Hashmasks: NiCiTies and NiFTies
The tokenization of physical and digital assets has been garnering plenty of attention recently. Long ago in June 2017, the CryptoPunks were born: 10,000 computer-generated, thumbnail-sized pixelated squares, depicting female, male, zombie, ape and alien ‘punks,’ each with unique attributes. Free-of-charge on release, CryptoPunks now command thousands of dollars worth of Ether, the Ethereum network’s native currency, on crypto-collectible marketplaces like OpenSea and Rarible.
Fast-forward to January 2021. Suum Cuique Labs GmbH, based out of Zug, Switzerland, released a collection of 16,384 unique digital images created by a group of over 70 artists. The ‘Hashmasks’ were snapped up almost immediately by the cognoscenti, for relatively small amounts of Ether.
Starting on January 28, 2021, the Hashmasks were released in groups according to a schedule and with a price that gradually increased from 0.1 ETH to 3.0 ETH, with the last 3 artworks going for 100 ETH each. With today’s prices, purchasing a Hashmask for 0.1 ETH is fantastic, and may prove to be similar to buying Bitcoin in 2010. Here’s hoping. But time will tell.
In and of themselves, Hashmasks have aesthetic value, which like all artistic works, is in the eye of the beholder. Since there are only about 16 thousand Hashmasks, they also have value as relatively uncommon collector’s items. In fact each Hashmask has various attributes, some being more rare than others. This includes traits like character, mask, eye color, skin color, and whether there is an item in the picture frame, like a book, a bottle, a hand mirror, or golden toilet paper(!), for example. (A sense of humor definitely pervades some of the images.) There are also differences in background scenery, hair color, and perhaps most mysteriously, some Hashmasks contain glyphs, chess pieces, Fibonacci spirals, playing card indices and suits, and the list goes on. Part of the fun is zooming in on the Hashmask, looking for some hidden feature. Some of these rare distinguishing features are difficult to spot, giving Hashmasks an aura of a treasure hunt, further adding to the mystique.
Another feature of Hashmasks, and a welcome inclusion, is the Name Changing Token (NCT). Each Hashmask can be bought and sold in a digital marketplace for a particular crypto-currency like Ether, but the NCT has a singular purpose, namely, to give the Hashmask owner the ability to change the name of the artwork. Because the name is stored on the blockchain, it is publicly visible. It is also immutable for everyone but the owner: the current owner of the artwork can spend NCTs to alter the name of the artwork.
On the Hashmasks website, the particular name of the Hashmask is considered:
…the rarest of all attributes within the entire project. This opens up a whole new dimension for collectibles where the value hierarchy of the individual pieces of the whole collective art is highly impacted by the preferences of the consumers.
Name Changing Tokens are generated at the rate of 10 per day, and therefore about 3,660 per year. To initiate a Hashmask name change, half that amount, or 1,830 NCTs must be sent to the Hashmask smart contract on the blockchain, and burnt. In other words, the destroyed NCTs are no longer available to be used to change any Hashmask’s name in the future. The supply of NCTs is limited. According to the Hashmask creators:
After 10 years, the emission of new NCTs comes to a halt. From then on, NCTs can only be burnt until one day no NCTs are left and the names of the Hashmasks cannot be altered anymore. The artwork is then considered complete.
Some of the Hashmasks were named right away by the original owners of the artworks. It is debatable whether some of the names were ‘throwaway,’ without a lot of thought going into naming the pieces. Debatable, because to paraphrase Shakespeare: ‘A rose by any other name would smell as sweet.’ What’s in a name? Who’s to judge? However, an interesting phenomenon has arisen: many Hashmasks remain unnamed. Perhaps unnamed Hashmasks will be the ultimate rarity, rather than a Hashmask having a unique name. Is a Hashmask name similar in value to a unique and desirable domain name? Probably not, but it will be interesting to see how this plays out in the future.
Other than name changing, another option is simply acquiring NCTs through Hashmask ownership, not burning the NCTs, and swapping them for Ether at a future point. If NCTs are rare in the future, their value may very well increase. It may be considered preferable to stack NCTs and cash them in, rather than name Hashmasks. It depends on the individual.
Time will tell, but at the time of writing, Hashmasks have been off to a phenomenal start, and as all things ‘blockchain’ and ‘tokenomics’ in particular, begin to gain more traction in the public consciousness, the future looks good for Hashmasks and NFTs in general.
Shortly after launch, Twitter user @seedphrase tweeted:
Selling on OpenSea for 420 ETH, this amount of money would buy me a modest home in a quiet neighborhood, or even a few CryptoPunks. At the time of writing, Hashmasks are averaging around 2 ETH at sale, some selling for significantly more.
Psychologically there are many reasons why human beings are collectors. Perhaps there is ego-satisfaction in acquiring rare items, that you are the sole owner of. Maybe collecting assuages existential fear, and provides a glimmer of immortality. Preserving something that belongs to us, and in a way is a part of our identity, into the future, long after our passing. Or we may be like magpies, attracted to shiny objects. Then again, it could be about speculative investment, and ultimately, the money.
As a child I collected hockey cards, stamps, coins, pop bottles, and LP records (then CDs — remember those?). I even had a huge collection of Doctor Who paperbacks. These days it’s NFTs.