aka @BartlettWenzel; $ICP 8YG; CodeGov Founder (https://teapaw.org/t.co/hXbqjluQ65); Synapse Followee (https://teapaw.org/t.co/ez4AWkNRuf); Analytical Chemist / Analyzer Engineer
Texas, USA
Joined September 2016
- Tweets3.8K
- Following998
- Followers2.2K
- Likes10K
wpb retweeted
1/2) As Head of Product for an AI infrastructure startup, I invented the Agent vs Agent Gaming category which helped them achieve PMF!
This week my whole department was laid off, but I know God's got this!✝️
I’m looking for my next high-impact PM role.
DMs open if you’re hiring (or know of a good fit). RTs appreciated
Resume👇
wpb retweeted
If you've ever heard the term "intelligence layer" and thought "heck yeah"
I've got a blog for you:
intelligence-layer.com/p/wha…
wpb retweeted
Someone got Wordpress running 100% from the Internet Computer! Not as easy as it sounds, as it's designed to run on traditional tech, not frontier serverless cloud, so big shout out to ICP community member @miadey 🔥
forum.dfinity.org/t/wordpres…
wpb retweeted
Reminder for everyone:
Being undoxxed in your career is ONLY normal in crypto
Crazy to see so many people crying about this and saying how “privacy” is such a core principle of crypto
These are the same clowns who care nothing about privacy on the tech level but just want an anon PFP so they can scam easier
Reputation is an asset—an asset that money cannot directly buy
Have been a doxxed professional in crypto for 8+ years and I can tell you at times it is not easy
But for those who want to build to accrue value, be EV+ for DeFi, and create real impact in crypto, it’s worth it
Nothing against having an NFT as a PFP or art you love to represent your profile. Still think a lot of punks and apes an other NFTs make exceptional PFPs and bring personal + community identity to the space in a net positive way
@0xSweep also is right:
If you are here to build long term you should invest into your own IP as a proponent in web3
The smartest traders, builders, and investors I know in crypto are all echoing the same thing right now…
They want to work with doxxed figures
They want to invest in public teams
They want to back credible players with strong reputations
People are tired of the rug pulls and the blatant scams
People are tired of influencers farming them daily
People are tired of what crypto has become during the extraction era
As someone who has worked directly with @0xSweep & @Jeremybtc and met them IRL, it’s good to see them championing this and sparking some conversation around it
They say, “the best time to build is during the bear,” but they never tell you what to build
Build the #1 thing you can:
Your reputation
Just changed my pfp to my face
The anonymity era is over. What started as a culture of privacy became a shield for bad actors
Fake names, cartoon avatars, zero accountability and the space paid for it
If you’re building in crypto for the next decade, you need to build IP as a real person not a cartoon
This is becoming a real industry and being anonymous no longer protects you, it limits you
The next cycle rewards real faces
wpb retweeted
I’ve been thinking more about vibe coding and host on the InternetComputerProtocol, and honestly I feel like the biggest thing holding it back right now is just the deployment experience.
Right now, if you build something using the ICP skills and your own AI agent, it works, but the flow still feels a bit rough. You have to go through the CLI, use dfx, manage identities, top up cycles manually, and it’s not super intuitive if you’re coming from a typical vibe coding setup.
What would make a huge difference is something simple:
A clean ICP dashboard or NNS-style interface where you can:
- log in with Internet Identity
- drag and drop your app files (or paste your project)
- see a live preview
- hit deploy
- done
And for payments:
- either use ICP you already have
- or just link a credit card for auto top-ups
So instead of thinking about cycles, wallets, and commands, it just works in the background like any modern hosting platform.
Even better, CaffeineAI already feels like it’s halfway there.
Imagine if you could:
- either build inside Caffeine AI
- or upload something you already vibe coded using the ICP skills
- hit deploy
- and it handles everything
Then if you want to make changes, you don’t even have to edit files manually. You just tell the AI what to change and redeploy.
That would basically turn it into:
- AI builder
- hosting platform
- deployment tool
all in one place.
I feel like ICP already solves the hard problems:
- full stack in one environment
- built-in storage and auth
- no need for multiple services
Now it just needs that last step:
a really smooth, no-friction deployment experience.
If that gets solved, I think a lot more vibe coders would start using it without hesitation.
$ICP $CLOUD
@caffeineai @dfinity @dominic_w @PierreSamaties @bjoernassmann
wpb retweeted
This morning, Xander (from the dev forum open letter) and I had a great conversation with @radudeicp , Björn Tackmann and @PierreSamaties about Mission 70 and its impact on operations for projects such as our SNS DAO called Sneed.
Bottom line: we understand, on one hand, that 13 node subnets are costly and should not be subsidized long term. We also think, on the other hand, that raising costs on 13 node subnets should go hand in hand with introducing options to run parts of applications on lower-consensus (fewer nodes) subnets.
Paying high 13 node costs for the part of the application that needs it makes sense. Paying lower costs for parts of the application that don't need such high security guarantees also makes sense.
I believe we found common ground and a shared understanding with this perspective, and I came away feeling very positive about Dfinity's plans to address these concerns. I think all the right items are on the road map, in reasonable time frames, and I have high confidence that the necessary tools for devs to adapt to the updated mission 70 cost landscape will be made available in time.
There were some more good news in the imminent pipeline for SNSes, with a very solid plan for efficiency improvements (that are possible now once the platform has considerably matured compared to when SNS-1 was launched). The plan will roll out in stages, but already the first step - apparently ready for deployment very soon - will have a huge impact on SNS Infrastructure cycle costs. This will make the life of every SNS easier and extend runways, so this is just one-sided great news!
I thought it fair to report this since I have made a bit of noise about my concerns with mission 70, particularly the gas hikes.
After this meeting, I feel that Dfinity recognizes the challenges I and others have raised, and are taking practical, sensible steps to address them.
The road ahead might be a bit bumpy while it all gets sorted out, but nobody promised or expected just plain sailing on the cutting edge. Dfinity, in my opinion, sees these cost hikes as necessary and unavoidable, but does understand and respect the impact it may have on builders and are taking the right steps to alleviate the impact by building the right stack for letting developers control costs far more precisely.
Metaphor time! It is like Dfinity sold safes, and only had a very very secure "13 lock" safe on the market. App developers (let's pretend app developers need safes to make this metaphor work) love Dfinity's safes, but in truth what they usually need for their app is one 13-lock safe, and then 9 more safes that don't have to be quite so "Fort Knox" secure.
Devs would love to buy all 10 safes for their app from Dfinity, because they really do make great safes, but unfortunately Dfinity has only had the 13-lock safe to offer. So, to make that viable for devs, Dfinity said "hey, let's meet in the middle: we sell you these 13-lock safes cheaper than we should - at loss even - so you can indeed build your whole application with only our safes (100% on-chain) using our 13-lock safes even for those cases where you could go with lower security.
The problem is that this at-loss offer can't go on. So the solution, in a nutshell, is for Dfinity to introduce less expensive 7-lock safes, perhaps even 3-lock safes and 1-lock safes. Then devs can pay for only what they actually need - and be happy to pay for the ultra-safe 13-lock safes in those cases where they actually need them!
We can continue buying all our "safes" (secure application platform infrastructure) from Dfinity, without breaking bank by overpaying for security we don't need, and without Dfinity (and investors) making a loss on practically giving away 13-lock safes to devs for use cases where 7-lock or 3-lock safes would do.
As far as I could understand, everyone in the meeting was on the same page on this, and the road map will reflect this, so at this point I am no longer worried about mission 70 derailing long term adoptability of ICP as a World Computer and full-stack application platform.
Thanks to Pierre, Björn, Radu and Xander for a wonderfully productive and engaging meeting!
wpb retweeted
ICP has been attacked since day one for not being truly decentralized, having one party (Dfinity) calling all the shots in practice.
On day one, this claim was warranted, and not really contested. It was true - during a bootstrap phase Dfinity had de facto control over the network, but the plan was to let go of this control over time by decentralizing (selling) enough of their controlling supply.
So Dfinity's control has gone down over time, allowing us enthusiasts to state with continually greater confidence that the network was decentralizing. By now, I and others conclude that Dfinity does not have majority control anymore, and the network is in fact decentralized.
Those who still argue against that, usually will say that even if Dfinity's direct holdings no longer give them majority control, ICP users follow their neurons and just blindly accept what Dfinity says, so since everyone votes with Dfinity, the situation has only cosmetically changed.
And my counter to that usually goes: No, the reason so many of us vote with Dfinity is not that we blindly accept what they say, but that we usually think Dfinity is right. Dfinity enjoys great trust and credibility with many of us, and that results in the smooth governance you see.
Part of making this argument is the ability to point to how well Dfinity does with democratically anchoring their proposals.
Dfinity comes out with their plans for intended changes well ahead of time, the community will discuss it in the forum, and if some serious concerns are found Dfinity will usually take this into account and modify their plans before even making a proposal. That is the real secret sauce for why Dfinity proposals tend to pass overwhelmingly. They do the work of getting everyone on board.
This is why I think all the buzz about how "maybe Dom has a secret enterprise customer lined up in the wings that will make the gas hikes make sense!" is misplaced.
That's not how Dfinity governs. They don't make proposals on a "trust me bro" basis and ask you to vote them through in order to then see secrets revealed that explain how the proposal actually made sense.
That is not how decentralized governance works, and ICP is decentralized now.
In my opinion Dfinity thinks that this proposal stands on its own legs and should be evaluated in isolation on its merits. It should NOT be assumed that you should trust Dfinity to have some ace up its sleeve that will make the proposal seem more sensible post vote.
It is unlikely that Dfinity would come out and say "Just FYI, we do NOT have any big clients lined up" - no organization in their right mind would say anything like that.
Some clarification on this matter would still be useful, because as it stands, the votes on the most important proposals in the network's history are being shaped by what amounts to conspiracy theories, that are fueled by the proposal making so little sense on its own that it would HAVE to have some secret component to make it work.
There is presumably no secret customer just waiting for gas prices to rise "to their level" (yes I see that idea seriously bandied about).
It is just a bad proposal, and if we ever wanted a chance to prove to the world that the network IS decentralized by now and we don't all just blindly follow Dfinity, this is our big chance.
In my opinion, if we can prove to the world that the network is properly decentralized once and for all, simply by voting down a bad proposal from Dfinity, that will be worth more to the perceived value (and probably price) of the network than any tweaks in tokenomics could amount to.
wpb retweeted
Hey appreciate the thoughtful post, but need to clarify some points here.
Firstly, regarding ICP's dev community. Those using Caffeine — currently hundreds of thousands a month, and rising — are building apps too. People vibe coding, and people using self-writing, are all devs. This is a new paradigm.
In fact, scroll forward a year, and I doubt much code will be being written by humans outside specialized fields. Yesterday, I saw a very convincing Slack clone created for ICP using Claude Code (Rust backend, React frontend) by a semi-technical person without programming skills. It was only a few days work.
So we have to think about ICP as being a platform for agents too going forward. Furthermore, while some of those agents will be inside Claude Code or Caffeine, say, others will be independent agents working directly for users, such as OpenClaw instances.
If we keep on trucking, there will be millions of people building on ICP in a year thanks to AI. Building on ICP will give them a number of advantages I've covered elsewhere.
Secondly, onchain cloud compute costs should remain viable despite the increases, but it's important to realize that the NNS makes the Internet Computer adaptive, and should this prove not true, then it can make further adjustments iteratively.
Getting down to the current proposal to increase the cost of subnet memory from ~$5/GB a year to $12.5/GB a year...
(@SnassyIcp forgive me sometimes stating things you already know for the benefit of others following!)
That's for memory on a 13X subnet (i.e. a sub-blockchain with 13 nodes from different providers, in different data centers, in different geographies, etc, which is orchestrated and configured by the 50X NNS subnet, which hosts software that seamlessly integrates with software on every other subnet, etc etc)
Certainly, $12.5/GB is more expensive than Amazon Web Service's S3 storage at $0.28/GB per year BUT — comparing a "blob storage" service designed to remotely store static data likes files, with dynamic memory that app logic can directly read/write it at will, doesn't make sense.
Apps need to store the dynamic data — user accounts, details of objects like products, indexes, etc — in memory. Blob storage doesn't work for that.
If you build an e-commerce service on ICP, the details of your products, the organization of those products (e.g. categorization), user accounts, sales records, etc etc will all live in memory. You would only be able to put things like photos and videos of products into blob storage like S3, or the forthcoming ICP Blob Storage.
Unless the e-commerce service is Amazon, even if it is a pretty huge service, it will only need a few hundred MBs of memory to maintain that data. In practice, it will pay $10 or something a year — this is totally insignificant for most e-commerce scenarios.
Of course, in the above, I'm assuming that product videos and photos are stored on S3 or ICP Blob Storage.
Now, it's important to recognize, that hosting an app like an e-commerce service on ICP provides enormous benefits, and delivers enormous cost savings.
For example, your app is tamperproof, and doesn't need a traditional cybersecurity setup (and team) to protect it. Cost always has to be considered within the context of the benefits delivered.
In order to thrive, the Internet Computer has to target mass-market mainstream use cases (which is why with DFINITY 2.0 and Internet Computer 2.0 you can see things like cloud engines coming, in parallel to initiatives like Caffeine).
We have been making tremendous headway. In fact, we are the only blockchain that supports large numbers of users who don't care they are using a blockchain, and mostly don't even know. They are doing it because it's useful to build on the Internet Computer, not because there is some sucky speculative token incentive involved — it's the first major innovation in our industry since tokens (Bitcoin) and DeFi (Ethereum).
So hopefully, given the wider perspective, I hope this increase proves really insignificant for those building on ICP, while helping drive the tokenomics by taking us towards a more deflationary future.
Nb. on a separate note, for those that have followed this far, you should know that memory on other blockchains is tens of thousands of times more expensive that on ICP. Yes, you read that right!
They often make the ridiculous claim that you can still build apps on them because you can keep the app data on IPFS, or on something like Walrus (similar to ICP Blob Storage).
Their Pinocchio noses are growing in double time when they tell you this. Blob data on IPFS or Walrus cannot be dynamically processed by onchain app logic, because, in contrast to memory, it is stored remotely.
It's baseless that blob storage can support the creation of something like an onchain e-commerce service, where the app needs to enable the vendor to add/remove products dynamically, and record customer sales, and so on. For that you need memory.
Hope all this makes sense.
wpb retweeted
Expecting the #Mission70 proposal will be submitted to the NNS early next week. Rollin rollin rollin..
wpb retweeted
Doing business in Web3 can be one of the most unprofessional experiences.
You’ve got people running companies who’ve never built a real business, never led a team, yet carry executive titles and somehow talk down to people who’ve actually created, operated, and survived in the real world.
Let me be very clear: outside of Telegram group titles and Discord roles, results are what matter. And in the real world, most of you wouldn’t last a quarter.
wpb retweeted
When nation-states come for your tech instead of frivolous token narratives, you know you are on the right track @dfinity @caffeineai
DFINITY Foundation and the Government of Pakistan have signed an MoU to establish sovereign cloud infrastructure, generative AI app development, and secure national communications, on the Internet Computer.
The collaboration includes:
— Pakistan Subnet
— Caffeine AI Licenses
— National Messenger Service
— DFINITY in Pakistan
Through this decision, Pakistan furthers its digital sovereignty and AI push in line with announcements made by the prime minister at Indus AI Week.
1/4 🧵
wpb retweeted
Once again, we’re seeing certain individuals misuse the governance system to shape public opinion.
What’s the point of personal attacks on Dom? Or of calling DFINITY team members “scammers”? The pattern is always the same. Today it’s Internet Identity 2.0, tomorrow it will be something else. Any excuse will do if it helps push a narrative, distract attention, and try to sway voters.
The goal is clear: destabilize the ecosystem and influence people to vote No when the Mission 70 proposal goes live. The level of desperation raises an obvious question: does this come from genuine concern, or from a desire to see the project fail?
Mission 70 isn’t optional. Reducing node and voting rewards is necessary for long-term sustainability. $ICP needs more time to properly cover these rewards. This proposal buys that time, time for adoption to grow and for ongoing discussions with governments and institutions to move forward.
What stands in the way is greed. Chasing higher yields at any cost. But everyone has a choice: a high yield on a $1 token, or a lower yield on a much higher price.
At the end of the day, these tactics rely on poor price action and fear to push an agenda. If these actors had enough voting power, they wouldn’t need to involve the community at all. They need something from you, and they’re willing to mislead to get it.
For the record, I don’t agree with everything DFINITY does. I’ve been openly critical of certain decisions and ideas. But spreading fear, insulting people, and fudding our own ecosystem helps no one. I’m in favor of constructive, respectful discussions.
We all know, for example, that YRAL doesn’t have 500K users. Frankly, I’m not even sure there are that many real people on X actively discussing crypto once bots are excluded. It’s time to focus on utility, real usage, and adoption, and to shift our mindset toward proactive, meaningful conversations. Proposals driven by fear and exaggeration are childish and ultimately harm the project.
wpb retweeted
Did @dominic_w make the right decision from late 2023-present when he
1. Cut 90% of funding and roadmap for the existing ICP ecosystem
2. Pivoted that ICP funding and resources to Caffeine AI
24%Yes, the right decision
29%No, the wrong decision
32%Idk (time will tell)
15%Show results
34 votes • Final results
wpb retweeted
I don't know why Adam is named here and not just a part of "the others"... I should probably just stay quiet 😂
This topic is worth a separate video in which I will share the data about the $ICP Inflation, VCs, tokenomics & ways to fix the problems that we are currently facing.
wpb retweeted
Just received an email from “Ledger” asking me to “validate my seed phrase [with them] in an encrypted session”. Obviously a scam. Never give or show your seed phrase to anyone that asks for it, ever! There is no legitimate reason for this, period! Stay safe frens 🫶
wpb retweeted
👀 This week’s Featured Posts just dropped on distrikt
We did the scrolling so you don’t have to.
Smart ideas, strong opinions, and posts that deserve more eyes.
👉 Head to distrikt.app
👉 Check out the Featured Posts
👉 Tell us what should’ve been featured
