Nostr Web Client

inscriptions = bitcoin graffiti

it will get priced out with innovation

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I actually used this exact analogy. If there's a digital 'space' on a Sat that someone can figure out how to put info in, then it is what it is.

2 options that are rational and logical then:

1) Accept it. And move on.

2) Propose an Update and change to the Bitcoin Core program to amend this. (Bigger blocksizes anyone? Or delete this "space" somehow?)

Anything else is futile IMO. Also, L1 hasn't been exactly cheap, fast or able to handle mass volume for a long while - BY DESIGN.

I'm not a fan of ordinals. But I'm not also a huge detractor.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Avi Burra 2y ago

That wasn’t the point of the article.

I was appealing to people I know to not go down the NFT route - a digital copy of an image is not scarce and any ownership claim on it is tenuous at best.

To your point about “if there’s a digital space on a sat…”, - there isn’t. There’s space in a block and if there’s a way to fill it up, I don’t have a beef with that. I do with ownership claims on that space based on a made up framework like ordinal theory.

I address this here nostr:note1guhm2x7kn4rqhm5tpvtgfd0dt09nnvl95n7r4ty4h99n89dsn6dqt06e03

nobody 2y ago

I appreciate hearing your thoughts on this. We're on the same team and I mostly agree with your view.

I think an update to BTC Core will come to address this - but we all need to come to a consensus on a solution and framework - simply saying people 'shouldn't' use Bitcoin like this due to any "reason" - moral, principle or otherwise - to me, flies in the ethos of the whole project. Satoshi wanted to get away from arbitrary stuff like this. Hence, we trust the math and cryptography and verify only. Right? In a sense.

If - take your pick - a famous and important person were to sign or draw on a $1 bill, the value might be worth more to other people. Yes, the bill now becomes something different. It seems to me like inscriptions are similar - yet they still remain fungible. So it's like adding a small piece of graffiti in a sense.

Your reasoning on how Satoshi's aren't real and are just an abstraction loses me. Can you ELI5 more basically?

I think a key distinction for this is: are ordinals just a time-ordering and serial numbering of Sats that an owner can use to way-find (or 'prove' ownership of other metadata stored elsewhere? Or does the inscription live with/in the Sat?

And what does ownership even mean here?

Does physical custody = ownership? Or does a law that is enforced by police, and guns = ownership? What makes you the owner of anything in particular?

Having a time-stamp on a public blockchain like Bitcoin isn't the worst idea IMO.