Listen to the Podcast here (or read the content below)
Question: What is your background in technology and Polkadot?
I used to work as a database developer before getting into blockchain and starting my YouTube channel. In 2017, a work colleague introduced me to Bitcoin, which sparked my interest in cryptocurrencies. I set up a wallet and purchased my first Bitcoin on Coinbase, a popular platform at the time. I also discovered Ethereum and Litecoin on Coinbase and decided to invest in them without fully understanding their differences. As I delved deeper into crypto, I began to grasp its technical aspects and its potential to solve issues like double spending and high transaction fees. This intrigued me, and I started researching altcoins and initial coin offerings (ICOs). In April 2018, I launched my own YouTube channel to discuss cryptocurrencies and ICOs. I was particularly drawn to the Neo ecosystem, known as the “Ethereum of China” at the time, due to its requirement for payment to list projects, which I believed would reduce scams and encourage serious development. I expanded my research to other cryptocurrencies like Cardano and Tezos and aimed to become multi-chain rather than focusing solely on Neo. In 2020, I discovered Polkadot, an interoperability ecosystem connecting different blockchains, and became fascinated by its creator, Gavin Wood, who had previously developed Ethereum’s programming language, Solidity. This led me to cover Polkadot extensively on my channel, including interviews with founders and co-founders, project reviews, and providing the latest news updates.
Question: Why did you decide to go the creator route rather than stay with coding?
The comparison between relational databases and Blockchain reveals intriguing similarities and differences. Formerly, my professional endeavors revolved around working with centralized relational databases. However, the advent of Blockchain introduced a paradigm shift, offering a distributed database solution. This technology operates in a decentralized manner, still functioning as a database. Ultimately, it manages transactions, user information, and analogous data elements. Consequently, there exist certain commonalities between the two systems.
Nonetheless, it is imperative to acknowledge that content creation, in its essence, diverges substantially from development and coding. Engaging in content creation necessitates an intricate sequence of tasks, encompassing research, video production, scriptwriting, video editing, and publication. Such processes vastly differ from the meticulous intricacies of coding. In retrospect, my journey commenced in 2018, when I embarked on content creation endeavors while maintaining my existing occupation. Gradually, I realized that my true passion lay in the realm of content creation, rather than coding. The emotional gratification and profound sense of purpose associated with coding appeared lacking, prompting me to contemplate a different career trajectory, one that I could pursue until retirement.
Thus, I yearned to explore alternative avenues, seeking a new narrative and a divergent initiative to ascertain personal fulfillment. Despite encountering fluctuations along the way, I, along with other content creators within the crypto industry, confronted numerous challenges. Our fortunes are inextricably intertwined with the performance of the market itself, rendering us heavily reliant on its favorable conditions. However, by astutely devising strategies and meticulously planning our actions, such as capitalizing on bullish market periods and diligently preparing for bearish downturns, it is possible to navigate this dynamic space successfully.
In conclusion, while similarities can be drawn between relational databases and Blockchain, the divergent nature of content creation from coding becomes apparent upon closer examination. My personal journey has exemplified this contrast, as I discovered my true calling in content creation and chose to veer away from coding as my long-term career choice. Embracing the challenges and uncertainties of this new path, I have encountered both successes and setbacks, mirroring the experiences of fellow content creators within the crypto industry. By adopting prudent measures and formulating comprehensive plans, we strive to achieve stability and resilience within a market that inherently fluctuates.
Question: What is the importance of content creators in Web3, in particular in Polkadot?
It is of utmost importance to recognize the distinction between educators and influencers, as they serve distinct roles within the realm of content creation. While many individuals identify themselves as influencers, the true essence of being an influencer and their actual identities warrant careful consideration. Influencers, in my perspective, attempt to exert influence upon others by promoting certain products or ideas, with the aim of incentivizing them to invest, particularly in the context of cryptocurrency. Despite the ubiquitous disclaimer of “no financial advice,” their actions often contradict this statement, as they frequently showcase their personal gains and encourage others to follow suit. Such contradictions appear illogical to me. Consequently, I opted not to tread this path.
Instead, I chose to adopt a different approach by presenting information about products in a transparent manner. I discuss the positive aspects and potential drawbacks, always emphasizing the importance of conducting individual research. While I refrain from providing explicit recommendations, I believe it is crucial for individuals to examine the tokenomics, as it provides insights into potential concerns, such as the impact of investor sell-offs, which is a prominent apprehension. Regrettably, many content creators neglect this aspect, driven solely by their personal agendas.
I sought to deviate from this trend by prioritizing an educational approach. However, it is essential to strike a balance, as being solely educational may hinder channel growth. Therefore, I aim to craft enticing thumbnails, titles, and video descriptions that pique viewers’ curiosity without resorting to clickbait tactics. This strategy allows me to capture attention and entice individuals to click on the video, subsequently uncovering educational content within. This delicate equilibrium between captivating presentation and substantive educational material defines my modus operandi.
In summary, distinguishing between educators and influencers is crucial. While influencers often promote products with the intent to influence investments, I have chosen a path focused on transparent information dissemination. My approach underscores the significance of individual research and tokenomics, aspects often overlooked by content creators who prioritize their personal agendas. Balancing educational content with captivating presentation enables me to strike a chord with viewers and provide valuable insights.
Question – who was your favourite interviewee?
Bill Laboon is a notable figure in the cryptocurrency community, serving as the Director of the Web3 Foundation. He played a pivotal role in the establishment of Kusama, which functions as the canary network of Polkadot. Regrettably, I did not have the opportunity to personally know him during the early days. However, I learned about Kusama from a community member who informed me about its potential. At that time, I was grappling with a sense of discouragement due to the prevailing bear market. The relentless downturns experienced throughout 2018 and 2019 had left me disheartened. Despite being employed full-time in 2
020, I remained apprehensive about the market’s trajectory and its potential for recovery.
It was during this period that the community member mentioned Gavin Wood, prompting me to ponder whether Kusama, being a test net at that time, would thrive, regardless of Gavin’s involvement. Unfortunately, I had missed the early opportunity to engage with the Kusama project.
Bill’s notable contributions to the ecosystem, his dedication to educating others, and his involvement in the “Polkadot Digest” newsletter or blog have captivated my interest. His commitment to providing the latest updates within the ecosystem demonstrates a genuine pursuit of education. Although I am uncertain if he actively engages in coding as a director, his background as a developer resonates with me as I, too, possess a technical background. This shared similarity reinforces my trust in him as a reliable source of information and content. Unlike certain individuals within the crypto industry who may have personal agendas, Bill’s down-to-earth nature and integrity stand out. He possesses a wealth of information to share regarding the broader ecosystem, especially concerning Polkadot, which further solidifies my admiration for him. As a result, Bill has become my favorite figure in this space.
Question: How can we make Polkadot more accessible to the public
I believe that creating user-friendly decentralized applications (dApps) is crucial, especially when it comes to wallets. Currently, when people think of Polkadot, they often perceive it as complex and find the existing wallets inaccessible, as they were primarily designed for developers. These wallets offer technical functionalities that are not of interest to the average user. Most users simply want to know how to stake, transfer funds, and participate in crowd loans and parachain auctions, which are significant features of Polkadot.
Fortunately, we now have alternatives available. One such option is the Nova Wallet, a mobile wallet that offers various functionalities. Users can vote in governance directly from the wallet, easily transfer funds, and access all the dApps within the ecosystem. It is a user-friendly and convenient option. The team behind Nova Wallet is doing an excellent job. Additionally, there are other wallet options like Talisman for desktop users and Sub Wallet, which is available for both mobile and desktop platforms. Having these alternatives is beneficial, as the official wallet is often seen as complex. Unfortunately, many people associate Polkadot with the official wallet due to the extensive promotion from the Parity side.
There are discussions taking place in our private Polkadot channel with the hope of persuading Parity to promote the alternative wallets, such as Nova Wallet. Ultimately, the user’s experience plays a significant role in their decision to stay or leave. If the experience is challenging and difficult, users are likely to become frustrated and may view it unfavorably. I can recall my own initial encounter with Polkadot.js, which seemed overly complex even for someone with technical expertise. Having been accustomed to user-friendly wallets like Metamask and Neo Wallet, I found it perplexing why Polkadot’s interface was unnecessarily complicated. As a content creator, I even received emails from people who mistakenly sent their tokens to validators instead of staking them. The steps involved in staking were not adequately clear and straightforward.
Although we have made progress since then, it is evident that the official wallet remains complex. Nevertheless, the availability of alternatives represents a positive development in addressing user accessibility and usability concerns.
Question: Are crowd loan divisive?
Indeed, it certainly creates tension, especially at present. In the beginning, there seemed to be less tension as the process commenced. The way it operates is that there are rounds, each containing a set of options. Once a round concludes, the winners transition from parachain threads to parachains. It is crucial to understand that projects start as threads and must compete and win an auction to become a parachain. Initially, the batches consisted of five projects, but now it has reduced to two. However, it is anticipated that the number will increase to seven in July or August, if I recall correctly.
In the most recent round, there were only two projects, unfortunately. One of the projects I interviewed, March Network, put in tremendous effort and ran a robust marketing campaign, enticing people with rewards to vote for and support them. However, they faced a setback when an anonymous bidder entered the scene and self-bid with an amount around $151,000 to $155,000. Since this bid exceeded their cap, March Network couldn’t secure a victory. Such occurrences can happen when launching as a parachain and striving to win the auction. It presents a considerable challenge as you need to provide sufficient incentives for people to contribute and support your project. However, you must also impose a limit. March Network could have set their cap higher, say $300,000, but then the rewards would have been significantly lower. Who’s to say the anonymous bidder wouldn’t have bid $301,000? They might have had substantial resources to do so. Now, they have to wait until May 31st before the next round begins, as they were two competing parties—one being March Network and the other an anonymous bidder. However, the other two contenders didn’t fare well, except for one.
Even if the anonymous bidder hadn’t won, there was another competitor who set their cap at around $300,000 and could have potentially emerged as the victor. This situation highlights the challenge of having a cap and anticipating others attempting to surpass it. Consequently, it creates tension within the communities. Participants who lock their funds won’t be able to access them until the round concludes. They have to wait for weeks without staking rewards or any benefits, simply waiting for their funds to be returned. It’s a sacrifice they have to endure.
That’s not the only challenge. Another issue arises after winning an auction, where some teams fail to promptly deliver the promised coins. Instead of the typical three to four months, as it was in 2021, they may even delay distribution for a year because they are unprepared. They simply aim to secure the slot and community support. When they inform the community that they are not ready and distribution will be delayed until development is complete, people become anxious. They regret not staking their tokens and miss out on rewards. They question why the coins are not being distributed, leading to numerous arguments. However, it seems that these issues have quieted down compared to how they were in the past.
Question: Why is Polkadot better than other ecosystems?
It’s a challenging situation, to be honest. From a technical perspective, it is undoubtedly better, but not so much from a user retention standpoint. Many people would agree with that. And it’s not just about user retention; there’s more to it than that. Various factors come into play behind the scenes, such as VCs, market makers, centralized exchanges, and content creators supporting the ecosystem and working together to promote a specific platform. Unfortunately, Polkadot hasn’t received much support in those areas. This is primarily because they have always distanced themselves from such narratives. They aimed to play a fair game and let their technology speak for itself. However, in the crypto space, most individuals are primarily driven by the desire for profits. Some argue that they don’t want gamblers but genuine users. Yet, when you analyze the percentages, the number of gamblers outweighs that of legitimate users who are genuinely interested in utilizing and staying within the ecosystem.
I witnessed this trend in 2018 and 2019 when many people left the scene. These were individuals who had incurred financial losses and didn’t care about the technology. I
f they truly understood the tech, they would have said, “Even if I’m experiencing losses, it’s fine. I’m here for the technology, and I’ll continue to support this vision and team.” However, that wasn’t the case. They simply left, claiming it was a scam or a Ponzi scheme. Hence, trying to make people understand that Polkadot has robust technology but faces challenges due to the complexity of its dApps and their reluctance to collaborate with entities to attract users is hurting them, to be fair. So the question is, what will happen next? Will there be a point where numerous dApps emerge and we witness the creation of an outstanding killer app on Polkadot that attracts a large number of mainstream users? Or should we make efforts to attract users now? It’s a significant challenge because they are also navigating the legal landscape with the SEC. They aim to avoid being classified as a security and instead position themselves as software, as mentioned by individuals like Billabong in his tweets and others from the Web3 Foundation. However, it’s a challenging situation because if they choose to follow the correct path, they cannot be associated with any entities that could potentially manipulate or engage in questionable promotions to attract users. If the SEC were to discover any such manipulation, it could harm Polkadot itself. Therefore, I believe they want to focus solely on the technology and ensure they are playing a fair game, while hoping to attract institutions and legitimate users. I’m uncertain about what the future holds, but that’s how I perceive it based on the information I have received.
Question: What are your plans for the future?
Yeah, it is challenging for content creators as we need to support ourselves financially. Recently, I was fortunate enough to receive support from the Treasury. Polkadot has an open governance system that allows coin holders to vote on proposals. So I was able to propose creating videos to support the ecosystem and receive funding from the Treasury instead of relying solely on sponsorships. When you’re a content creator, you can only provide free content for so long before needing a sustainable income, especially as you grow. The Treasury route is ideal because it allows me to talk about Polkadot, promote its products and ecosystem without being obligated to talk about shady projects just for the money. It provides flexibility to do what I enjoy. I have received payment from the Treasury in the past, but that support has ended. Now, I’m planning to submit another proposal soon to secure continuation funding, hopefully for a six-month period this time, as the previous funding lasted for three and a half months, which was a short experiment. I’m trying it out and if it doesn’t work, I have a backup plan, which is to pursue sponsorships. I want to stay in this space, so my first step would be to reach out within the ecosystem and explore potential support through Ambassador programs or similar opportunities. If that’s not feasible, I’ll have to look outside the ecosystem because ultimately, it’s about surviving and thriving in a multi-chain environment. I don’t want to be solely focused on Polkadot to the point of being a hardcore Polkadot advocate, even if it means working for free. I’ll find ways to stick with Polkadot, but I also have to consider alternative routes if there’s no support coming in. I love Polkadot, but I have to be realistic and find solutions to sustain myself in this industry, or else I’ll be overwhelmed, as they say.
