Quote from: DaveF on December 16, 2022, 11:39:59 PM

The problems are as I said the fact that without 10+ characters of the address it is easy to generate another address with the same visible 1st bits.
Even if you have the complete address do you know what is really under that hologram: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5401502
And the ever popular you don't know if you can really trust the coin manufactures.

When BTC was $400 if some maker made 100 BTC0.1 and ran off with 10 BTC it sucked we all got pissed and went on with our day.
Now even at the $17000 price it starts to get into substantial amounts of money. Relying of 1stbits and holograms and so on is just no longer viable.

That's true/correct.
I've read already about manufacturers getting silent and having the coins redeeming logic based on their (now offline) website.
I think that I've read about the possibility holograms could be taken down and put back again (in some cases).
Clearly, addresses created with the same firstbits in order to mislead users is not a possibility to dismiss.

Imho collectibles are very nice even if not funded (I tend to like more the DYI ones). Funded collectibles, especially with higher amounts, tend to pose unnecessary risks.
So, again, I agree, you're fully right.

However, the topic has started with a question, not a debate on how (un)safe holograms and fistbits are. If one indeed has such a collectible, he will still want a tool to see his funds without taking down the hologram. Yes, it may not be accurate, in some cases the wrong address may be checked, but I don't know of better tools.