They all forced me to post this.
Author: Deep Tide TechFlow
In the early morning, two special Pump.Fun Memecoins started to surge on the Solana chain. The two Memecoins share the same characteristic of being launched almost simultaneously, and both the token names and token icons are blank. Within two hours of their launch, they reached market capitalizations of $4 million and $6 million, respectively.
In the recent Meme market, such sudden surges of new coins must have some novel angles and backgrounds behind them.
What exactly is going on? Deep Tide TechFlow found that both "blank Memecoins" are related to the anonymous artist @SHL0MS, whose past experiences also exhibit a strong performance art style.
Art is Explosive
Speaking of the main character @SHL0MS, NFT OG players from the last bull market might have some impression. In February 2022, SHL0MS blew up a used Lamborghini Huracan and used this performance art as material to issue the related NFT CAR by SHL0MS. At that time, crypto art NFTs were still quite "recognized" by the market, and SHL0MS's explosive art attracted passionate buyers, with a market cap exceeding 1000 ETH ($3 million) on the day of launch, currently priced at 0.169 ETH.
Regarding this performance art, SHL0MS claimed that this act was to criticize the greed phenomenon of speculation in the crypto industry, rather than just to make money for himself.
After that, SHL0MS gradually faded from market attention until the recent blank Memecoin hype occurred early this morning.
Criticizing Speculation but Being Mocked by Token Issuance?
The recent wealth effect of Memes needs no elaboration, and in the narrative of AI + Meme, one amazing project after another has emerged.
In response to the current Meme frenzy, @SHL0MS, who has always been averse to the speculative attributes in crypto, has been continuously voicing some criticisms on Twitter, stating, "I am deeply bearish on the AI industry because many of them are getting caught up in the Meme coin game, which will leave them mentally exhausted, either bankrupt or rich enough to not care about the industry," and "If a niche internet celebrity endorses a token randomly issued for someone, it will deceive your fans without making any money, while permanently ruining your reputation, which is foolish."
At the same time, SHL0MS also believes that if the hype is only because of the price increase, then such theories are meaningless. He argues that a valid Meme value theory should be able to:
Predict which Memes will successfully spread
Or at least explain after the fact why certain Memes succeeded while others failed
If a theory cannot achieve these two points, then it is meaningless. He used the term "tautological price apologetics" to imply that these theories are merely justifying already successful Memes without truly explaining the reasons for their success.
SHL0MS's passionate remarks also attracted discussions among some Twitter users, but beyond rational discussions, some people "did not forget their original intention" and asked SHL0MS, "You talk so much, what about the coin you issued?"
SHL0MS replied that he had issued a coin earlier, and that this coin had no value, serving as a satire of speculative behavior, and stated that only those who received an invitation could own the worthless coin he issued (I am noble, don't come near).
SHL0MS's actions in the current environment of value frenzy inevitably seem a bit "politically incorrect." As SHL0MS's discussion gained some traction, playful users quickly launched a parody token named $SHL0MS on Pump.Fun and posted the token link in SHL0MS's comment section.
Seeing this mockery, SHL0MS exploded, stating, "If you get Rugged, you deserve it."
From the chart, the parody token $SHL0MS indeed headed towards zero, but it peaked at a market cap of a million dollars, allowing some quick players to make a profit.
The More I Think About It, the Angrier I Get, I’ll Issue a Coin Myself?
Perhaps because enduring it for a moment only made him angrier, in order to "oppose" the mockery of issuing coins, SHL0MS chose to issue a coin himself on Pump.Fun. Shortly after, he released the first CA (which he called Blank One).
It is said that initially SHL0MS mistakenly sent his own wallet address and had already bought a large amount of tokens, but later he burned the early purchased tokens.
Not long after, SHL0MS released another CA of a blank token (which he called Blank Two), stating that the difference between Blank One and Blank Two was some format of blank characters, etc.
Clearly, the market also viewed SHL0MS's act of issuing coins as a hot topic for speculation, and within a short time, the market capitalization of the blank tokens skyrocketed, with the total market cap of the two tokens nearing $10 million at their peak.
Some followers commented on SHL0MS's act of issuing coins, saying, "OMG, I didn't expect you to start issuing coins too, that's a bit hard to say."
SHL0MS quickly began to save face, stating that they forced me to do this…
After that, SHL0MS did not engage in any major promotional activities for his token, instead using some relatively "abstract" tweets to explain and introduce his actions, while joking with Meme memes. He also stated that he had been burning tokens and that the pre-purchased tokens had been mostly burned.
Conclusion
Perhaps the market's hot topics change too quickly, or this token issuance was originally based on short-term hype. As of the time of writing, the two blank tokens have gradually headed towards zero.
However, the price of the tokens is not the most intriguing aspect of the whole affair. After all, the "cause of issuing the coin is to accuse the act of issuing coins for profit" is already abstract enough. It is impossible to truly judge from superficial remarks and abstract expressions whether this is a case of mistaken performance art or if this artist took a few legitimate detours to issue a coin for profit.
Perhaps the artist's abstraction is ingrained, and the seemingly hypocritical act of issuing coins can also be masked under the guise of "performance art." But in the end, only the participants themselves and the balances in their wallets know who made a fortune and who spent a lot of money to watch the spectacle.
免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。
