Since months, Bitcoiners have bitterly debated the Ordinals phenomena and the high level of activity they bring to the network.
The clash is very subtle and it can be difficult to determine the right way forward. “ideological” response. This is not the place for me to try to provide a definitive response, since that ultimately rests with the entire community. We can agree on some ground rules to help resolve this debate.
The Higher Purpose of Free Markets
This debate is complicated by the mental dissonance caused by Ordinals within the Bitcoin Community. Bitcoiners, it’s fair to say, are pro-liberty.financial freedom.
Ordinals represent the purest expression of market freedom. Who are we to tell people that it is a bad idea to pay to use jerry-rigged tokens which are pushing Bitcoin Script’s capabilities to the limit?
The Bitcoin network’s foundation lies in using egoistic economic incentives to create a positive outcome for all — the creation of a neutral value settlement and payments layer.
As one of the main pillars in Bitcoin, miners make huge sums of money with Ordinals.
The network will also benefit from the BRC-20s. The Ordinals are a great improvement over the percentage The percentage of revenue from fees that miners receive is expected to be similar to the peak of the bull market in 2021.
Bitcoin’s security is at risk if the mining rewards are not available. What’s good for Bitcoin is anything that can encourage the use of the Bitcoin Blockchain, right?
The answer is that it’s actually not so simple. Ordinals increase the cost of using Bitcoin to do what it is designed for: payment and value transfer.
Bitcoiners who are hardline would have heart attacks when they see the Bitcoin community accepting speculative exchanges of shitcoins. “fix” To the budget security issue. They’re not entirely wrong.
Bitcoin was created to help people escape central banking, give them the most secure money, and provide a layer of neutrality for all users, no matter their political, economic or geographic background. Speculative trading of shitcoins doesn’t exactly fit that higher purpose.
While Ordinals may be a valid use of Bitcoin, and they are in line with the principles that Bitcoiners share, such as a free-market approach, ultimately, however, Ordinals prevent Bitcoin from reaching its intended purpose. How can this be reconciled?
Is pragmatism the key to success?
Currently, there is an unresolved dispute. issue In the Bitcoin Core GitHub, it is proposed to consider Ordinals a vulnerability within Bitcoin Core. The only way to deal with this issue would be to eliminate it in all possible ways.
This is one approach, but it is a bit of a reactionary response. Bitcoin has always been beautiful because of its stability and simplicity. The community, however, has consistently resisted changes that would alter its core.
They are a bit of a scam, but still adhere to the Bitcoin rules. These traders are not a greater threat to Bitcoin’s future than those hyperactive Bitcoin traders who made the biggest spike in fees ever recorded. Spiritually they’re not that much different than the Omni protocol which, in the OP_RETURN area, introduced tokens to bitcoin (USDT being its most well-known user).
Bitcoiners agree that it is best to use L2 for the majority of transactions and the mainchain only when the transaction involves high costs and/or high values. It is the only possible way to include enough fees for transactions in the block size currently used to maintain the security budget over the long term.
In the event that L2s are adopted by a large number of people, most Bitcoin usage will be used as an information layer to support these secondary protocol. This would not be the end of the world. And if I were to choose, I’d pick Bitcoin as the go-to data availability solution for extremely sensitive information — far ahead of customized solutions whose future depends largely on the coffers of a single development company.
The key point is, if Bitcoin needs to undergo any changes, we must do so in a methodical, calculated and slow manner.
The Ordinals can still be useful in non-speculative applications. They’d be my first choice to store them. next Wikileaks.
I also think that speculators are worth a mention. Bitcoin would not have achieved the level of global recognition it enjoys today without them. This Trojan Horse was always used as a means to boost the network impact required for Bitcoin to become a worldwide currency.
We should give them time to grow and evolve, as long as BRC-20s or Ordinals are not a real threat to Bitcoin. It doesn’t necessarily mean more should be done to help them. Quite simply, if it works, don’t fix it — we may just see something of real value come out of this experimentation.
Robbie Greenfield has written a guest blog. Opinions are solely theirs own The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent those of BTC Inc. or Bitcoin Magazine.
“This article is not financial advice.”
“Always do your own research before making any type of investment.”
“ItsDailyCrypto is not responsible for any activities you perform outside ItsDailyCrypto.”
Source: bitcoinmagazine.com