pull down to refresh
471 sats \ 8 replies \ @TonyGiorgio 17 Feb 2023 \ on: King Jame Bible inscribed as 5 rar files bitcoin
Missed opportunity to do it on block 777777, but hey at least it's there now. Still a lot of countries that are aggressively hostile towards possession of alternative religious text, so access to it is probably the only care I have for ordinals.
Now can we stop the madness?
to be frank. you cant have your cake and eat it too.
either your for arbitrary data on chain or not.
reply
Putting data on chain is one thing. Opting into the scam of bullshit "PNG ownership" with the intention of scamming fools is another.
reply
REGARDLESS of what the data is, it is arbitrary data. not required by the network for functioning,
id rather have keep bitcoin a monetary system and only a monetary system, rather than it morphing into a file hosting system, including text and stupid jpegs.
i hope you can see my point here.
reply
I don't see the word of God as just arbitrary data but hey you do you I guess. Some people hold the blockchain and the money aspects of it to a higher power as the most important thing in life, I don't. If you don't see the difference in comparing God to a bunch of images, then I'm sorry.
reply
A view I've taken is that there's a difference between occasionally putting non-monetary data on the blockchain and regularly putting non-monetary data on the blockchain. Both are a bad idea in general, but the former has two unique properties: (1) it is (probably) impossible to stop and (2) there are (probably) exceptions to the general rule. E.g. I personally don't mind someone uploading the bible, because there's a higher rule: exceptional things deserve exceptional treatment. And I think the bible is an exceptional thing.
That said, regularly putting non-monetary data on the blockchain is possible to stop because regular activity produces detectable patterns that can be blocked via a soft fork. A good example is ord wallet's "envelopes," they all use the pattern OP_FALSE OP_IF OP_ENDIF, and a soft fork can invalidate transactions containing that pattern. If I can discourage regularly putting data on the blockchain by prohibiting this currently-popular method of doing so, then I want to do that, and as a bonus, it still leaves the door open for people to upload exception-worthy data in some other way. So that's my preferred solution. A soft fork.
(I know, surprise surprise, Super wants a soft fork. Who'da thunk?)
reply
supertestnet wants a softfork.
no way!
reply
and where do we draw that line?
we as humans are not good at that, we have biases that alter our opinions.
reply
That's fair we have a difference of opinion.
And I'm sorry if I came off asshole-ish.
And I'm sorry if I came off asshole-ish.
I am of the firm belief that we need to minimize unnecessary data, in relation to the function of the network, that lives in the base layer.
I also understand the appeal of having different texts be readily available.
I guess my thoughts would be to have all this stuff done on higher layers.
I'm not a super technical guy so this is all just thoughts. Not sure if they are implementable.
I am also lucky enough to live in a relatively free country.
So i know I have blindspots regarding certain things. And that is on me to fix.
Tldr:
Maybe I don't value the ability to pull texts/info from the time chain because I'm not currently faced with difficulty in getting that info.
reply