bLighT Inscription Explorer

Renders on-chain inscription art from chain state alone. No server, no indexer, no API key.
enter an address and press View
statusidle
raw SVG
no backendno CDNone file Every byte rendered above came from a single eth_call.
Why the market is deliberately not live yet
Market — deliberately not live yet.
Trading inscriptions is not a UI problem, it is a settlement problem. On this standard a transfer of a non-exact-seed amount dissolves locked inscriptions back into spores: measured on a real wallet holding five, sending 1 whole token took it to four, and sending the full balance took it to zero. A same-seed collision is worse — it dissolves the piece being sold plus unrelated ones, and does not revert.

The fix is not a safer escrow — it is an id-addressed transfer. The Ethereum deployment moves one inscription by globally-unique id, carrying exactly its backing tokens, so no arithmetic can go wrong. Where that exists, a market can escrow the payment and never touch the art at all, and delivery is provable by an eth_call. Viewing is safe and read-only; trading ships when it is proven, not when it is demoed.
When a swap destroys art, and when it doesn’t
When a swap destroys art, and when it doesn't.
An earlier version of this page said every swap is a delete. That was overstated and is corrected here. The debit is floor(balance) − floor(balance − amount), so loose spores absorb the trade first. Measured: a holder with a 107-spore cushion sold 25 whole tokens and lost nothing; sub-whole-token sales destroy nothing at all. But a holder with no cushion sold 4% of a position and lost 40% of the art — five inscriptions down to three.

The rule: destruction happens only when the whole-token delta exceeds your spore cushion. Providing liquidity is different and worse — it always dissolves, because the position manager pays by transferring to the pool. Proven twice, on two contracts. The pool itself holds 8,292 whole tokens, zero inscriptions and zero spores — it is excluded from inscription accounting entirely.

A wallet must therefore compute the actual risk, not shout on every trade. Warning on every swap trains people to dismiss the warning that matters.
Why four ABI shapes — no single ERC-20i interface
Why four ABI shapes. There is no single ERC-20i interface. PEPi answers on 0xa435130b, the FUNGI/FROGGI/JELLI group on 0x422b9e23, TRUFFI on 0xa62f5b1b — which takes an address where the others take a seed triple — and the Ethereum item model on 0x058e7a31, whose seed struct is four words, not three. Two contracts sharing a signature can still have different selectors, so this page probes rather than assumes, and a fifth shape is expected.

Known trap, guarded. seed = 0 reverts with panic 0x11seed + nonce − 1 underflows. Any explorer that iterates addresses hits this. It is caught below rather than surfaced as a failure.
⌂ hub