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.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

QW 2y ago

You have always had exceptionally rational takes on this ridiculous trend. I commend you ser! 🫡

ภ๏รtг๏ภคยt 2y ago 💬 1

Why does bitcoin only have to be money?

Isn't everyone free to use bitcoin however they want?

Dan 2y ago

You're free to use it how you like. That doesn't mean the design has to accommodate your use cases.

Hersh 2y ago

I also don't have to accept your changes to the design

Dan 2y ago

Oh you mean the configurable node setting that has always been tweakable according to the node runners preference? Ya no shit you don't have to use the same setting... This debate is insane

Hersh 2y ago

Yea that's the point, everyone can have their opinion, but what's truly best for the market will be decided by the market; and whining about it doesn't change anything. If ordinals are what the market wants, then they will get them. Personally I think they're retarded and are a fad that will die out once block space becomes more valuable.

Dan 2y ago

No, that is absolutely not the point people are making. They are saying that a pool operator configuring their preferred MAX_OP_RETURN_RELAY value is somehow "an attack on Bitcoin". They are acting as if this setting is an ephemeral core parameter. It's literally designed to be and intended to be configurable.

Hersh 2y ago

Who is they? That was the point I was making, I think we've been shouting at each other in agreement 😅

Dan 2y ago

I assumed when you said that you don't have to "accept my changes to the design" you were referring to Knots decision to include a different default value. As if altering an intentionally configurable value is "changing the design"

Guy Swann 2y ago

Money is the most valuable public good in the world. There is no problem as great as the problem that sound, stateless money solves. No, it should not be used for other things, the same as TCP/IP shouldn’t be inundated with spam connections that aren’t actually meant to do anything or send any information. If this was the norm then TCP/IP simply wouldn’t be used for communication.

If bitcoin isn’t strictly defined with rules for it to work as money, then it won’t work as money.

It’s strict limits ENABLE it to be permissionless freedom money. We can’t just say “but free markets” and drop any restrictions that some people wish were gone.

Sikto 2y ago

The art of doing one thing well. Why do we need things to do everything?

ภ๏รtг๏ภคยt 2y ago

While I understand this, it still contradicts real freedom of the individual, to use bitcoin however they so choose.

Apple and Google will use it for financial surveillance.

You will use it as money.

And others will scribble their dick size and memes on sats.

What really makes bitcoin not work, is telling others how it should be used. Its the biggest turn off and makes no sense to the average individual talking about the freedom bitcoin brings but then telling them how they have to use it only as money.

What kind of freedom is that again?

This also plays into why I think adoption is slow for bitcoin and nostr.

Ronin 2y ago

Agreed. Bitcoin should be optimized to be money. If there is a way to remove or disencorage data on bitcoin it should be done.

Mindaugas 2y ago

💯

nostr:nevent1qqs87tjmnt0ftvdalnxtm6ss6xcfe9kpavwjlhlcrca8gcv50y9feqcpz3mhxue69uhkummnw3ezummcw3ezuer9wcpzpw08v4rt5pj9dmfsrk0990zflfywwznt7g5zheap4eefgasjqg7uqvzqqqqqqyejqyh4

BOOK IT 2y ago

So I brought this up with bitcoin and... podcast. If you as a node decide to censor certain transactions, can you truly say your node can verify everything? On the miner side I can say thats up to the pools ideals and consensus. But on the node side, if you are a full node you cant censor shit cause that defeats the purpose of verifying everything even the dumb shit. Just my opinion that if your running miners like me I can choose what I process but nodes should stay neutral for the network.

Guy Swann 2y ago

They don’t filter blocks, they filter transactions from propagation.

BOOK IT 2y ago

I feel like I'm confused now. Isn't the bitcoin node what verifies what the miners are processing? So if you ran a pruned node wouldn't that cause it where your node wouldn't record the filtered transactions the miners processed?

B.O.P 2y ago

I agree that we need to protect the main use case of Bitcoin as money, but changes to the protocol in order to do this need to be taken very seriously and we need to think if it’s long term needed at all.

The majority of people that are using Bitcoin for data storage are trying to resell what they are inscribing for a profit. The hype will eventually die off and so will the expectation of profit. If the free market can solve our problems, doing nothing may be the best thing we can do.

There’s a small minority of these people actually trying to store data in an immutable way, but as NOSTR as a protocol grows I think these people will naturally move here to do this.

Just my 2 sats hope I wasn’t rambling

Laser 2y ago 💬 1

This.

#Bitcoin can be used (validely) as an atomic, immutable, trustless data bus.

OP_RETURN is useful. Not just for Whirlpool, but also decentralized identity proofs, and other usecases yet concieved.

₿harat 2y ago

💯

dr.fred 2y ago

it is not p2p money

not private

nothing to do with satoshi nakamoto

B.O.P 2y ago

You sound incredibly smart

dr.fred 2y ago

'I’m a Bitcoin only pleb'

says the religious zealot

dog muzzler wearer

that speaks for itself

B.O.P 2y ago

Do you speak in haiku? 🤣 ok guy👍

Viktor Vsk 2y ago

I never believed in saying “if a person is genius in one, he is a genius in everything”

But getting older I start believing in “if a person is load and stupid in one, he is stupid in everything”

Krv 2y ago

When you are smart and bad at something, you know it. When your dumb, you think you know everything you need to know.

Nour 2y ago 💬 1

Should there not be #Bitcoin, storing #ordinals sounds like asking a highly reputed bank to keep my groceries in their safes for a hefty fee.

I'm willing to pay millions of money units to store a few cucumbers in certain bank safes–those with unique serial numbers; what's wrong with that?

I guess they will eventually gain some value and I could sell one or two to the next collector of banked cucumbers.

nostr:note10uh9hxk7jkcmmlxvhh4pp5dsnjtvr6ca9l0ls836w3seg7g2njpsdjr398

Nice and Kind Vic 2y ago

Lets get rid of OP_RETURN and merged mining while we're at it

Laser 2y ago

Not possible without another fork war.

crany 👽🧡🗿 2y ago

Yes, Bitcoin has the best financial store and payment use cases (payment with Lightning Network). And there are other blockchains so much better for digital art.

J. 2y ago

For those 1 sat transactions, what if only transactions are valid if the value of the transaction is higher then the transaction fee? Maybe gets rid of a lot of crap?

sommerfeld 2y ago

I'm suprised you of all people have this take.

I have heard your voice countless times in my hears laying out why the only sensible use of a blockchain is money, i.e. people only have one worthy use for a decentralized inefficient database.

Blockspace is blockspace. Money just happens to be the only worthy use case for block space in the long run. There is absolutely 0 need to enforce that directly. The free market naturally self corrects malinvestments.

Doing so just makes bitcoiners look desperate, insecure and petty.

Guy Swann 2y ago 💬 1

I still think this. On a long enough timeline this isn’t an issue. My argument above isn’t suggesting otherwise. Fees are the best solution.

Paul 2y ago

I know everyone was praising taproot, but the question I have not being super technical and only seeing the unintended consequences of ordinals is did it actually make bitcoin better money? I’m seeing the ordinal downside without the upside.

Guy Swann 2y ago

Ordinals aren’t that big of a downside, and there are a lot of important capabilities of taproot that make it really good to have. In fact with something like BitVM, we may have options for scaling that we hadn’t thought possible. I’ve always felt the room for incredibly large scripts was important in the long run. Maybe some has a different opinion but I still think that.

Laser 2y ago

100%

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.

overmind 2y ago 💬 2

"let's fix global money then congest the network with memes"

freedom dev 𓅦 2y ago

I agree. Also consider that decoupling the components that make up the whole system might be the only way towards scaling things up on the long run.

It doesn't need to be a perfect system, it only needs to be anti-fragile.