paradigm based on how complicated it is to create/recombine subproblems compared to solving them and provides an asymptotic analysis for each category.

I'm currently reading all Vitalik’s articles on Zero-Knowledge proofs (ZKPs). He is a fount of knowledge, and I believe Vitalik's work on education equals his contribution to Ethereum in terms of usefulness to humankind. As I mentioned in Day 1 of this series, my background is in computer science more than advanced mathematics. One would argue that computer “science” isn’t a real science and neither is anything else that needs the word “science” appended to it. Cleaving tweet. Still, Vitalik makes it possible to grasp complex concepts with relatively little mathematical background. He always starts from the beginning or points the reader to the appropriate resource. It's the best place on the internet to learn advanced crypto. Right, but why am I talking about ZKPs now? Because I have an intense fear of missing out (FOMO) that I can't shake off. It's been THE big thing in crypto for a few years and will likely enable privacy-preserving KYC applications and solve Ethereum scaling, amongst other problems. Easy. The math behind them is fascinating, and their domain of applicability is unbound. Fast Fourier Transform (FFTs) algorithms play a big role in proof generation, allowing the implementation of optimized polynomial multiplication required to transform the "prover's statement" (i.e., computational problem) into a Quadratic Arithmetic Program (QAP). I will surely not do better than Vitalik (again) in explaining them, but I love that most common implementations of FFTs are part of the divide-and-conquer big family.
And they belong to the same Master Theorem category as the Merge Sort.

Is the world running on a handful of fundamental meta-concepts? We'll answer that question in the following post (just kidding!)

How do you say PMF in Portuguese? After long months of coding remotely with X2 from my parent's apartment, we shipped a testable PoC. It was time for a confrontation with the first users. Factchain is available for Warpcast on Base mainnet (with ridiculous stake amounts) through a frame and for X (ex-Twitter) directly in the browser with the extension. We announced on Warpcast first to receive feedback from a benevolent community. X1 took over the communication. The general atmosphere on Farcaster (the social protocol behind Warpcast) is known to be more indulgent than on Crypto Twitter, and even though it's too early to have misinformation posts, the potential early fact-checkers were here, living at the intersection of crypto and information. As a reminder, Factchain brings cross-social onchain community notes. The community welcomed the project with warm interest, and we even saw a bunch of notes starting to appear under Tweets without having shared a single communication post on Twitter. In my eyes, it was enough traction to start talking to VCs. This was all very new to me. X1 and X2 agreed to join the venture full-time if I managed to raise enough capital to match their current salary. I put on my CEO hat and began the mission.

There are many excellent books on how to succeed in fundraising. I thought I could contribute to this large body of literature by talking about failure, too often overshadowed by industry fairy tales.

Here are my top tips for failing to raise funds. 100%.

• Having "co-founders" working a full-time job. This take is obvious, but entrepreneurs sometimes don't have all the options available. It creates a cap table that no VC can comprehend. It requires a bigger round. Production stops because you're the only one full-time and busy looking for investors all day. VCs are like sharks; they smell blood miles away.

• A GTM strategy that is too disconnected from the end product. How does Factchain Community enable Factchain Media? We saw the fact-checkers community as the only solution for mainstream socials to integrate Factchain Media. Were we right? I don't know, but it creates too many "what ifs?". Bootstrapping a community is already a full-time job; I think VCs saw it more like two different products and missed the connection. A GTM strategy should de-risk your project, not add more interrogations.

• Aim for a large financial round too early. I had many reasons to justify expenses. Among other significant developments, we needed a better note ranking algorithm than Twitter, and the Factchain PoC only computes an average of all ratings. I was disconnected from reality: We hadn't proven the beginning of a PMF, and the tech requirements were probably already too big. Better start small with BAs before pitching to top-tier VCs.

Even if the long-term goal is to go mainstream, Factchain is too industry-specific for generalist VCs to lead a pre-seed round, but I had the chance to be introduced to one of the most successful crypto VCs. After much discussion on the project, they couldn't believe in our ability to (i) bootstrap an audience and (ii) make it sustainable. In yesterday's post, I promised to share why the notes and rating stakes were probably a bad idea. A Lannister always pays his debts.

The note and rating stakes didn't help at all to reassure VCs on their aforementioned worries. Remember, we developed Factchain with the "Put your ETH where your mouth is" narrative of X1. Users would pay some ETH to submit notes and ratings and get rewarded or slashed based on the quality of their contributions. These financial stakes became our Achilles' heel. It raised a plethora of questions:

• How do you pay for the winners? Factchainers are definitely not playing a zero-sum game.

• How do you mitigate security risks? Stakes are locked in the Smart Contract for the duration of the "note auction" (i.e., the period during ratings are open)

• How do you stop malicious actors from rating their own notes and always win the auction?

On the other hand, what do we really gain from stakes? The main answer is incentives, but I'm not even sure it's a valid one. Who wants to fact-check information for a few bucks? People interested in the Truth do it for other motivations than money. The cultural NFT reward would've probably been enough for them to enroll. Bragging about being right is a far more joyful incentive than making a few WEI out of it, and users could've been rewarded in an Airdrop anyway. Have you never heard of the FACT$ token? No, and that’s alright: it never existed.

We saw yesterday how the stakes could've secured the system by increasing the costs of network collusion. Intuitively, the more users involved, the more money a malicious actor needs to spread a single misinformation note. This intuition is wrong. The median rating number on X community notes is only 72 for 400k involved users. Submitting more ratings on your own notes will always be affordable unless requiring a dissuasive stake amount.

We should've explored other solutions, like reputation scores.

In most Web2 forums, like Stack Overflow, you may not be able to post a question immediately after your registration. The site has certain restrictions to prevent spam and ensure the quality of the content. Users must answer a few questions first or wait a while.

We could've replicated this reputation scores system onchain to gate note creation by Ethereum addresses with already a few correct ratings under their belt. And restrict the number of notes new addresses can rate in a given period.

A reputation score-based system would've drastically reduced the cost of the Factchain launch on mainnet: no winner to pay, fewer security risks to cover.

There is a demonstrated growing interest in the X Community Notes feature. I've written two Python scripts to extract notes stats and ratings stats from the X public dataset, and their output is impressive: 3x more users and notes over the last 6 months. The use of browser extensions and frames could effectively redirect this traffic onchain, creating opportunities to build a community of fact-checkers. This potential is worth further exploration.

Per Ardua Ad Astra. (3/3)

I will not paraphrase the great definitions of mechanisms and credible neutrality given by Vitalik in this 2015 post. Please do read it, though, as these two definitions are fundamental to our concept of Factchain Community: an onchain version of X community notes. This feature was initiated by Twitter in 2021 under the name of Birdwatch. It was an experimental attempt to involve users in the moderation effort of the platform. Enrolled users can rate others' community notes and submit their own notes after a few successful ratings. An open-source ranking algorithm periodically computes ratings to assign scores to notes. Vitalik (again) did a great job explaining how the algorithm is trying to select notes that get cross-tribal approval (i.e., notes rated as HELPFUL by users with different political opinions). 

Moderation is costly for all social media, so there is much to be gained from getting users to collaborate in order to do some of it for free.

When Elon Musk took over Twitter, he probably saw an immense opportunity in Birdwatch, rebranded it Community Notes, and allocated an entire team to it. The project had two dimensions: cost efficiency and ideological principles. Elon could boast about being the guardian of free speech while laying off staff handling misinformation.

While X’s community notes have paved the way, their approach still falls short in several aspects:

• Users are anonymized. They can't brag about being the author of a community note under Joe Biden or other important personalities' posts. They have no incentive to participate in the moderation effort. "Given how demotivating this selfless task is, It's quite likely that special interest groups will eventually end up taking control."

• It is impossible to audit the data used by the algorithm as X ultimately controls the storage and access of Notes and Ratings. Elon Musk has already been accused - probably unfairly - of hiding community notes under his posts.

• It is limited to X and cannot be easily extended to other platforms.

We built Factchain Community to address the above concerns.

I was mainly responsible for developing the Factchain Backend and the Solidity Factchain Contracts on the figure above. I used typescript for the backend because of the maturity of the JS web3 ecosystem. There are great libs like ethers to interact with Smart Contracts. Eventually, I became obsessed with NFTs. I always thought they were a sufficient motivation for people to contribute. X1 had another vision: "Put your ETH where your mouth is." Every note and rating would require a financial stake for two principal reasons: (i) incentivize contributors who would get rewarded or slashed based on the quality of their contribution, (ii) augment the cost for bad actors to vote on their own note and spread misinformation. We will see in the following post why these financial stakes turned out to be a bad solution to these two problems.

While working on Factchain NFTs, I drifted away from the purely technical aspect to find an image for them. As we saw on Day 4, people are used to associating NFTs with JPEGs, and NFT marketplaces like Opensea and Blur display them as thumbnail images. I came up with the idea of using AI to generate an image from the community note. The output is random but related to the note's text. Nobody can obtain the same image again, so the NFT is unique in style and ownership. I used the great replicate AI platform to generate the image with one API call and stored the result on IPFS through Pinata.

Once their note is finalized (i.e., the last run of the ranking algo), Factchain authors receive the original as an ERC-721 non-fungible token, and raters receive a copy as an ERC-1155 semi-fungible token. Both share the same immutable metadata on IPFS. These tokens are the entry point to a social network of fact-checkers, laying the foundation for a billion-dollar authentication SaaS.

Sadly, It didn’t happen. But on the flip side, I wouldn't have had the time to write this series if it had. Every cloud has a silver lining, I suppose. (2/3)

At Ledger, I participated in developing features to transition the enterprise’s offering from a bare crypto Vault with an integrated orchestration framework into an entire web3 platform with activable DeFi and NFT use cases. Amongst other things, I worked on Ethereum smart contracts interaction and deployment, Ethereum message signatures, and DApps integration. I was implementing the product strategy of X1, who I introduced in yesterday's post, working under the technical authority of X2, a seasoned software architect. I have always admired X2’s technical skills and learned a lot from him. He could come up with a simple, intelligible solution to a wide variety of problems. Anyone who worked with him would speak highly about their collaboration: X2 was kind, humble, and always available to help when challenging issues arose. X1 was a close friend of mine, but my relationship with X2 never exceeded the professional domain. Both did not live in Paris. X1 used to come to the office twice a week. It was always the funniest day. At that time, I'd do anything to please and care for him. If he or a member of his family was sick, I would call my older neurologist's sister for her opinion. If he was late at the office, I would pick him up with my dad's BMW 1200 GT. If he needed a temporary shelter, my apartment was always open. 

Rapidly, my entrepreneurial instinct triggered the ambition to found a venture with X1. I thought he'd be the perfect co-founder: very few people have a vision and even fewer are my colleagues. None of them are my friends. I was continuously trying to look for business ideas in the crypto sphere. The AI-generated picture of the Balenciaga Pope that tricked the entire internet sets the tone: how to leverage crypto to authenticate media and combat misinformation? This question has all the ingredients for a riveting story. Misinformation is a threat to the fabric of our digital society. The solution will be technically fascinating. Business potential is unlimited. With the rise of AI, the timing was perfect. AI creates abundance; Blockchain will preserve scarcity. I wanted X1 to start obsessively thinking about the problem. I opened a Notion space, ridiculously named it "Sourth" after the contraction of Source and Truth, invited him to it, and started doing market research on the existing solutions. I read all the C2PA specifications to understand why this standard was never broadly adopted despite the support of powerful companies. Every lunch with X1 was an opportunity to convince him to build something together. Eventually, it worked out. One day, X1 came to my desk with a solution draft: a SaaS for creators to authenticate their media onchain in a web2 fashion, abstracting away all the complexity of blockchain. Social networks would check for authenticated media through a simple API call and display warnings accordingly.

X1 and I always had an asymmetrical relationship. I placed him far above his absolute worth, and he put me far behind mine. I thought it was the price to pay to maximize the chance of success of this project, and I thought I'd be able to endure it forever. I was wrong in both instances. It's usually wrong to idealize people. There is no hero. I learnt it the hard way.

The more we thought about Factchain Media, the more obstacles appeared. How do you convince content creators to upload to the platform? Social networks and publishers would be even more complex to onboard. On a warm summer day, while hiking in "Les Calanques de Marseille," I received a phone call from X1. He introduced me to the fundamentals of Factchain Community. I thought it would be a great GTM (Go To Market) strategy: leverage the power of a community of fact-checkers to launch our authentication SaaS. The call came before Vitalik’s article on community notes by a few weeks. Not a lot of people can precede Vitalik's intuition.

X1 wanted to start the adventure with someone of "his seniority,” and Factchain Community is a complex system. We onboarded X2 and started thinking about an implementation. It will be a side project for X1 and X2. They both quit Ledger for a full-time contractor job in extremely demanding environments. On my side, I quit Ledger to work full-time on Factchain. I had to learn Solidity to program the smart contracts. I will probably dedicate some more technical posts on Solidity and the EVM. It was an immersive experience, and I want to keep writing code that runs onchain.

From that day, I embarked on an entrepreneurial adventure with X1 and X2. I set myself the goal to get Factchain off the ground and make them come on board full-time.

To be continued. (1/3)

I grew up in an environment that associated success with physical symbols such as fancy cars, modern houses, and expensive watches. X1 always had vindictive words for it. He's never been in this world, and crypto was his revenge.

I was miles away from understanding why people would spend a single dollar to own a JPEG. The answer is Culture. When you own a beautiful CryptoDickButt like mine - bought 1.5 ETH less than a year ago and worth 0.3 ETH today - you send a social signal and join a community of owners, and there is a market for that. People speculate on the future of cultural trends, memes, and ideology. I probably placed the wrong bet on dickbutts, but I have no regret: I'm still in love with this beautiful creature of pixels.

A financial consolation came from my first manager at Ledger. He's been the greatest manager I've ever had, a great software engineer, and the most degen of all degens, forever lost in the Cosmos. From his distant planet, he brought me back a badkid that I sold for 4000 dollars. When the collection went live, he minted an entire class for a few bucks. I sold mine more for the social signal than the cash. I'm bullish on Ethereum. Ethereum is my religion, and Vitalik is my prophet. Owning anything on another ecosystem is a betrayal.

Misconceptions plague global opinion on NFTs. The last bull market valued monkeys' JPEGs at millions of dollars. No mind can comprehend such nonsense; most artists can't recognize them as art, and they're right. But NFTs aren't these JPEGs. NFT is a technology. Hating on NFTs is like hating on IMAP/SMPT because your mailbox is full of spam. NFTs enable anyone to own a piece of data online. It can be literally anything, from music royalties to scientific papers or house title deeds. If their real-world application remains limited, it's mostly because society isn't ready for it. Record labels are hard to disrupt, Elsevier will not easily give up on scientific paper distribution, and most states want to control house ownership. Let's comfort ourselves with two activable NFT use cases:

• Factchain NFTs are honorific badges bestowed to guardians of truth: authors of community notes who combat disinformation on social media. They could unlock access to a group chat on warpcast to emphasize the community or allow owners to connect on reserved areas of Factchain.

• You got it, NFTs can grant their owners access to token-gated features online. For example, I'm writing this series on the wonderful paragraph creators' platform, which allows me to restrict article access to the owners of specific NFTs. Sometimes, creators want more granularity in their distribution. Publishing online used to be either all or nothing. Not anymore with NFTs.

Don't hesitate to mint your favorite post from my writing challenge. It will probably never serve any other purpose than showing your support and helping me grind daily.

See you tomorrow.

I've always loved anagrams. Rearranging a set's elements and finding another meaning is immensely satisfying. It's easy to write a suboptimal Python one-liner to detect them.

sorted(word1) == sorted(word2)

I even landed my first software engineering job by optimizing anagram detection to a linear complexity: Haa, the good old days with trivial junior interview questions. Nature has played with the same concept since its inception. In fact, It’s commonplace for molecules to be made of the same atoms but arranged differently. These are called isomers and have entirely different physiochemical properties.

So, if humans are to teams what atoms are to molecules and letters are to words, what happens when we rearrange them worldwide? What properties do the teams gain and lose? I can't give a generic answer to this question; the relevant experience under my belt here is building Factchain remotely with two co-founders over six months. I used to work with them at Ledger, in a hybrid configuration. I don't want to dive right now into the nature of our relationships and how they translated into a common project. That would spoil the rest of the series. Still, It is interesting how my perception of them changed with a different setup. Moving from physical to remote is more complex than joining an established remote team, and it is better to be Meteor than Remote when building something from scratch. Building a company surpasses the act of creation itself because the values and motivation must equally infuse in all participants.

Ironically, I just received this automatic email from the YC co-founder's matchmaking platform, to which I recently registered. Welcome to the Tinder of wanna-be entrepreneurs. It's the far west out there, especially if you have a tech background. It's probably a fun enough experience to fit in its own post.

The world isn't governed by data, but its transitional state function is. To build a successful startup, you better live next to your co-founder, say YC data. I didn't set any area restrictions on their platform because I'm at a point in my life where I could relocate anywhere. I'm crossing a monster interchange of opportunities. Where to go? What to build? Who to join? I'm probably writing this series to find answers, but I know I'll flourish in an early-stage environment.

In a more advanced development phase of a startup, remote work is excellent for productivity since all human knowledge is at the fingertips of anyone with an internet connection. Knowledge transmission doesn't require a delimited physical room and scale-up open spaces are more often a source of noise and distraction than a fertile ground for collaboration. However, it can be frightening for juniors, who usually require more emotional support to learn. Emotion doesn't travel well through wifi. We should create a less hostile environment for them (us?). I'm a transitioning junior in that regard, but I now feel confident enough to build from everywhere with anyone.

If my next experience is fully remote, I'd take the opportunity to travel the world. I need nature. I need a break. It's sunny outside. Sorry for the botched conclusion, gtg.

If you've read yesterday's post (Day 1), you should know the context of how I got into chess: a boring class of "entrepreneurial" bullshit somewhere in 2019. I generally think no theoretical business learning can beat hard skills with a building habit. But that's for another story. Chess amazed me in the first place because of its scientific nature: a game with incomplete but perfect information. These terms borrowed from game theory mean that you can't know your opponent's strategy, but both players have access to the same level of information: the state of the board. This type of game is conceptually more difficult to imagine and requires one player to outwit the other by making them misinterpret one's decisions. Chess is a psychological war. Another fascinating aspect of chess is its relation to infinity. Claude Shannon calculated 10^120 chessable (possible) games while trying to brute force a solution. It's more than the number of atoms in the universe after physicists' cosmological estimation (10^80). So, how could computers suggest the best move, like the arrow in the image below, if they have to evaluate an infinite number of situations (i.e., board states)? Well, they have strategies to discard most of them.

The values of free software are closely tied to crypto. I can’t envision a closed-source crypto project succeeding, at least in the B2C industry. Crypto ideology goes a step further than the anti-capitalist views of open source. It is more libertarian-focused: it provides financial and privacy tools for the masses to escape the state's control. Lichess is open-source and founded by Thibault Duplessis (ornicar), describing himself on Git Hub as the "Maker of lichess.org, a hippie communist chess server for drug fueled atheists.". How can we not love this man? Lichess tastes the French Revolution and is an excellent alternative to chess.com, a $500M business with the same features. Respect. The cherry on the cake is the tech behind Lichess: Scala, an elegant and powerful statically typed functional language targeting the JVM. This technology resonates deeply with me, so I might dedicate an entire article to it in the upcoming days.

I think you got it: I love this project, but how could crypto improve it? Great product ideas often come from broken user experiences, and it's easier to have the former when you encounter the latter. Putting aside these typical business school platitudes, I'd love Lichess to go onchain for at least two reasons: (i) username updateability and (ii) collecting iconic games.

• My lichess username comes from the name of my Legendary World of Warcraft Orc from the Lich King era. Definitely not my proudest invention. I remember being 12 and randomly typing on my keyboard to obtain this weird assemblage of letters deprived of any meaning: "Rutiyu". Lichess doesn't allow me to update this username from another age. I'd love to connect with a wallet and claim ownership of an ENS or a Farcaster ID to replace it. Moreover, I bet this onchain integration would be easier than allowing native username mutation. They could add a link in their database, just like an alias, and rely on "Rutiyu" for all the internal actions. But I'm just speculating here.

• Some games are iconic, at least for the ones who played them. I'd love to collect them onchain as NFTs directly from the lichess interface. The thumbnail image could be a beautiful screenshot of the checkmate position stored on IPFS. 

Have you heard about Farcaster, the "sufficiently decentralized social protocol"? I'm sure you have.
It's one of the hottest crypto projects at the moment. The key promise is to decouple the social graph of a Twitter-like social network from its client applications. Users own their data to a certain degree. Censorship happened at the client level, not at the protocol level. Suppose @dwr bans me from Warpcast because I keep posting nudes or scams in other users’ channels. In that case, I can still use a different client like Firefly or Supercast that might have different policies, like being nudes friendly, and interact with my network from there.

The Farcaster team recently shipped frames that let developers turn any cast (post) into an interactive web3 application. It makes signing transactions from the comfort of your social app super straightforward, and from there springs the opportunity of integrating lichess. I'd love to send a challenge to a lichess username from a frame on Warpacst and use the lichess javascript SDK to operate the game. This challenge could handle stakes to spice up the integration, and a smart contract could act as an escrow until the game ends. Irwin - the open-source protector of lichess from all chess players villainous - could detect, slash, and ban cheaters.

Ideally, as stated earlier, the lichess username would resolve to a Farcaster ID. I could forget about it forever and challenge my friends directly from my favorite social network.

I'd love to see someone (me?) work on the above integration. Could we call it Farchess? Probably. It would be worth asking the community's opinion, but let me finish this writing challenge beforehand…

"I was a terror since the public school era," - even earlier, actually. I was born in Paris on the 8th of September 1997 in a blended family. I share my dad with two older brothers and my mum with an older sister. My parents were a classic case of love at first sight, or coup de foudre. They met at the law firm they both worked at less than a year before my birth. I spent the first months of my life in hospital because of renal complications. Doctors said I would have died if I wasn't a five-kilogram newborn. Already too big to fail. I, of course, do not remember these early days, but most will agree that early traumatic separation from parents can leave indelible scars.

School has always been complicated for the little me, who constantly rejected authority and control. I instinctively saw it as a disciplinary institution—a mandatory children's ranking machine. Despite being a curious soul, this vision hindered my learning ability, leading to getting kicked out for the first time at fourteen for behavioral issues and poor academic results. A psychiatrist diagnosed me with ADHD and prescribed me Ritalin. My parents sent me to a tennis academy boarding school. Exercise was a straightforward solution to calm a kid who could not sit still for more than half an hour. It worked well, and over time things improved, though it's difficult to discern whether the drugs or the sports played the more significant role in my progress. I'll let the reader decide. In four years of residential school, I was lonely enough to discover a love for literature that has stayed with me ever since. I read classic authors like Kafka, Stendhal, and Dostoïevski, to name a few. While tennis may have been the initial remedy for my inability to sit still, I found true peace and fulfillment in literature.

At seventeen, I got hooked on mathematics after attending a vulgarization conference on the Riemann hypothesis (sorry for the French ref), probably the biggest unsolved problem in math. At that age, I wasn't confident enough to target prestigious engineering schools that develop the pretentious personalities I encountered later in my professional life. I went to Epitech, a software-focused school, following the advice of a math teacher I randomly met in an internet cafe. At that time, playing MMORPG was considered a rebellious, addictive behavior to escape from reality, at least in my family. I had to frequent these places to evade parental control. Learning to code gave me everything, from intellectual reward to autonomy. But man, it was hard. I remember struggling with pointers and memory the first year or two. I wasn't exceptionally gifted, but I tried so hard that I eventually reached the top 10%. I used to love writing C code for programs on Unix systems. Any serious low-level programmer would laugh at this code, as I do today, but the first achievements often occupy a special place in one’s heart. To be serious about software, you must start with low-level languages. I even got my hands dirty with the X86 assembly, rewriting the C library functions like strcpy and friends. The last two years of the Epitech education progressively turned into business bullshit. I spent my days playing chess, convinced that nothing is more useful than useless knowledge. I decided I had enough technical background to start my professional life. So I dropped out six months before the graduating ceremony and went for it.

I will spare you a linear narration of my successive jobs and entrepreneurial stories. Some are worth an entire post, and I must keep the material for the next twenty-nine days of writing. However, my drive has always been two-fold: to be free and to make something people want. The corporate world can be crushing for the soul. Most will trade their inner kid for status and a perception of success. There is a reason this Trainspotting quote resonates so hard with every 90's kid after a bad office day of doing submissive and redundant tasks. The act of creation is the only escape. It requires bravery, passion, and love.

In the last three years, I have fallen in love with crypto because it aligns with my libertarian values. Crypto is a rebel, escaping the disciplinary institutions. Crypto is open and transparent. Crypto is for everyone. Crypto is untamable. I hope this series of articles will attract readers in the decentralized world. I also hope to have the discipline to keep writing daily, and if I do, it will be unchained. onchain.

Welcome onboard.