Content pfp
Content
@
https://tezos.com
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction

JestemZero pfp
JestemZero
@jestemzero
Zero Contract Feature Highlight #5: ○ True Destroy of art versus Burn There is a large distinction here and I feel we need to change our language. The most common "burn" that people understand is sending a token to a burn address. This is used all the time. And it is the only way a collector has to get rid of a token. But in reality, this is just a token transfer to another wallet. This results in the artwork technically still in circulation just owned by a dead, unmanaged wallet. Destroy, in contrast, removes the token from circulation. The blockchain ledger takes it out of the entries. For provenance, we do keep the metadata information, but the token is now more a historical reference and nobody can ever own it again.
2 replies
2 recasts
8 reactions

JestemZero pfp
JestemZero
@jestemzero
With the ZeroContract we do not have an integrated Burn mechanism anymore. Since this is just a send operation we rely on the transfer function. We do now, however, have a new Destroy mechanism. I have ensured that only the original minter can destroy a token. And they can do that if and only if they own all of the editions. The Destroy function becomes locked and inaccessible when any other address owns an edition. This also includes the Burn address. If one token is sent to the burn address, the artwork could never be destroyed. But it is an action that can be taken at any time. If an artist wants to destroy some art, they have the option of trying to buy back all of the editions. Once the artists owns them all a gain, Destroy is unlocked.
1 reply
0 recast
4 reactions

marydeer🌼🎩 pfp
marydeer🌼🎩
@marydeer
Wow, is that really possible?
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction