The ordinal debate essentially boils down to whether you think these transactions are legitimate economic activity, or spam that harms all other participants on the network.
I'll tell you which camp I land in, but first:
What say you?
The ordinal debate essentially boils down to whether you think these transactions are legitimate economic activity, or spam that harms all other participants on the network.
I'll tell you which camp I land in, but first:
What say you?
Please express your opinion in my poll if your client supports it! ๐
First ten to $boost this will get 1k each โก
Want to get the opinion of Nostr on this debate
I say that if people think they can prevent others from inserting arbitrary data into Bitcoinโs blockchain an unpleasant surprise awaits.
I donโt care about ordinals. Just stating that policing what other people do or not do is not my thing (and will never be) and it basically is a foolโs errand.
Never spent a minute thinking about ordinals
Spam that will be sorted out, eventually
I think is legit but at the same time a service/miner can reject it
Fine, if someone wants to spend their precious stored time on ordinals then let them. Miners are awarded and I can wait a bit longer putting my sats to cold storage.
Now that y'all voted I'll share my 2 sats:
I believe that anything that deviates from the use case of permissionless P2P digital cash is spam and should not be permitted to consume scarce block space.
There are other networks like ethereum that can be used for storing jpegs.
Legitimate spam
You'll still get a certain type of bitcoiner polling here. Nostr is kinda for maxi's at the moment, so they will lean in the direction of spam
Yeah I'm not asking the degenerates in the comments under this post: https://twitter.com/udiWertheimer/status/1731891648085274664
Take their bitcoin, smile, tic tock next block
the ability to embed text messages in transactions is a powerful one
ordinals are but a branch of the immense use cases this presents, and considering ordinals as spam builds a dangerous precedent
anyway that's up to the miners whether to include that TX or not (correct me if I'm wrong)