Replying to Avatar monk_cactus

It’s disconcerting for sure, and I’ve seen a lot of arguing past each other about it.

There’s two things that are true though:

1) it is a bad faith attack on bitcoin

2) the attack is just to use bitcoin and pay miners

If we find a way to soft fork and prevent inscriptions, that would probably be good. But there might not be a way to do that.

The attackers will run out of money eventually
Avatar
Anonymous 2y ago

You’re much more knowledgeable about this than I, so forgive me

Wouldn’t a malevolent actor or nation spending money to congest the network, end up being futile? As you’d end up depleting your own resources for something that would inevitably end up resolved?

Is this partially from inscriptions? Isn’t this what bitboy was talking about, making it “more fun”?

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Avatar
monk_cactus 2y ago

I don’t think it’s a single malevolent actor, but yes, you’re correct. It’s a foolish attack because it’s expensive and ultimately temporary.

I think what happened is people from BSV and other shitcoins promoted inscriptions and BRC-20 in the hopes that it would cause congestion. They’re promising huge returns for people who buy this nonsense, which is why demand for it has persisted.

So a lot of people don’t see it as an attack, but some of the “influencer” types are definitely promoting it in bad faith. Here’s an example: https://twitter.com/coolish/status/1655505700318228480

Avatar
Anonymous 2y ago

Thanks g