You can find a detailed description of this unique project [here](https://takenstheorem.medium.com/welcome-to-the-mesh-b19d2f8653a2). There are many reasons we have chosen to include this piece in our library. To begin with, Takens Theorem has been doing really cool NFT projects for a long time. You can find a few of them at places like: [_Indivisuals_](https://opensea.io/collection/indivisuals-by-takens-theorem), [_Gaussian Timepieces_](https://opensea.io/collection/gaussian-timepieces-by-takens-theorem-1), [_the_coin_](https://opensea.io/collection/the-coin-by-takens-theorem), and [_Ethstory_](https://opensea.io/collection/ethstory). The particular combination of different elements in *The Mesh* is what we enjoy, as well as its playful focus on co-ownership and the panopticon. Let's dive in, fam. >_The Mesh_ is a small, experimental NFT project that visualizes the social aspects of public blockchain. Everyone sees everyone, and we provably share ownership on tokens and other projects. Because of all this, we find ourselves in something like “social networks” that might live long into the future. [...] _The Mesh_ is inspired by visualizations of co-ownership that show how blockchain spontaneously generates whole new social communities. The big idea here is that *The Mesh* **is a fusion of a social network, a DAO and NFT** to create a kind of integrated on-chain experience. Th fact that each message posted on chain causes a cascade of changes to everyone's NFT, and that the costs for posting such a message are directed towards a charity make the kind of fusion indicated above interesting. In particular, it is the shared and public examination of co-ownership that is most fascinating in the context of Kernel. We've done our own work exploring the edges of ownership in a piece called [Signature Economies](https://sign.kernerl.community) and Takens Theorem insights into the "palpable amplification of certain meanings of on-chain ownership" are well worth learning about. >The chain also reveals rich social interconnectedness among those transacting on chain. When two wallets own on the same NFT project they are, in a profound way, interlocked by chain history. And while they co-own on that project, it may provoke community events and interactions [in the real world](https://twitter.com/atareh/status/1458858485739839492). The chain reveals, reflects and resonates with real social life, becoming further wound up into it. The way this particular piece combines thinking about co-ownership with a nuanced understanding of the panopticon is also fascinating. Each token in itself is a panopticon in miniature (it's details, colour, and general appearance are determined both by your wallet and the other NFTs you own, as well as the messages posted by other owners). And the porject itself foregrounds this weird feature of many of our digital systems - not only the idea that we may be watched at any time, but that any one of us might watch any other at any time: >The doubly panoptic quality of crypto has further implications. Because we can watch each other, we can infer _social systems_ that are latent in the blockchain. You own an NFT, I own an NFT on the same project. We are in this meshwork, in an all-seeing system that immediately reveals that you and I are connected by co-ownership. >The panopticon concept seems grim and eerie, but it offers a critical reminder [about] the importance of self-custody, of resistance to censorship, of minimizing friction to peer-to-peer interactions among those who wish to freely associate. The panopticon metaphor encourages measures to protect these associations [...] The beauty of social connectedness and awareness travels in tandem. What's most fascinating about the way that artists approach exploring these "eerie ideas" is that it is rarely done in a moralising or endorsing manner: it simply comes down to conceptual, creative decisions and how these interact with computational limitations: > With each `reveal()` call, the contract is completely reconstructing an owner’s connectedness to all other 71 tokens. I also decided this was preferable for a conceptual reason. The panopticon, as noted above, is argued to have a kind of _normalizing_ effect. Having a handful of projects determine linkages creates this kind of subtle and simulated social coercion: “…if you want to connect, _you must do such and such…_” These projects reflect some of the major NFT categories since the codification of [ERC-721](https://eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-721). (Note again this is not an endorsement, but just a creative decision of the project.) The way that messages or posts work is also fascinating. You can only put a number between 1 and 9 into what you choose to post. If others post the same number, and own shared NFTs, then particular lines in the NFT become brighter. >These numbers can mean anything, it is up to owners on _The Mesh_. The simplicity is meant to symbolize a kind of conceptual alignment that happens in the space all the time, a proclamation of particular sentiments meant to energize or commiserate and so on. To some, it is a [concern](https://twitter.com/jonnybNFT/status/1471484678616104962); to others, it is [culture](https://twitter.com/richerd/status/1430895054176935939) [...] Viewers of the nodes would _not_ know the meaning of the messages. They might only know when communication has taken place, and by how many in similar ways.