Bitcoin: "Positive Use Cases of Ordinals on Bitcoin"
Subhead: "A Positive spin on Ordinals from the non ordinary Bitcoin Maxi Unicorn: Michael Saylor"
When I first heard the word Ordinals/NFTs in the same sentence on the Bitcoin Timechain, I bristled. Even up to the past couple weeks. However, as I dig into it, they don't seem to be terrible, in the long term. Unfortunately, in the short term the terrible side is what is getting all the attention and was center stage for all to see in Miami. However, that Udi/Eric maneuver wasn't shocking at all and predictable with the beforehand Nic Carter drama and Udi "we broke Bitcoin' celebration. What was shocking was "Bitcoin Magazine" gave those guys a microphone? Money over matter.
I agree with Foss something is wrong at "Bitcoin Magazine."
=====
(Superfluous stream of conscious side comments: Albeit Foss blocked me for my comparing El Salvador to having a lower GDP than our lowest, by GDP, US state Virginia. Regardless, Canadian Jeff Booth's velvet hammer approach is way better and impactful than the Foss' frothing-at-the-mouth-"Bonds"-"For-the-kids"-sledge-hammer approach.
Cory Klippsten called "Bitcoin Magazine" out before and no one listened. Swan has way more integrity and would have never let many of those panels exist let alone be on the Nakamoto Stage. I am waiting for a Natalie Brunell/"Hard Money" counterpunch on ordinals. Swan knows journalism and it is no accident they are winning awards.)
=====
I've had reservations about "Bitcoin Magazine" early finding out Vitalik Buterin was a cofounder before it was 'sold.' Everyone knows baggage is left behind by the first regime. (The 'CEO'? Compromised? Sorry Peter, my pants don't get tight with promoting David. Nothing he said resonated with me.)
Michael Saylor resonates with me:
- Saylor has said those 10 life lessons multiple times over the years. I got it the first time. They hang on my 'fridge
- As a 35 year BI professional, it has nothing to do with the BI software, the tool, it is all about the data. Saylor knows this too. Even if 100% of databases (and their subsequent tables) have GIGO (aka 'some future'/'most now' ordinals.)
- Saylor stays positive and isn't a douche canoe up on stage flossing with Dollar Store Wizard hats. Saylor doesn't need the attention nor does Bitcoin nor the weird validation the Crypto Crappies crave. ( After Earache and Udiot's self promotion publicity stunt some guy on the "Bitcoin Magazine" Desk had the best line that gave me the biggest laugh of the conference, he said they "looked like Junior Varsity Gandalfs.")
Once again, trying to get 'signal from the noise' or whatever corporate FIAT lingo you want to throw at this, I turned to positively charged Bitcoin Saylor to captain me through this. What is he thinking? What is he doing?
Starting with the latter, he sees opportunity in ordinals. Not with the current JPEGs/NFTs or putting alt coins on the Bitcoin timechain. As he states, doing so may even be illegal, breaking Security laws. What about the positive side?
I don't know about you but I take comfort knowing Satoshi put the Bitcoin White Paper on the Bitcoin ledger. (Eat your core out Apple.) What about when Saylor talks about a billionaire (Him?) putting his last will and testament out there as an ordinal on Bitcoin?
To me, fantastic use case, your will out there, electrically 'signed' undisputed, ethical, fantastic, safe way to do something, friction free, no lawyers needed. (Prince Rodgers Nelson, if only I could have orange pilled you on Bitcoin and then Purple Pilled you on NOSTR.)
Michael Saylor doesn't wait for permission from people or permissionless Bitcoin. MicroStrategy is building on this ordinals opportunity, in a best ordinals use approach, which predictively will not even close resemble what the unethical crypto community is doing.
Never mind, the Crapto Community saying 'we broke Bitcoin.' That is garbage, you paid to put garbage into the Bitcoin Timechain and future attacks are unsustainable and threaten your wealth health. Regardless, the miners thank you for your money and Bitcoiners understand "one man's garbage is another man's treasure" and Bitcoiners will lead the way to adding ordinal treasure, digital diamonds, into the digital gold mix already in there.
As for the scale concerns, Layer 1 was never built for scale, thus the Lightning Network on Level2. For store of value and BTC, I equate it to the old WORM CDs. Some of us want to pay extra for the security our Bitcoin address(es) get, as we are Super HODLers. Maybe not the best for you doing DCA. Saylor knows, even the best databases have GIGO in them. Gladly, even at it's largest the Bitcoin Timechain open source ledger will never be all that huge from a data standpoint. Perhaps it is as simple as 'pruning' in the future to weed out ordinals from Bitcoin transactions. Sure that opens up the decentralization debate but who cares if everyone runs full nodes and Microstrategy/Michael use some soon to be released software on Layer2 that will preserve that "big, big, beautiful wall" of digitally encrypted energy regardless of the Crypto noise trying to jam Bitcoin's never failing Signal.
I am not going to be against Bitcoin/Microstrategy/Saylor and of course AI. AI understands all this, just ask it and take out the human emotion.
===== Bathtub Section =======
https://decrypt.co/140954/bitcoin-brc-20-activity-unethical-or-illegal-michael-saylor?amp=1
MicroStrategy's Michael Saylor: Early Bitcoin BRC-20 Uses May Be ‘Illegal’
Saylor isn’t completely against them, claiming it “partly comes down to use case and partly to how they are perceived.”
By André Beganski and Pedro Solimano
May 22, 2023
Saylor has embraced Ordinals as a positive development on the Bitcoin network, although he said many of the early use cases "aren't terribly serious" and veer towards being more speculative.
"If BRC-20 tokens are viewed as fungible tokens to issue unregistered securities, there's a lot of objection to that, because it's unethical. It's illegal. And you can't blame [the community] for objecting to that," Saylor said.
However, if they are issued and regulated in an ethical and legal manner, he said, there’s no issue. It all comes down to the use case and perception.
“What if I was using them to tokenize all of the stocks and ETFs trading on NASDAQ so that individuals can take personal custody of their shares of stock instead of leaving them locked up with a centralized custodian” he said. “If it was presented that way, then Bitcoiners would love it.”
According to the MicroStrategy co-founder and executive chairman, however, he sees economically sound use cases, but he can “also imagine unethical, stupid things.”
Despite warnings of possible unregistered security offerings and strong pushback from parts of the community, Saylor is against censoring Ordinal transactions on the Bitcoin network. “Do I think we should modify the protocol to censor certain types of transactions," he said. "My answer is no.”
https://nostr.build/i/650c1ca3b884759e9516bbe9ca6f65463ace46154ccefac0446b3b58d555b404.webp
