Discussion on ERC-7583 for Inscribing assets in smart contract

[ins-evm]

@MidnightLightning

@ins-evm

Based on these reflections, we have updated our results in the GitHub repository…

The latest updates to the GitHub draft lay out a radically different structure, with ERC7583 defining a type of contract that is a (true) ERC20 and (renamed/tweaked) ERC721 contract at once. That hybrid blend of non-fungible and fungible token is something that non-inscription communities have been exploring lately and ERC7631 has come from that. ERC7631 seems to be pursuing the same goals as this updated ERC7583, in that users have their fungible tokens saved as discrete “bundles” of arbitrary value. The key difference is ERC7631 has the non-fungible “bundles” be true ERC721s. A significant downside of this updated ERC7583 is that the non-fungible part looks similar to ERC721s, but isn’t actually, and could confuse or break interfaces that assume they are.

ERC7583 having part of the contract’s state be accessible to other smart contracts (ERC20 interface) and the other part inaccessible (by attempting to save it as “an inscription”) seems like it’s significantly less useful. So, my opinion is that if a project wants the functionality of having a set of non-fungible tokens that “store” fungible token values for a user, we should help standardize ERC7631 as an interface to do that, to have the best compatibility with all other smart contracts in the space.

I have read the first commit of the ERC7631 implementation code, which was committed three weeks ago. And it is very similar to ERC404(Pandora).

I don’t know if you are aware of INSC. We deployed it on De-24-2023, at, and it was the first contract to attempt to combine ERC20 and ERC721. INSC was on the top trending list for 4 days until it was hacked.

Then, we spent a considerable amount of time developing a compensation plan in an effort to ensure our users receive fair compensation. And we also launched a new contract named INSC+ on Jan-17-2024, which introduces more innovation. We made this announcement at that time as well.

Because we didn’t fully grasp the cutthroat competition in the crypto industry, we set a restriction that the FT function could only be unlocked after all INSC+ tokens were claimed. Then, Pandora was launched on February 2, 2024. Following a similar story, it gained popularity and became increasingly well-known.

I mentioned this because you wanted me to build on ERC7631, akin to expecting a poor prince to serve a nouveau riche. Our story hasn’t been fully revealed yet. The significant downside of ERC7631 is that it requires using two contracts for one asset. This approach was proven to be ineffective by the project Cirth.

An NFT that points to off-chain content on IPFS or Arweave is incomplete, and thus not a digital artifact.
It’s a sign of weakness to abandon innovation just to conform to the existing NFT market.