Ok, I got an idea.
What do you think of ordinals?
Discussion
bad in that they’re hella dumb and susceptible to scamming and degeneracy - the idea they are “good for adoption” is retarded because the proponents have an extremely short-sighted and high time preference attitude about the reputational impact, in that not all attention is useful attention; neutral in that who am I to say? it’s a public tool and how I feel about how people use it is of absolutely zero importance to anything; neutral once again in that it’s clearly a fad that has already enormously died down and a lot of the scaremongering about the impact was even more laughably stupid than the ordinals themselves; good in that it probably won’t ever die down completely and so it seems like there is now a permanent block space buyer of last resort; good once again in that expansions of utility that don’t endanger decentralisation or consensus are definitionally good because we have to be humble in admitting we don’t know what will come from them. something significantly less retarded than monkey jpegs could be right around the corner.
#[3] said this the other day, I think but I can’t be bothered finding the note: “but there are orphans in Africa who can’t afford the bandwidth” was surely peak retarded cringe.
surely?
SURELY?!?
Yeah I’ve gone back and forth on it too. I’m no expert but I share a split view on each aspect of it, like you. I guess it depends on how we prioritize each thing. Like is buyer of last resort more important than congested block space if block space remains constant? I’d certainly put buyer of last resort, block space, and freedom of use above good for adoption in my hierarchy of importance…
put it this way, if monkey jpegs are really going to outbid lightning channel openings in a hyperbitcoinized world, then wtf is the point? any fee is a good fee and if we can’t structure the incentives such that people are willing to pay for legit use cases then we’ve lost.
and in fact, who is to even say what is and is not “legit” if not the market? so it’s all begging the question anyway.
Yeah. If the free market wants things that are detrimental to the whole thing then we’re fucked.
…and I’ll blame crypto if it happens.
Then again, I don’t currently mine and I don’t buy jpegs so it’s tough for me to decide whether anything should be done about it or whether we let the free market decide.
I lean towards the latter even though I in no way support them.
Miner friends of mine would disagree, especially given recent mining economics.
Any censorship on any transaction, ever, and I'm out.
Immutability and censorship-resistance is the value.
I think that even if you are as critical as you could possibly imagine - say you think ordinals are literally the work of the Devil, out to thwart our glorious future of a decentralised money - then you still have to treat it at the following conceptual level if you are being intellectually honest: this is just spam. if we can’t deal with spam, then we really are fucked. a globally distributed network, inherently adversarial to nation state money printers, cannot subsist on begging and shaming people out of spamming it. it’s either open or its not.
🎯
That’s absolutely right. It’s just spam.
…so much for arguing lol
Thanks for engaging. Good to connect with you after reading your writing for the last year.
then argue about something else.
what do you think about the continuum hypothesis? solved or no?
Sir, while I used to be good at math, I stopped at calculus and went to art school.
After looking it up, I can conclude that I need to first brush up on my math vocabulary before I even have a chance of coming to any conclusions.
yeah but just argue.
It’s clearly not solved.
OH YEAH?!? then how do you explain Gödel’s and Cohen’s proofs?!?