This week’s featured collector is jonnyclean

JonnyClean has a solid collection of Ethereum and Polygon NFTs. Check it out at lazy.com/jonnyclean

Last week’s token gating poll showed that exclusive merch drops are the strongest draw for connecting a wallet to a store, taking 40% of the vote — the only option that pulled away from the pack. Discounts on existing purchases, cross-brand perks from a single NFT, and a flat refusal to connect at all each tied at 20%. Event access, interestingly, got zero votes despite being one of the most-cited success stories in Shopify’s guide (Liquid Death’s festival VIP passes, Fox’s Krapopolis activations). The even three-way split at 20% tells its own story: our readers are almost equally divided between wanting practical savings, wanting interoperability, and wanting nothing to do with wallet connections at all. That last group is a useful reminder that even among an NFT-literate audience, one in five still sees the security tradeoff as not worth it — exactly the conversion friction Shopify flagged as the central challenge for merchants adopting this model.

NFTs Are Coming Back — But Not the Way You Remember

Reid Hoffman made a case at Consensus Miami this week that NFTs are due for what he called a “rebirth.” And his reasoning has nothing to do with profile pictures or floor prices. The LinkedIn co-founder and Greylock partner argued that as AI agents increasingly populate the internet, transacting and communicating on behalf of humans, the need for a trustworthy digital identity layer becomes urgent. And crypto, he said, is the obvious answer.

The core of Hoffman’s thesis is a question that sounds abstract until you sit with it: when your agent is talking to my agent, and they book a talk or complete a transaction, how do you know it’s a trustable interaction? Traditional identity systems — usernames, passwords, corporate databases — were built for a world where humans are on both sides of every interaction. As autonomous AI systems begin making transactions, booking services, and negotiating agreements independently, those systems may struggle to keep up. Hoffman believes NFTs and blockchain verification become useful again precisely at that point — not as collectibles, but as verifiable digital credentials.

Hoffman said identity systems will work fine inside companies, but the harder problem is identity for agents operating across the open internet. That’s where on-chain verification has an advantage: cryptographic proofs don’t depend on any single company’s infrastructure to remain valid. His crypto holdings include approximately $7.2 million in Ethereum and a CryptoPunk NFT, which he said he purchased because identity questions are central to his AI-and-crypto investment thesis.

There’s a practical thread here that connects to his LinkedIn background. Hoffman noted that real identity creates more responsibility and more reliability, while acknowledging that pseudonyms have legitimate uses in some contexts. He also pointed to his own AI clone, Reid AI, which he has sent to speak at conferences on his behalf, as an example of why provenance will matter more as generative media improves. If an AI version of you can show up to a panel, how does anyone verify what’s real?

As an investor, Hoffman said he’s looking for crypto ideas that may have been tried too early during prior market cycles but could return as AI changes the internet. NFTs are one such area, while DAOs and other structures could also see renewed relevance.

For collectors, Hoffman’s argument is worth thinking about carefully. He’s not predicting another speculative run on JPEGs. He’s suggesting that the underlying technology — unique, verifiable, on-chain identity tokens — may turn out to be essential infrastructure for an internet where you can’t tell humans from agents by default. That’s a very different value proposition than what drove 2021, and it reframes NFTs less as cultural objects and more as trust primitives.

Whether that framing helps or hurts the art side of the NFT world is an open question. If NFTs become primarily associated with AI agent identity and credential verification, the cultural layer — the art, the communities, the curation — could get overshadowed by enterprise use cases. On the other hand, identity infrastructure that works could solve some of the provenance and authenticity problems that have plagued digital art from the start. If your NFT can prove who made it, who owns it, and that the transaction was initiated by a real person rather than a bot, that’s genuinely useful for collectors.

The deeper signal from Consensus this week isn’t that one investor bought a CryptoPunk. It’s that the AI industry is starting to recognize a problem that the crypto world has been building toward for years — and the tools that looked like speculative toys in 2021 might turn out to be the trust layer the next internet actually needs.

This post is based on CoinDesk’s reporting from Consensus Miami 2026.

Poll: What would make you connect your NFT wallet to a store?

We ❤️ Feedback

We would love to hear from you as we continue to build out new features for Lazy! Love the site? Have an idea on how we can improve it? Drop us a line at info@lazy.com

This week’s featured collector is Brayden03

Brayden03 is a self-described “blockchain hustler.” Take a look at their collection at lazy.com/brayden03

Last week’s poll on how NFT artists should relate to speculation split cleanly down the middle — 50% said ride the wave, 50% said reclaim art on your own terms — while the moderate options (use it but don’t become it, withdraw entirely, still figuring it out) all drew zero votes. That polarization is striking. Nobody picked the cautious middle ground or the full opt-out; our readers seem to feel this is a binary choice between leaning into speculation as creative material and rejecting its terms altogether. It maps neatly onto the artists we highlighted from Emily Morley’s Ocula essay — Ann Liu surfing volatility as a small fish in a vast market on one end, Leah Ke Yi Zheng using the I Ching to reclaim indeterminacy on the other. The fact that Cameron Rowland’s withdrawal approach got no votes suggests our readers, even when they want to push back against speculation, still want to be in the arena rather than walking away from it entirely.

Shopify Just Updated Their Token Gating Playbook — Here Are the Highlights

Shopify published an updated guide this week on how merchants can implement token-gated commerce — using NFTs as access keys to unlock exclusive products, pricing, and experiences. It’s a practical, implementation-focused piece aimed at retailers, but the case studies and data points are worth pulling out for collectors too, since they tell you a lot about where token gating is actually gaining traction and where it’s still struggling.

Here are the main takeaways.

The mechanism is straightforward. A customer connects their wallet to a Shopify store, a smart contract checks for a specific NFT, and verified holders unlock gated products or perks. No passwords, no stored personal data. Shopify supports this through app partners rather than native tooling, with wallet support across MetaMask, Phantom, Kukai, and Dapper.

The numbers are real. Across more than 100 brands using token-based loyalty, customers who engage with the incentives average two purchases versus 1.2 for non-redeemers — a 67% increase. Repeat-customer rates hit 50%, and revenue per customer runs 115% higher. The NFT market overall was valued at $66 billion in 2026, with growth now driven by utility rather than speculation.

The case studies are a mix of wins and warnings. Louis Vuitton’s VIA program continues to use token gating for digital and physical collectibles, with clearly time-boxed sale windows and defined redemption steps. Adidas evolved its Into the Metaverse collection into ALTS by Adidas, integrating wallet authentication directly into their CONFIRMED app for ongoing exclusive access. Liquid Death issued Wallet Pass NFTs to its 200,000-member Country Club, giving holders festival VIP access and limited merch drops through Apple and Google Wallet — clean and low-friction. On the other side, Starbucks shut down its Odyssey NFT loyalty beta before it ever left closed beta, citing overcomplexity as the core problem. Dual reward currencies, gated quizzes, and a confusing marketplace overwhelmed users even with Starbucks-level brand recognition behind it.

Conversion friction is the central challenge Shopify flags. The wallet connection step remains a real barrier. Seventy-five percent of consumers cite scam concerns as their top worry, and phishing attacks mimicking “Connect wallet” prompts cost users nearly $84 million in 2025. Shopify’s recommendation: treat token gating as an optional perk layer, keep a non-wallet path open for everyone else, and lead with the benefit rather than the mechanism — “Unlock community access” rather than “Connect your wallet.”

The collector angle. What’s interesting about this guide from our side of the fence is the picture it paints of where NFT utility is quietly becoming durable infrastructure. The brands still investing in token gating aren’t chasing hype — they’re building portable, resalable, dynamically upgradeable membership systems that happen to run on-chain. For collectors, that means holdings can function as more than speculative assets or aesthetic objects. They become keys. The tradeoff is more wallet surface area exposed to phishing, which is worth taking seriously.

Shopify’s full guide covers implementation details, tooling recommendations, and A/B testing frameworks for merchants. For collectors, the signal is simpler: the platforms that power mainstream retail are treating token gating as a real feature, not a novelty, and the gap between “NFT holder” and “loyalty member” continues to narrow.

This post highlights key points from Shopify’s Token Gated Commerce guide, updated April 2026.

Poll: What would make you connect your NFT wallet to a store?

We ❤️ Feedback

We would love to hear from you as we continue to build out new features for Lazy! Love the site? Have an idea on how we can improve it? Drop us a line at info@lazy.com

This week’s featured collector is Chefx

Chefx launched a pfp collection back in the day. Take a look at lazy.com/chefx

Last week’s Foundation shutdown poll revealed something important: the biggest concern among our readers isn’t the practical stuff — it’s the narrative. “The signal it sends about the NFT market” led with 38%, suggesting that what worries collectors most about platforms like Foundation and Nifty Gateway closing isn’t losing access to specific features but what the pattern says about the health of the space overall. Close behind, losing auction history and discovery getting harder for artists tied at 25% each — both real, infrastructural concerns about what disappears when a front end goes dark. The lack of curated alternatives drew 13%, and perhaps most striking, not a single reader voted for “nothing — the art lives on-chain.” That’s a notable reality check on the decentralization narrative that Foundation’s own CEO leaned on in his farewell letter. Our readers clearly believe that on-chain permanence, while important, doesn’t solve the problem by itself — the context layer around the art matters, and right now it’s eroding.

When Volatility Becomes the Medium

Emily Morley published a sharp essay in Ocula this week that deserves attention from anyone collecting at the intersection of art and crypto. The piece tracks how prediction markets — Polymarket in particular — are reshaping the relationship between speculation and art, and what that means for artists working in and around these systems.

The setup is straightforward. Polymarket lets users bet on the outcome of virtually anything, and that now includes art auctions. Last year, bets were placed on the results of Sotheby’s sale of the Leonard A. Lauder collection. As Morley frames it, what’s being traded in those moments is no longer the asset itself but speculation about its future value. If the last decade saw dealers and flippers experimenting with price as medium, prediction markets represent a further abstraction — one where volatility itself becomes the site of value.

This isn’t entirely new territory. Morley traces the lineage back through the 2010s art-fund era, when paintings became quasi-financial instruments, through the NFT boom, where artists were — as Hito Steyerl put it on the Disintegrator podcast — treating price as the artwork. But prediction markets push the abstraction further. You don’t even need to own the work to speculate on it. The artwork becomes a surface for bets made by people who may never see it.

What makes the essay especially interesting for NFT collectors is the artists Morley highlights as responses to this condition.

Ann Liu is a Los Angeles-based artist and meme coin trader who came up during the stimulus-check-powered NFT boom. She makes airbrushed landscape paintings rooted in the Daoist Shanshui tradition, where the human figure is dwarfed by its surroundings. She keeps her artwork separate from her trading, but the sensibility carries across — she describes market participation as being a small fish navigating between states of bullishness and bearishness, merely a participant in something vast. The landscapes and the markets share a scale relationship: you’re inside something you can’t fully see.

Leah Ke Yi Zheng takes a different approach. Her recent installation at the Renaissance Society in Chicago, Change, I Ching (64 Paintings), uses painted I Ching hexagrams on translucent silk screens to create what Morley describes as an alternative, interiority-oriented method of speculation. Where Polymarket reduces futures to yes-or-no propositions, the I Ching sits with indeterminacy. Zheng’s work foregrounds chance, bodily perception, and meditations on change that resist algorithmic overdetermination. The connection to John Cage’s chance operations from the 1950s and 60s is explicit and well-drawn.

Then there’s Cameron Rowland, whose work operates through withdrawal. For Depreciation (2018), Rowland purchased an acre of former plantation land on Edisto Island and attached a covenant making it permanently unusable and undevelopable — appraised at $0. At Dia, the acre existed only as framed legal documents. No image, no visit, no surface for speculation to attach to. Morley calls it the structural inverse of prediction market logic: an object made deliberately illegible to systems that deal in prospects.

That spectrum — from Liu’s navigation of volatility, to Zheng’s reclamation of indeterminacy, to Rowland’s total refusal of legibility — maps neatly onto choices NFT artists and collectors face right now. The onchain art world has always had an uncomfortable intimacy with speculation. Some artists have leaned into it productively, making price dynamics part of the work (r__ipe’s Value Discovery, which we covered recently, is a good example). Others are finding ways to create meaning that the market can’t easily metabolize.

Morley’s closing line lands well: the artists who may matter most going forward are those who have made themselves unreadable by operating in a temporality the market cannot price. That’s a useful filter for collectors thinking about what to pay attention to — not which works will appreciate, but which works are doing something the speculation layer can’t absorb.

This post is based on Emily Morley’s Chance Encounter in Ocula Magazine.

Poll: How should NFT artists relate to speculation?

We ❤️ Feedback

We would love to hear from you as we continue to build out new features for Lazy! Love the site? Have an idea on how we can improve it? Drop us a line at info@lazy.com

This week’s featured collector is alphanfts

Alphanfts has a wild collection of various pfps. Browse their collection at lazy.com/alphanfts

Last week’s generative art poll delivered a clear message — and a humbling one for us as poll writers. “Something else” took a commanding 50% of the vote, which means half our readers felt that none of the options we offered captured what they actually value most in generative art. Among the named options, color and composition tied with the journey from code to expression at 20% each, the artist’s personal story drew 10%, and notably, zero readers voted for the algorithm itself. That last detail reinforces something Veit Heller’s essay argued: the math matters less than what you do with it. But the real takeaway is the “something else” landslide — we’d love to hear what we missed, so drop us a note if your answer wasn’t on the list.

Foundation Is Shutting Down… What Collectors Need to Know

Foundation, one of the defining platforms of the 2021 NFT boom, is closing its doors. Cofounder and CEO Kayvon Tehranian announced Wednesday that the platform’s planned sale to digital art display company Blackdove fell through, and with no other viable buyers in sight, Foundation has begun a formal wind-down process. Collectors have a one-year window to migrate their assets off the platform.

For those who weren’t around in early 2021, Foundation carved out a distinct identity in the NFT marketplace landscape. While OpenSea was the open bazaar where anyone could list anything, Foundation launched as an invite-only platform aimed at digital artists and serious collectors. It never quite reached the brand recognition of SuperRare, but it hosted some genuinely historic moments — Chris Torres’s Nyan Cat selling for roughly $600,000, Edward Snowden’s Stay Free going for 2,224 ETH. Over its lifetime, the platform facilitated $230 million in sales.

The Blackdove acquisition was announced in January as an attempt at finding long-term stewardship for the platform. But according to Blackdove’s statement, posted from Foundation’s own X account, full due diligence only happened after the operational handover was already underway — at which point Blackdove decided that building its own marketplace made more sense than acquiring Foundation’s. Tehranian had simultaneously shut down Rodeo, a social NFT app his team launched in 2024, which he said never reached sustainable scale.

Foundation’s closure is the latest in a steady erosion of the platforms that defined the NFT boom era. Nifty Gateway, which Gemini acquired in 2019 and which reported $300 million in sales during the boom, shut down in January. Christie’s closed its digital art department last fall. Sotheby’s gutted its Metaverse team in 2024. NFT sales volumes have dropped roughly 70% from their 2021 peaks.

There’s a real conversation to be had about what this pattern means for collectors. On one hand, Tehranian framed the shutdown as validation of decentralization’s importance — your NFTs live on Ethereum regardless of whether Foundation’s front end exists. That’s true and it matters. The art isn’t gone. On the other hand, platform closures do have practical consequences. Discovery, provenance context, auction history, artist profiles, and the social layer around collecting all lived on Foundation’s infrastructure. When the front end disappears, that context gets harder to access even if the tokens themselves remain on-chain.

The deeper question is whether the curated marketplace model that Foundation pioneered can survive this market at all, or whether curation will need to find a different home — embedded in collector communities, DAOs, or tools that don’t depend on a single company staying solvent. The art persists on-chain, but the infrastructure for finding it, contextualizing it, and building culture around it remains fragile.

If you have assets on Foundation, start your migration now. A year feels like plenty of time until it isn’t.

This post is based on Harrison Jacobs’ reporting for ARTnews.

Poll: What concerns you most about NFT platform closures?

We ❤️ Feedback

We would love to hear from you as we continue to build out new features for Lazy! Love the site? Have an idea on how we can improve it? Drop us a line at info@lazy.com

This week’s featured collector is kkamauu

Kkamauu is a prolific collector of Ethereum NFTs. Check out their picks at lazy.com/kkamauu

Last week’s EIP-8141 poll split evenly between paying gas with stablecoins and multisig security without wallet migration, each taking 50% of the vote, while batching transactions, private mints and bids, and “something else” all came in at zero. The takeaway is telling: our readers aren’t most excited about convenience features like fewer clicks — they care about the practical economics of collecting (not having to hold ETH just to transact) and protecting what they already own (adding multisig security without the risk and hassle of migrating assets to a new wallet). These are both pain points that collectors live with today and have largely just accepted as the cost of doing business on-chain, so it makes sense they’d be the features that land hardest once EIP-8141 arrives.

A Generative Artist’s Vocabulary, Built One Algorithm at a Time

One of the things we find most valuable as NFT art observers is when artists pull back the curtain on how their practice actually develops — not the polished origin story, but the messy, incremental version. Generative artist Veit Heller recently did exactly that in a personal blog post, tracing his journey from 2016 to now across roughly 114 sketches. Heller isn’t an NFT artist — his practice lives on p5js and personal canvases, not on-chain — but his reflections on how a generative art vocabulary develops over time are deeply relevant to anyone collecting or following the NFT generative art scene.

It starts where a lot of generative art journeys start: with math. Phyllotaxis spirals, trigonometric functions, golden angles. Thirty lines of code producing sunflower patterns. Heller describes this early phase honestly — he was a programmer first, choosing formulas rather than making aesthetic decisions, and whatever the algorithm produced was the work. The results were beautiful in a clean, illustrative way, but they felt more like demonstrations than expressions.

The shift happened gradually. Boredom with pristine mathematical output led to an interest in texture — simulated brush strokes, particle systems mimicking fur or hair, flow fields chosen not for their novelty but for the rich surfaces they could generate. This came alongside what Heller calls his “greyscale period,” where avoiding color was partly aesthetic preference and partly a way to dodge decisions he didn’t feel ready to make. A useful constraint, in retrospect, even if it lasted longer than it needed to.

Then came a quieter revelation: lines, layered densely enough, stop reading as lines and start reading as surfaces. Enough geometric primitives with enough intention can evoke physical materials without simulating them. That insight opened a door. Instead of asking “what does this algorithm look like?” Heller began asking “can I make this look like watercolor?” — working backward from a felt memory of how a medium behaves to the math that might approximate it.

Over time, a small library of simulated materials accumulated: watercolor washes, dry brush, felt-tip pen, cracked glaze, pencil fill. None physically accurate, all convincing enough to carry emotion. Each one taught something. Watercolor taught layering and transparency. Brush strokes taught pressure and variance. Cracked glaze taught that imperfection has its own structure.

Color remains Heller’s self-described weak point — no formal theory, just a slowly growing intuition built through looking, testing, and failing. But comparing recent work to that first phyllotaxis spiral makes the distance visible. The algorithm is still present, but it’s in service of composition, texture, and intent rather than being the point itself.

What resonates most for us is Heller’s framing of all these accumulated techniques as a “vocabulary.” Each algorithm learned, each material simulated, each failed color experiment becomes something available to reach for later. The question evolves from “what can I do?” to “what do I want to say?” — not dramatically, but meaningfully. The tools recede, and something like a personal aesthetic starts to emerge.

That’s a trajectory worth paying attention to as collectors, even when the artist in question has no connection to the NFT world. The generative artists producing the most compelling on-chain work right now aren’t the ones with the most sophisticated algorithms. They’re the ones who’ve spent years building a vocabulary and have started using it to say something. The code is the medium, but the art lives in the accumulated decisions about what to do with it. Heller’s essay is a clear window into what that accumulation actually looks like from the inside.

This post is based on Veit Heller’s Generative Art Over the Years.

Poll: What matters most to you in generative art?

We ❤️ Feedback

We would love to hear from you as we continue to build out new features for Lazy! Love the site? Have an idea on how we can improve it? Drop us a line at info@lazy.com

This week’s featured collector is munoznfts

Munoznfts has a massive NFT collection spread across more than a dozen wallets. Check it out at lazy.com/munoznfts

Last week we polled readers on the most compelling aspect of ripe’s Value Discovery, and the results leaned decisively toward the visual logic — the dithering-driven rendering of price disagreement between two Uniswap pools — which took 67% of the vote, with the participation layer (the fact that anyone trading in either pool actively reshapes the artwork) picking up the remaining 33%. Nobody voted for the concept alone or “something else,” which is telling: readers weren’t drawn to the abstract idea of markets-as-material in isolation, but to how it’s executed — either the specific mechanism of error diffusion making disagreement visible, or the live feedback loop between trading and image. Both winning answers point to the same underlying appreciation: what makes Value Discovery resonate isn’t just that it says something interesting about price and consensus, it’s that the onchain infrastructure is doing the actual aesthetic and compositional work.

Two Upgrades That Will Quietly Transform How You Collect

If you’ve been collecting onchain art or gaming NFTs for any length of time, you know the friction. The approval transaction before the buy transaction. The bridging dance between chains. The ETH you need to keep on hand just for gas. These aren’t dealbreakers, but they add up — and they’ve kept the experience feeling rougher than it needs to be.

Two upgrades now in development are about to smooth all of that out. Neither is flashy in the way a new marketplace launch might be, but their impact on your day-to-day collecting will be significant.

The first is the Ethereum Economic Zone, a framework led by Gnosis and ZisK with Ethereum Foundation funding. The core idea is synchronous composability — a technical term for something simple: contracts on different chains will be able to talk to each other in real time, within a single transaction.

Right now, if you want to act on an NFT that lives on Base while your funds sit on Ethereum, you’re bridging tokens, waiting, and paying extra fees along the way. Under the EEZ model, rollups that opt in will behave as though they share a single execution environment. You call a proxy contract on your chain, it handles the cross-chain coordination, and the transaction either completes everywhere or doesn’t fire at all. No partial states, no stuck bridges.

For collectors, this means a multichain NFT ecosystem that actually feels like one place. You won’t need to think about which chain a piece lives on before you bid on it.

EIP-8141: Flexible Transactions for Everyday Collecting

The second upgrade is EIP-8141, slated for Ethereum’s Hegotá upgrade later this year. Where the EEZ addresses fragmentation between chains, EIP-8141 tackles rigidity within transactions themselves.

Today, every Ethereum transaction follows the same pattern: one signature authorizes it, one address pays gas in ETH, and one operation executes. EIP-8141 replaces that with modular “frame transactions” — sequences of steps that can be composed however an app or user needs.

Gateway CTO Igor Mandrigin described the architecture as a transaction broken into discrete frames: an optional deployment frame (to create an account if needed), a validation frame (where authorization logic lives), a paymaster validation frame (for third-party gas sponsorship), and an execution frame (where the actual state change happens).

What does that look like in practice for collectors?

Fewer clicks, fewer transactions. That annoying two-step of approving a marketplace contract and then buying? Batch it into one atomic operation. Deploy a fresh wallet, mint from a drop, and set up an ENS name… all in a single transaction.

Pay gas however you want. EIP-8141 natively supports gas abstraction. A paymaster contract can accept your USDC and swap it for ETH inside the transaction itself. Or an app can sponsor gas entirely, removing the cost barrier for new users trying a mint.

Better security without migration headaches. Want multisig protection for a valuable collection? Today that means deploying a separate smart contract wallet and moving everything over. With frame transactions, you can set up multisig authorization directly on your existing account. You could also use session keys with expiration dates for onchain games, or delegate specific minting permissions to a curator — all configured atomically.

Stronger privacy options. The validation frame can accept a zero-knowledge proof instead of a standard signature. That opens the door to private mints where your eligibility is verified without revealing your address, or secondary market trades routed through privacy protocols. For collectors managing high-value holdings, ephemeral signing keys — a new key for every transaction — become a real possibility.

What This Looks Like Together

These two upgrades complement each other naturally. The EEZ handles the space between chains; EIP-8141 handles the mechanics within them. Combined, they enable flows that would be impossible today.

Consider: minting a membership NFT on Ethereum with USDC covering gas, then immediately accessing gated DAO voting on Arbitrum and claiming an exclusive in-game wearable on Base with sponsored transactions — all triggered by a single wallet signature. Or picture a cryptoart marketplace where bids are submitted via ZK proofs so collectors can participate without exposing their addresses. Or an onchain game where your character NFT updates dynamically based on DeFi activity across multiple chains, all through a sponsored background transaction when you log in.

These aren’t speculative scenarios. The EEZ framework is being actively built as open-source, credibly neutral infrastructure. EIP-8141 has a concrete deployment target in Hegotá. The long-standing UX constraints that have made EVM-based collecting clunkier than it should be are being addressed at the infrastructure level.

The collecting experience on the other side of these upgrades will feel meaningfully different — less like navigating a patchwork of disconnected systems, and more like using a single, capable platform that happens to run across many chains. That’s a practical improvement worth paying attention to.

Learn more at Bankless, part one and part two.

Poll: Which EIP-8141 feature matters most to you as a collector?

We ❤️ Feedback

We would love to hear from you as we continue to build out new features for Lazy! Love the site? Have an idea on how we can improve it? Drop us a line at info@lazy.com