pull down to refresh
508 sats \ 4 replies \ @cecil 24 Feb 2023 \ on: We're all full of shit bitcoin
... my objection to ordinals has 0 to do with wealth protection. more about simply respecting the intended use for Bitcoin.
The intended use of bitcoin. There's validity there in that argument. I'd say the three BIPs that make Taproot is the right design pattern, because it's required for the LN to scale, augment privacy, and take its next steps. Taproot is a part of bitcoin now. Perhaps you agree with that, but what I see with Ordinals is no different than taking advantage of game mechanics to speedrun a game, except each time you play it you're getting slower, until you're back to the same game. Ordinals is an unintended consequence, an emergent behavior, but it's augmenting the security of the system, not damaging it, as a systems engineer that's more telling to me of incredibly robust system design.
reply
I agree that ordinals are not damaging and are something akin to speedrunning a game. though the shared nature of the blockchain has a different effect there. one persons speedrun doesn't have any effect on another persons playing of the game, not the case with ordinal use.
reply
Im not sure it maps to create a system that is designed to be decentralized, permisissionless and censorship-resistant. And also be annoyed at how people use such a system.
That's one of the whole objectives. It's a middle finger to anyone who tries to excert control over others.
reply
If bitcoin cant withstand an attack, its not worth anything. Us being annoyed with how bitcoin is used is proof we still haven't given up our fascist impulses.
reply