Amadeus Protocol

A new chapter for Amadeus. Earlier this year, Amadeus Protocol acquired Bitte.ai, bringing its users, agents, product, and community into the protocol. Today we are completing that integration. This account will serve as the primary home for Amadeus product, protocol, ecosystem, and launch updates. The @AMA_Fdn account will transition into a dedicated home for foundation, governance, protocol stewardship, and longer-term ecosystem communications. Why the change? Amadeus is entering its next phase: building the confidential uPoW L1 for agentic finance. As the ecosystem grows, our communications need to become clearer: → Product, agents, ecosystem, AMA Hub, and launches will live on this account → Foundation, governance, and protocol stewardship updates will live on @AMA_Fdn account For followers, nothing changes except where different types of updates will appear. The next phase starts here.

@Yemihq Absolutely

@ama_protocol Super bullish event we keep cooking

Where AMA emissions go now: holders and compute, in equal measure With Raditz Update v1.5.5, the new emission budget is split right down the middle: → 50% to AMA Yield Vaults → 50% to uPoW miners Even though total issuance is down significantly, miners now receive a substantially larger percentage of the emission pool than under the previous model, so their aggregate reward pool can stay broadly stable at full network participation. This shift is possible because of a broader change to how emissions are allocated. The treasury is funded from unused emission capacity, not deducted from participant rewards, and cannot increase issuance beyond the established emission curve. Put together: less automatic extraction, a tighter link between real compute and rewards, and a direct, equal stake for Yield Vault holders, all in one balanced system.

@FrankTime84 Yeah, community first

@ama_protocol What a way to reward the community and keep the AMA flywheel running.

@xxodux Now or never

@ama_protocol A good time to be an $AMA holder and miner

@xxodux Few more epochs to go

@ama_protocol anticipating the official release date for this.

Introducing Native AMA Yield Vaults AMA holders can now lock tokens directly in protocol-native Yield Vaults, no third parties, no wrapped assets. Choose a 3, 6, or 12-month lock period and earn nominal APYs of 5-20% for early participants. Here's what makes this different from typical staking: Each vault nominates a validator. That means your locked AMA isn't just earning yield, it's directly contributing to validator participation and network security. Validators backed by at least 1M AMA through Yield Vaults can qualify for the validator set. Rewards can be auto-compounded or paid out to a separate address, depending on your preference. The result: more stable validator backing, fewer sudden shifts in security-critical stake, and long-term AMA holders directly aligned with how the network runs. This is a core piece of how AMA is building sustainable, holder-driven network security.

@talentnodes Yeah, just a few...

@ama_protocol Few more epochs to go 🔥

@TrebleSwap Always working

The grind never stops! Stay based 🟦

@ama_protocol Awaiting the details Hope it drops soon

Raditz Update: v1.5.5 Amadeus node v1.5.5 is live, introducing a major upgrade to AMA's utility, emission model, and network security. Key changes: 🔒 Native Yield Vaults: AMA holders can lock tokens for 3, 6, or 12 months at nominal APYs of 5-20% for early participants. Each vault backs a validator, meaning staked AMA directly strengthens network security. Validators need at least 1M AMA in vault backing to qualify. 💰 Dev fee reduced: The previous model sent ~85.7% of emissions to designated community-fund validators. That's now replaced with a protocol treasury allocation of up to 25%, funded from unused emission capacity rather than participant rewards. 📉 Emissions down ~70%: The new Shenron curve reduces daily issuance from ~1.35M AMA to ~240k-310k AMA at activation, gradually rather than through abrupt halvings, creating a more predictable supply schedule. ⚡ Rewards realigned: The new emission budget splits 50/50 between Yield Vaults and uPoW miners, with miner rewards tied to measurable network compute contribution. 🏗️ Decentralized validator set: Starting at epoch 750, validator eligibility shifts entirely to Yield Vault backing and top uPoW solvers. By epoch 760, designated validators are fully removed, no hardcoded addresses, no protocol-designated operators. Together, v1.5.5 and the epoch-760 transition materially strengthen AMA's security, decentralization, and economic architecture, while giving exchanges clearer visibility into issuance and reward accounting. We'll be diving deep into more details in the coming days.

@itzMahlex DM

@ama_protocol Quick question team, are you open to explore a potential cross project partnership with other aligning crypto projects?

Why AMA defaults to TEEs over ZK for agent privacy? Agents need confidentiality by default, if a trading strategy leaks, the edge is gone. TEEs give us private computation with hardware attestation, at performance levels that actually work for agents today. ZK is powerful, but still too expensive and constrained for complex agent workloads. So our design combines TEEs for privacy with a deterministic runtime + on-chain history for auditability and safety. ZK comes in over time where it fits best, we're looking at it for permissionless consensus and trust-related layers of AMA. Confidentiality doesn't mean invisibility, though. Via the AMA hub, traders can still monetize winning strategies, even ones running inside a TEE, by IPOing ownership of their agents or earning fees when others copy-trade their performance. Privacy by default. Monetization by choice.

Exactly, and that's the core constraint driving our sequencing. ZK can't handle inference at the complexity/speed agents need today, that's the biggest practical drawback right now. But ZK isn't trying to replace TEEs here. Where it's genuinely strong is proving that a TEE ran correctly, attesting to the integrity of the execution environment itself, not the inference inside it. So the two aren't competing approaches, they complement each other: TEE handles the private compute, ZK can verify the TEE did what it claimed. That's part of why we see ZK entering later for trust-related layers, not as a replacement for TEEs, but as a way to strengthen the attestation around them.

This is a clean writeup of a real tradeoff. The line I keep circling is "confidentiality doesn't mean invisibility." For agents that move money, that's the whole problem: the strategy has to stay private, but the safety of what the agent actually executes has to be checkable by someone. Your TEE-plus-onchain-history split is one answer. The open question I'd ask is where intent verification lives relative to the confidential boundary. That placement decides everything downstream.

@xxodux That's the point

@ama_protocol security first before hype

@Yemihq cooking something huge

@ama_protocol Absolutely the real ticker let's cook

Bitcoin's Proof of Work is elegant security design, but most of the compute it burns is thrown away the moment a block is won. The network gets secured. Nothing else is produced. Amadeus asks a different question: what if the work securing the chain was also the work the network needed? That's Useful Proof of Work (uPoW), not a feature bolted on, but the assumption Amadeus was built around from day one. Miners perform real AI workloads: training, inference, evaluation and that work is the proof. Nothing discarded. Every cycle spent on security also produces something agents and builders can use. That compute doesn't disappear once a block is validated. It flows back into the network powering Nova and the agents built on top of Amadeus. The same work that secures the chain also fuels what gets built on it. The result: Compute has a destination: Security and utility are the same act, not separate line items. Incentives compound: As demand for agent compute grows, so does the reward for securing the network, a flywheel built into the protocol, not added after. The model is rare: Few chains tie utility to consensus itself at the protocol layer. AMA does. If work has to be done to secure a network, it should be work worth doing either way.

@reizzlla yeah. that's the whole point

@ama_protocol This is the way uPoW turning wasted hashpower into real AI compute is brilliant

@xxodux yeah, good place to be.

@ama_protocol Good place for miners to start from, purposeful mining ⛏️

Really valid point to raise. Dual-purpose compute does mean Amadeus sits at an intersection that's still being actively defined, AI compute markets and blockchain infrastructure both draw regulatory attention independently, so overlapping them is new territory in some ways. Our approach has been to build with that evolving landscape in mind rather than treat it as a future problem: transparent tokenomics, no premine, and a compute layer that's auditable by design all help position the network to adapt as frameworks develop, rather than needing a redesign later. We don't think any protocol can predict exactly how regulation will move, but we'd rather build something structurally sound now than retrofit compliance later. Appreciate you pushing on this, it's the right question to be asking.

@ama_protocol when compute serves dual purposes, scaling the networks utility may also attract regulatory scrutiny, which could influence how the protocol evolves over time.

Miners this is worth a closer look, your compute doesn't have to be wasted to be trusted. It's what powers Nova and the agents built on Amadeus. Join Amadeus pools: 1. poolama.com 2. ama-pool.com