Nostr Web Client

Ordinals and inscriptions aren’t using bitcoin the money. They are merely using #Bitcoin *nodes* to store their garbage, and the bitcoin *name* to sell it to people.

It makes perfect, and necessary,

logic to build, optimize, and restrict the #Bitcoin system to only allow and facilitate the bitcoin *money.*

This isn’t a contradiction, it isn’t censorship, it’s necessary to defining what the protocol even does.

Any other arguments you want to have about the difficulty, feasibility, or foolishness of making or trying to reverse changes or certain data that is already included are valid. But the above point is true no matter what side you take.

jimbocoin 🃏 2y ago

From the perspective of a money-only user of Bitcoin, ordinal transactions are inefficient in space. They use more block space than strictly necessary.

From the perspective of a single-sig user, multisig transactions are likewise inefficient in space. Additional programmability takes block space (at minimum in the unlocking).

But both ordinals and multisig transactions must be efficient in fees, in order to be mined. Fees are the equalizer. Value for value.

The fee market is the guarantor of censorship resistance. A censored party can increase their fee rate to incentivize miners. This increases hash rate, punishing the censor with reduced profitability.

If we abandon fees as the exclusive arbiter of efficiency, we also give up our engine of censorship resistance.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

No replies yet.