Will someone please explain why can’t ordinals and BRC-20 tokens just move to Lightning network?
Wouldn’t this stop all the congestion, lower transaction fees, and stop the tsunami of complaining?
pull down to refresh
695 sats \ 3 replies \ @k00b 18 May 2023
No, then we'll complain about them using up liquidity on lightning and driving up fees.
The problem isn't so much that fees are high. It's why they're high.
reply
0 sats \ 2 replies \ @jk_14 18 May 2023
we will not complain about shitty images running on LN because we simply won't care
why driving up LN fees? LN throughput is so big that we won't even notice these shitty images are running there
reply
21 sats \ 1 reply \ @k00b 18 May 2023
Theoretical throughput is high. Liquidity is still pretty low and the network is vulnerable to a variety of attacks.
If someone is sending me an altcoin with a high bitcoin exchange rate (let's say its 1:1) it'll exhaust one bitcoin of liquidity in my direction.
We will be competing for bitcoin liquidity with other assets afaik.
reply
61 sats \ 0 replies \ @jk_14 19 May 2023
I think it will self regulate like currently with plain transfers:
if you think your NFT is high value - on-chain
for all low-value NFTs - the LN is the way to go, and this will impact liquidity much less
this new traffic and interest in it - will make that liquidity will be growing yet, additionally
reply
61 sats \ 0 replies \ @falsefaucet 18 May 2023
why doesnt TARO fix this, wasnt that touted as a shitcoin killer?
reply
61 sats \ 0 replies \ @benthecarman 18 May 2023
No one seems to like Taro
reply
61 sats \ 0 replies \ @Haths 18 May 2023
Ordinals follow the rules of the protocol and thusly it is what it is.
I don't personally know much about them or care.
reply
61 sats \ 0 replies \ @oraltosun 18 May 2023 freebie
I hope so.
reply
51 sats \ 2 replies \ @nerd2ninja 18 May 2023
Shitcoins are shitcoins and I will complain about them no matter what. Scams are bad for people.
Fees being high on the other hand, are simply an opportunity to innovate!
reply
2 sats \ 1 reply \ @BTCbabe OP 18 May 2023 freebie
Agreed, but can you answer the question good ser?
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @nerd2ninja 18 May 2023
Can they move onto the lightning network? Sure. Will they? I'm not so sure.
reply
21 sats \ 1 reply \ @orthwyrm 18 May 2023
Lightning / Taro is for fungible assets, not sure how this can work for ordinals?
Also Bitcoin's reputation and scarce blockspace carries a certain prestige. People can already mint NFTs on any number of shitcoins, but Bitcoin's blockspace will always be seen as special. For that reason I am not convinced that NFTs will migrate to L2s, at least not until transaction fees explode to the point where dumb retail is completely priced out.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @k00b 19 May 2023
I believe you can transfer nonfungibles with Taro. It was one of their use cases.
reply
11 sats \ 0 replies \ @joda 18 May 2023
Lightning doesn't have a Blockchain. Only node operators opening and closing channels are exchanging sats on the Blockchain.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @randy 20 May 2023
The entire appeal of an inscription is having the data on-chain. Any other minting process would be unappealing by the nature of the proposed value-add to those in the NFT community. on-chain aren’t as big a deal for me since they are just low value transactions that help pay miners.
The Lightning Network also can’t facilitate this transfer because the Lightning Network does not treat UTXOs as non-fungible. The party you are exchanging sats with does not have to be a channel partner and a channel close would leave the inscription trade without the proper UTXO. A new system can probably be devised to combat this but I haven’t heard any proposals yet.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @034678ffb8 19 May 2023
Complaints will never stop. Ignore them.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @wispy 19 May 2023
well, if lightning is actually a network of peers moving htlcs (simplifying a lot, I know), whomever wants to use NFT could connect in a network of peers in a LN fashion but apart from it, so the trades and stuff don't eat the LN liquidity? I know they still have the commitment txs, but once they mint their things it's done, they get the bitcoin hashrate security in a way that impacts a little less the mempools, right? If the nfts/ordinals/etc are really demanded, I think the minting will eventually slow down and the trades will be the primary use, otherwise it wouldn't make a difference. Am I in the right direction?
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @2bithits 18 May 2023
Something about having all the history on chain & the proof of it being there makes the lightning network less attractive for this kind of stuff.
reply