Yeah. I had it playing in the background while I was working, so I was only half paying attention.

On monetary vs. platform maximalism: I think I agree with Rizzo in that it could be beneficial to soak up some of the "use cases" of alt-coins (i.e. gambling) if only to encourage additional revenue and investment into the space. It's complicated, though. For example if we see MEV begin to emerge in Bitcoin as a result of ordinals / inscriptions then this could impact mining decentralization. One also calls into question the value of VC investment if it's directed mostly towards enabling crappy forms of gambling.

On trojan horse adoption: Agnostic. I think Bitcoin is doing fine and its main selling point will continue to be hard money.

On collateral damage & scaling: Here is my extra spicy take... People are not mad at ordinals, they are mad that fees are high and that Lightning doesn't work so well in such an environment. I think Rizzo raised this point, to which I agree. Many influencers have spent the last several years evangelizing Lightning as the second coming of Christ without really understanding it, so of course now they are responding to ordinals with all these deranged takes. I'm sorry you cannot onboard people in Africa or whatever, but frankly Lightning isn't an adequate solution to this problem with or without ordinals.

What did you think of it?