funpepe.eth

Whenever I'm on Opensea searching for something that feels genuinely authentic, nothing really beats Opepen for me. Open to suggestions if anyone knows NFT projects that have real value.

@jackbutcher we're so back

@Buttered11 😂

@funpepe_eth not even kidding. This was me giving up receipts.vv.xyz/receipt/50

Paid $1 and all I got was this jpeg of a receipt

@cefas_eth 🤌

@funpepe_eth Ngl took me like 30 minutes to get a decent one

quick, incomplete sketch capturing some ideas from friday's opepen space again challenging the idea that token ≠ image and treating the protocol itself as artwork (proposing this as what you would see on opensea or similar) at first glance complex, but a first pass at the bigger goal of collapsing the complexity that lives between the marketplace view of the image that the token points to and the opepen specific web interface an approach like this would aspire to contain the entire interface/game in the "token" view where 99% of people discover it (at least today) instead of leaning out of the granularity and nuance of the protocol, lean all the way in

buying NFTs to “make money” is a bad strategy

if buying punks now is buying btc in 2012, then opepen and checks is btc in 2009 they are still pre-consensus - the quiet phase all era-defining assets pass through in 2012, 99.9% dismissed bitcoin. in 2016, they dismissed ethereum. in 2017, they dismissed punks. imo, that’s happening rn with opepen and checks

@visualizevalue All opepen are temporary

"All visuals are temporary." – Virgil Abloh

@cryptocowboy108 @ripe0x @jalilwahdat @ArtOnBlockchain

@funpepe_eth @ripe0x @jalilwahdat @ArtOnBlockchain In a way, the preserved art on a new contract would be the actual definition of permanent, assuming the tokens could not be used for opt-out. I'll just assume someone is listening.

"Consensus Is Temporary" i'm incredibly excited about Opepen V5 - more than i've been for a long time. i think it completes the project beautifully; makes it a true protocol; brings home the gift of a metaphor of it being an internet native museum (🙏 @ArtOnBlockchain). ever since working out how the initial version would work in 2023, one thing was clear to us - it should function as the opposite of Checks. if Checks is a commentary on scarcity, Opepen should be one on abundance. Checks starts with thousand different visuals and ends with one. Opepen starts with one symbol and ends with however many people are interested in making. in the first versions of the protocol we only tangentially hit this principle (there can be an infinite number of set submissions but the collection is capped at 16,000 and that always felt like a missed opportunity to me). at the same time, we have (i think) encountered a negative feedback loop of collectors being very hesitant to opt in to art and artists being discouraged by the high bar / low chances of becoming part of the permanent collection. don't get me wrong; the bar should and will be high, but there shouldn't be economic incentive not to take part in the curative process (and arguably right now there is). V5 will tackle both of these points, and solidify the workings of the protocol long term (we iterated quite a bit on the consensus protocol, and V4 fully solved the opt in / reveal process. we feel confident we can protocolize this - it's tried and tested by now). 1) when V5 goes live, sets can be cleared of their currently exhibited art. all Opepen tokens will become unrevealed and the set slot will be free for the next exhibition. 2) the exact conditions for losing consensus are yet to be defined, but expect them to be much lower than what is required for reaching consensus. 3) when a set submission reaches consensus, it is revealed unto the next free slot (probably; still thinking through a potential alternative approach). it is already clear that Opepen will never reach all 200 sets (some tokens are burned, some are in lost wallets) - but that is besides the point: Checks is complete even without one Black Check in existence. We want Opepen to feel the same way. It is complete when the protocol works; indefinitely. and as mentioned earlier - i think this will create a much more interesting bar for collectors to judge submissions to Opepen and be more welcoming to artists that give their hearts and souls with their contributions. remember no one earns anything from this (nothing monetary at least), neither the artists nor us; and that's how it should be - a celebration of intrinsic motivation and decentralized consensus building while using financialized assets to approximate truth / value. and if we're right; this will work indefinitely - and if built right even past VV's existence. "Exhibited in Opepen; Mar 2026" is a celebration, not a failure. appreciate all of you; with love!

@cryptocowboy108 @ripe0x @jalilwahdat @ArtOnBlockchain Yeah, that’s what I’m imagining.

@funpepe_eth @ripe0x @jalilwahdat @ArtOnBlockchain So, your opepen would shift to unrevealed and at the same time the art would be spawned as a token on a different contract. I think this would incentivize a lot of action.

@ripe0x @jalilwahdat @ArtOnBlockchain Another point- you have the freedom to accumulate as many pieces from a set you like as you can. VVD is a good example of this. It’s a great way to secure that set in the permanent collection and also increase attention & desirability with scarcity

@jalilwahdat @ArtOnBlockchain i love this broad direction, but do want to say that i’d be extremely bummed if a revealed opepen that i owned and loved was lost without me opting into the change

@ripe0x @jalilwahdat @ArtOnBlockchain I’m suggesting a mechanism that creates a new collection of NFTs with the legacy opepen sets that have been opted out. So the art still lives forever on the blockchain but in a tertiary collection

@funpepe_eth @jalilwahdat @ArtOnBlockchain isn't that the exhibition history?

@ripe0x @jalilwahdat @ArtOnBlockchain would be cool if an opted out set spawns a separate 80 that become part of a legacy collection. could add a watermark or change the border to distinguish the art

@funpepe_eth @jalilwahdat @ArtOnBlockchain i get that. but it doesn't change my feedback

@jalilwahdat @ArtOnBlockchain love it