XI

**BSC's First NFT 2.0 Football Collectible is Here!** Not just an NFT. Not just a memecoin. It’s both — fully on-chain. Built with PancakeSwap Infinity Hooks. **$XI** will permanently record football history. **VOL.01 · 1930-2022** 22 Chapters · 10,964 Player Identities The protocol will continue writing the next volume with real football history. Each player has a maximum of 5 copies. Price multiplies ×10 with each rarity tier. Evolution Path: **Player → Jersey → Country → Stadium → Trophy** The 5th copy of a Legendary Trophy? Can mathematically reach **100,000 BNB**. This hunt never ends. **$XI Pre-sale is NOW OPEN!** Secure your piece of football history 👇 🌐 onxi.art **CA:** 0x069Fb107752639dB67c68d9da9B1aC59daA1779f DYOR • Not Financial Advice • High Risk

🚨 **XI Genesis Final Sprint!** 🔥 BSC’s Hook project for **Hook Summer**! XI is BSC’s first NFT 2.0 protocol: - 🌍 World Cup Trading Cards - 5-tier rarity system - On-chain permanent append-only - Buy & instantly mint + on-chain generation (no secondary mint) **Only 2000 Genesis Cards left** at fixed presale price! Once sold out, it moves to full market price 👀 Don’t miss the last chance to enter at presale price! 👉 Grab yours now: onxi.art CA: `0x069Fb107752639dB67c68d9da9B1aC59daA1779f` #XI #HookSummer #BSC #NFT2.0 #WorldCupCards

**🚨 Exclusive Alert! BSC's Only Hook Project Joins Binance Wallet Hook Summer!** 🪝 Binance Wallet just launched **Hook Summer**, and **XI** stands out as the **sole Hook project on BSC** — leading the charge in innovation! BSC's first NFT 2.0 protocol featuring World Cup trading cards. 5-tier card structure, permanently append-only on-chain, instant on-chain generation with no secondary minting — true Hook-powered gameplay! **Only the final 2000 Genesis cards left at fixed presale price!** Once sold out, it's market price only 👀 🔥 Grab yours now: onxi.art CA: 0x069Fb107752639dB67c68d9da9B1aC59daA1779f #XI #HookSummer #BSC #BinanceWallet #NFT2.0 #WorldCupCards

🚨 最后冲刺！XI 预售仅剩 2000+ 个就将完成！ 1 XI = 1 张随机 Player 卡，买入即抽取，链上即时生成，无二次 mint。BSC 首个 NFT 2.0 协议，10,964 名球员 identity，5 层卡牌结构，永久存续。 错过 Genesis 阶段就再无固定价机会！ 👉 立即参与预售：onxi.art

@HollanderAdam @spennypretzel @unipegv4 @opensea @Uniswap Hey bro, check out this unipeg2.0: github.com/onxiart/uninou…

@unipegv4 @opensea @Uniswap nice! look forward to trying out the wrapper later. congrats on the launch!

Unipeg is now live on @OpenSea 🦄⛵️ opensea.io/collection/uni… permanent on-chain digital objects built on @Uniswap v4 hooks. every uPeg generated from live block data at the moment of the swap. no IPFS. no external storage. backed by a fully liquid ERC-20. how to list 👇🦄

@HollanderAdam @opensea @pudgypenguins @LilPudgys Hey bro, check out this unipeg2.0: github.com/onxiart/uninou…

@opensea @pudgypenguins @LilPudgys that’s an opensea lil pengu if i ever saw one 👌

Joining OpenSea's Flagship Collection... @LilPudgys — 21,858 smaller, rounder companions to the original @pudgypenguins, designed to scale one of crypto's most beloved brands to a wider community. More below 🧵

@tiger_web3 github.com/onxiart/uninou… can fix it

Where $uPEG actually stands after yesterday — and a path forward？ Yesterday's findings kicked off a real debate across both EN and CN crypto twitter. Here's what I think actually happened, what's salvageable, and where this might go from here. -------------------------------- Before I get into any of this — credit where it's due. What the $uPEG dev shipped is genuinely novel. A hybrid ERC-20/NFT where the token is the NFT, traits and art rendered fully on-chain, randomness churned by a Uniswap v4 hook on every swap, mint-on-transfer instead of a mint button — there isn't another live project on mainnet doing all of that at once. Most "on-chain" NFT projects are still IPFS metadata with a thin contract on top. uPEG is the actual thing. The hook design in particular is the kind of mechanism people will copy for years; tying NFT state to AMM activity is a real primitive, not a gimmick. I wrote yesterday's thread, and I'm writing this one, because I respect the work enough to take it seriously. It's easy to clap for a project at launch and walk away when something breaks — I'd rather stay around and help the thing get fixed. Whatever the dev ships next, I'm in. I'd rather hold a flawed-but-ambitious experiment from someone pushing the envelope than a clean copy-paste of last cycle's playbook. That said — the flaws are real, they're being actively exploited on-chain, and the holders deserve a clear picture of what's happening and what a fix looks like. --------------------- So: The two design flaws Both of these are baked into the deployed contracts. Neither is fixable in place. 1) Atomic rarity-washing via custom routers The natural friction in this market is what I assumed was the rarity gate. You can always manually shop for traits — buy a uPeg, if it's ugly sell it back, repeat — but the round-trip costs (LP fee + slippage + gas) eat 5%+ each cycle. By the time you hit something rare, you've burned the upside. That friction was the design. Then someone wrote a custom router that mints 100 uPegs in a single transaction, runs them through their own selector, keeps the rarest, and dumps the other 99 back to the pool — all atomic. Net cost per cherry-picked rare: under 0.1 ETH. The implication people are missing: rare uPegs aren't a fixed supply. The pool can manufacture top-0.5% items on demand, indefinitely. There is no cap. 2) LP-replay — the perfect-clone exploit The hook only churns the random seed in afterSwap. But minting fires on any pool→user UPEG transfer — including LP removeLiquidity, which doesn't trigger afterSwap. tx 1: removeLiquidity → seed = S → mint uPeg_A (trait_X) ↓ no swap in between tx 2: removeLiquidity → seed still = S → mint uPeg_B (trait_X, identical to A) This is cherry-pick's evolved form. Confirmed on-chain: address 0xfcf2d5fc...157ebe77 minted #53879 and #53880 with byte-for-byte identical seeds (verifiable from storage slot 0 of the Upeg contract). LP-replay's superpower: No router needed ~70× cheaper gas (~150K vs 11M) Once you mint a top-1% trait, you can clone it indefinitely The two attacks compose. Cherry-pick to find any rare you want, then LP-replay to copy it as many times as your liquidity allows. Someone has already built a simulator where you input a seed and it tells you the resulting trait — the "random" function isn't random anymore, it's a controllable lookup table. The visual rarity layer is, mechanically, dead. 3) On the official "look at the timestamp" response Reading between the lines of the team's recent communication, I think they did think about this — they anticipated that near-duplicates would emerge organically over the game's long tail. What they didn't anticipate was that someone would weaponize it on day 7. Saying "use the mint timestamp to determine which is canonical" is technically and philosophically correct. But it's also a quiet concession that the visual layer is now decorative. The whole pitch was fusing NFT collectibility with token liquidity. Pivoting to "look at the timestamp, not the picture" effectively ships a stripped-down NFT. If that was the actual design intent, a single-image NFT from day 1 would have been more honest. The multi-trait randomization is now controllable, predictable, and reproducible — which is exactly what loses the NFT-native audience uPEG was built to court. On the market and where I sit A big reason I was adding into the highs was the hope that uPEG could pull a wave of cycle-21 NFT whales back on-chain — that crowd looking for the next mechanically-novel thing. Token + on-chain art + new mint primitive felt like the right combination to drag that capital out of hibernation. After yesterday, I don't think that's the trade anymore. NFT-native traders see "controllable rarity" and walk. That's why I trimmed most of my position. That said, the market hasn't really collapsed. There's still genuine bid coming in — meme energy plus speculation on whatever the team ships next. The ceiling has shifted: from "next big NFT primitive" to "credible meme + novel protocol fork." Smaller TAM, but not zero. What you do here is up to you. Memes don't care about logic. The dev is putting in real work and clearly cares — they considered these scenarios already, just couldn't find the clean fix in time. If they ship V2 properly, I'll show up again. What a fix would actually look like (V2) The current contracts can't be patched. They have no upgrade mechanism, and v4 hooks are bound to the pool at creation. But the V2 fix is surprisingly small — under 30 lines of contract code in total. The hard part is migration, not engineering. 1. Hook fix — turn on the missing permission. afterRemoveLiquidity: true, // currently false Plus a 4-line _afterRemoveLiquidity handler that calls _randomizeSeed(). Same for afterAddLiquidity. The single permission flip kills LP-replay completely — every liquidity op churns the seed before the next one can replay it. 2. Defense-in-depth in createRandom(). // V1 return Random(randomSeedProvider.randomSeed(), 0); // V2 return Random(uint256(keccak256(abi.encode( randomSeedProvider.randomSeed(), _upegsTotalCount, // monotonic per mint block.prevrandao, block.number ))), 0); Even if some future mint path bypasses the hook, the entropy now varies per mint via _upegsTotalCount. Two consecutive mints can never share a starting Random. 3. Per-tx mint cap via EIP-1153 transient storage. uint256 constant MAX_MINTS_PER_TX = 3; uint256 current; assembly { current := tload(SLOT) } require(current + qty <= MAX_MINTS_PER_TX, "tx mint cap"); assembly { tstore(SLOT, current + qty) } Cherry-pick's economics collapse. Picking 1-of-3 is barely better than rolling normally — not enough upside to cover the swap cost. Transient storage means there's zero gas overhead between transactions and no way to bypass via msg.sender / tx.origin tricks. 4. (Optional) commit-reveal mint. commitMint() in tx N → records intent + payment revealMint() in tx N+M → resolves trait using prevrandao of block N+M The bot can't simulate the result at commit time because prevrandao(N+M) doesn't exist yet. Adds UX friction (two transactions, M-block delay) but closes the rarity-simulation vector entirely. This is overkill if (1)+(2)+(3) are in place. 5. Migration path. Deploy V2 hook + V2 token contract + V2 pool Write a migration contract: V1 holders deposit their uPeg, get an equivalent V2 uPeg (preserving mint# / rarity rank for OG-era holders) Announce a 30-day window. After that, V1 is left to drain Liquidity follows incentives — if the team can credibly bootstrap V2 LP, the pool flips quickly We need more onchian innovation!

@unipegv4 Hey team, I get the idea behind the Era trait and the nod to sequence culture, but I really hope you reconsider this. If this goes through, fewer people will want to buy $uPEG to mint new pegs. Old pegs will rarely get burned, new ones will struggle to stand out, and their value will stay suppressed. If new pegs aren't worth anything, how can the coin gain value? How do we build a real positive flywheel? This risks completely decoupling the pegs from the token, and the project won't be sustainable long-term. Please prioritize bringing the focus back to the **pegs themselves** give both old and new pegs fair room to grow and stay liquid. That's the foundation for healthy, long-term growth! 🦄

influenced by the culture that made sequence matter - the uPeg ID is the defining signal of provenance + origin. with @OpenSea, a new trait arrives: Era 🦄 every 1000 IDs is a generation. Era 1 // IDs 1-1000. Era 2 // IDs 1001-2000 // etc coded into the contract. immutable.

@unipegv4 @opensea github.com/onxiart/uninou…

@tiger_web3 github.com/onxiart/uninou…

新的 ethereum:0x44b28991b167582f18ba0259e0173176ca125505 wrapper合约被部署了，看起来解决方案并没有解决问题.. UnipegItemNFT 合约： 0x21dFb86dD4d9d22Cd43C5DC03A7bfBb043F26c00 之前总结过一共两个问题： 1. cherry pick洗稀有度问题 2. 重复铸造相同NFT问题 之前我判断如果加了wrapper合约，可以控制，是因为理论上官方可以控制哪些v4NFT可以铸造，而哪些不可以。 1. 关于有人通过原子化操作单次低成本查看100只NFT然后洗稀有度问题。 可以说，完全没有解决。 整个方案并没有加入任何黑名单机制，也就是说图片稀有度很有可能还是无法被大家炒作。 与此同时，官方还是相信用时间稀有度来代替，我只能说仁者见仁智者见智吧。 在我看来，这样做，图片的稀有度则完全失去了效应，这样做很多NFT图片OG收藏家则不会进入市场，失去了一大流动性支柱。 再者，纯靠时间判定稀有度，可以说这个项目印不印这个独角兽图片就没有意义了，直接炒作编号好了。 而且时间作为稀有度，你怎么吸引更多人来参与呢？后面参与的玩家永远无法抽到比前面玩家靠前的时间编号（而图片内容已经被证明毫无意义） 没有增量，哪有价格增长的飞轮？ 2.关于重复铸造问题 还算是比较好的一个解决方案，他在原先的合约上无法解决，但是在wrapper合约上做了"先到先得"的处理 。 合约不主动检测 duplicate-seed，但有一个隐性效果：如果一个seed被占用，其他重复的NFT则不能被铸造成ERC721 NFT。 唯一要注意的就是，拿着稀有NFT的朋友，如果有重复附件，记着开通合约的时候立即抢注，否则你的就不值钱了.. 我同意继续respect作者团队，但我觉得问题的最佳方案是部署一个修正版本的v2合约... 时间会说明一切。

@ErenVance x.com/onxiart/status…

🎲 UniNouns · Unipeg 2.0 真盲盒上线！ ✅ 零复制 ✅ 零碰撞 ✅ 零提前预知 ETH 上真正的链上公平盲盒，抢跑党彻底失效！ 我们在 1.0 基础上做了两大升级： 1️⃣ 随机源升级到 Chainlink VRF v2.5 每张卡由 VRF 节点在未来区块掷骰决定，回调全链可验证。每张卡独享 uint256 独立种子（2²⁵⁶ 概率空间）。 艺术通过 NounsDescriptorV2 链上实时渲染 SVG（高清图可下载，底稿永刻区块）。 核心优势： - 真盲盒：交易上链后才决定结果，无法预知、无法复制、无法碰撞 - 项目方无法暗箱留货，抢跑党嗅探元数据囤稀有度彻底失效 2️⃣ 彻底摆脱 V4 Hook 限制 用开放池协议复刻全部能力，现在 UNOUN 可在**任意 DEX、任意聚合器（GMGN、DexScreener、1inch）、任意机器人、任意自建池**自由交易，不再被官方前端锁死！ 机制：Presale Claim 时 1 UNOUN = 1 张密封卡同步到账，点击 Open 才触发 VRF，回调后揭晓 Noun！ 🔗 网站：uninouns.onxi.art 💻 合约源码：github.com/onxiart/uninou… #XI #Nouns #Unipeg #uPEG

🎲 UniNouns · Unipeg 2.0 True Blind Box is Live! ✅ Zero Copy ✅ Zero Collision ✅ Zero Pre-knowledge Real on-chain fair blind boxes on **Ethereum**! Two major upgrades from 1.0: 1️⃣ Randomness upgraded to Chainlink VRF v2.5 Each card’s traits are decided by VRF nodes in a future block. Fully verifiable on-chain. Every card gets its own uint256 seed (2²⁵⁶ probability space). Art rendered live via NounsDescriptorV2 SVG (high-res downloads available, source forever on-chain). Key Advantages: - True Blind Box: outcome decided only after your tx is mined — impossible to frontrun, replicate, or collide - No more snipers farming rarity or team reserving rares 2️⃣ No V4 Hook Lock-in We rebuilt all mechanics with open pool protocol. UNOUN now trades freely on **any DEX, any aggregator (GMGN, DexScreener, 1inch), any sniper bot, any custom pool** — no more being trapped in a single official frontend! Mechanics: 1 UNOUN = 1 sealed pack on Presale Claim. Click Open → VRF request → callback reveals your Noun! 🔗 Site: uninouns.onxi.art 💻 Contracts: github.com/onxiart/uninou… #XI #Nouns #Unipeg #uPEG

@unipegv4 @ztrader369 cool

@ztrader369 everything is being worked on and perfected // ready soon. 🦄

✨ Dust Dominance Ratio // 0.55 🦄 Peg2Peg Trading Volume // 513 ETH unpegged. focussed. flourishing. 🦄

@Arron_finance @Freak_y0u x.com/onxiart/status…

忆往昔一下上一次玩币图的盛况，上一次已经是2024年了，当时 @Freak_y0u 不知道从哪里发现了个天才dev，发了个币叫 emerald，这个dev就是钻研nft流动性1~2年，一直在实验图币的合约。这个币上线之后其实还蛮有热度，但是没多久合约就出bug了，直接归零。 然后第二天，pandora团队用了个很笨的方法成功修复了bug，叫ERC 404，虽然很废gas，确实能用了。后面这个代币获得了巨大的成功，传到了中文圈被大宇老师喊到了大几百m。 再往后就是astx，他们的DN404成功在代码层面解决了高gas的问题，图片也十分精美，后面还成功申请了Eip，地板价一度也到达过2 eth，后面随着熊市和nft落寞，渐渐的也归零了。 现在两年多过去了，链上又开始炒图币了，世人只记得以前有个潘多拉，而真的开创这个概念的dev，谁还记得呢？说实话连我都不记得了😂 一个项目的成功，创新可能并不是最重要的，timing和执行力才是真正的关键。

@unipegv4 dm

everything is on track.🦄

@unipegv4 github.com/onxiart/unipeg…

Design pattern for hook-based collectible protocols: Decouple the reveal from the swap. Swap mints an empty pack. Holder later opens it via Chainlink VRF callback. Trustless randomness. Sealed-pack secondary market. Zero LINK ops with v2.5 native payment. cc @unipegv4

@LunaPrime x.com/onxiart/status…

Ai says unipeg fud is dum Unipeg is a bad fit for VRF, and switching would basically destroy the project. The mechanic only works because the swap is the mint — hook fires inline during the swap, hash gets derived from layer/color/holder, the on-chain SVG renderer composes the unicorn, all atomic, all in one tx. VRF is asynchronous: you call requestRandomWords(), then a callback lands 2–3 blocks later. The whole “painting appears the instant you push the door” magic is gone — you’d swap now and get your unicorn whenever Chainlink gets around to fulfilling. A few other things that break: •Cost. VRF is paid per request. Unipeg fires on every swap. Tiny swaps would become uneconomical, and the LP itself has to budget LINK or native token for fulfillment forever. •On-chain purism. The pitch is “no IPFS, no external storage, fully expressed on-chain.” Chainlink is an off-chain oracle network — even if it’s the standard, it’s a dependency, and for the v4-hooks crowd that’s a meaningful concession. •Hook composability. v4 hooks have to return synchronously to the pool. You can’t pause a swap waiting for a VRF callback. You’d have to split into a two-step “swap → later mint” flow, which abandons the binding between trade and object. The deeper point: VRF solves a problem Unipeg doesn’t really have. VRF matters when randomness gates a valuable, adversarial outcome — raffle winners, rare trait rolls, mint order. Unipeg’s “randomness” is derived from swap context (sender, params, holder), and the unicorn you get is just the unicorn you get. There’s no jackpot to bias toward. The one place it could matter is rarity. If certain layer/color combos are meaningfully rarer and the hash is derivable from inputs the trader controls, a sophisticated swapper could grind for rare outputs (search for a sender address or swap size that produces a desired hash). That’s a real attack but the fix isn’t VRF — it’s making the hash depend on something the swapper can’t pre-compute (a future randao value, an unmanipulable block field, or a commit-reveal with a delay). All of those preserve the on-chain, atomic-ish ethos better than VRF would.

@unipegv4 x.com/onxiart/status…

Today was a good example of legacy NFT 1.0 thought processes clashing with a new standard. The market will resolve this, as it always does. 🦄

Eligio Insfrán。巴拉圭，1958，前锋 22 号。 那年是贝利的第一届世界杯。瑞典主办，巴西夺冠。 Insfrán 小组赛回家。 而我有他的创世第一张。Genesis #1 of 5。 onxi.art #BSC #Unipeg #XI