When executed - what it does is generate 165 sub smart contracts that would each individually mint 2 NFTs from the Adidas' smart contract, and then transfer them to the owner's main ETH address.
Since each sub smart contract has a unique address, the creator was able to avoid the 2 item limit imposed by the sale.
After sending the NFTs to the creator's main address, the child smart contract would self destruct
What was the the cost of packing all of these operations into one transaction?
They paid 27.3 ETH ~ $104k in gas fees to process this, on top of 66 ETH ~$252k to pay for the items.
This means that they'd need the price of the NFT to raise from Ξ0.2 (mint price) to Ξ0.28 to break even on the gas they spent.
As the time of this writing, the price floor has skyrocketed to Ξ0.8 ETH. Netting them a theoretical profit of ~$600k 🤯
Ethereum is about to experience a once-in-a-lifetime phenomena called the "Triple Halvening" after the upcoming Merge.
What this is, and how this will drastically affect every ETH holder 👇
For those of you who aren't familiar, the merge is an upcoming hard fork (i.e. major software update) to the Ethereum network that transitions it from using a Proof of Work to a Proof of Stake consensus mechanism.
A new NFT wallet draining exploit is taking shape that uses a mixture of social engineering and takes advantages of the "degen meta"
Let's break it down
The "degen meta" is the current trend in the NFT space where teams will launch projects as free mints and provide little/no roadmap
This trend was popularized by projects like @goblintownwtf
This value prop is nice in a bear market because there is no financial risk to minting
@goblintownwtf The scammers use this to their advantage.
Instead of creating fake projects to scam you of your ETH, instead they are now create FOMO inducing free "degen" mint projects that trick you into granting them access to transfer your NFTs out of your wallet
After seeing millions of dollars of NFTs lost due to scams in the past month alone, I've put together an easy-to-setup, personal wallet security framework that can help keep you safe in your web3 explorations
Here are my quick thoughts on @Stacks as a holder who has been following closely since the 2019 public ICO 🧵
Disclaimer, this tweet thread is not financial advice, it is purely for educational purposes.
Stacks' major thesis and north star is that Bitcoin is/will be the best store of value that exists for humanity. If you buy/hold $STX, you have to transitively also be bullish on $BTC.
81 Bored Apes + Mutants are potentially about to be sold by the 3rd largest holder @ApeDao_, pending an ongoing divided & heated community vote to liquidate the DAO.
Here's the insider scoop 🧵
Context:
ApeDAO is a DAO of NFT collectors that was formed last year by prolific NFT collector KyloRen from his personal collection of Bored Apes and female crypto punk
The mission was is be the single largest holder of BAYC's, and they swept the BAYC floor on several occasions
The DAO is governed by a token $APED, which represents voting rights within the DAO and fractionalized ownership of the DAO's treasury
A conservative estimate of the DAO's NFT treasury (using collection floor prices) is 11,562 E, or around $30,061,200 at the time of this writing
Setting custom spend limits is a simple yet overlooked technique to protect your wallet from potential Web3 exploits.
If you've ever used apps like Uniswap, AAVE, etc, chances are that you've overlooked doing this
Quick 🧵 on what they are and how to use them properly
When interacting with services that transact with your crypto assets, you often encounter something called the "Approve" transaction step before performing the main transaction.
Here's what that transaction looks like when you interact with Uniswap
What the Approve transaction does is two things:
1. Allow the smart contract you're interacting with to validate how much of the token you have
2. Give permission to the smart contract to transfer/spend a certain amount of those assets on your behalf for future operations