Thoughts on ordinals and runes (probably not popular, but thoughts) \ stacker news ~bitcoin

pull down to refresh

Thoughts on ordinals and runes (probably not popular, but thoughts)

2595 sats \ 22 comments \ @crrdlx 20 Apr bitcoin

We hear a lot around here about "sovereignty" and "permissionless", and yet people are reprimanded for things like ordinals and runes. The narrative seems to be that those types of things are not what bitcoin is for. (And who decides that?)

Sovereign means controlling one's self or actions without asking for any permission or freedom to do so. It can also mean freedom to do so wothout scolding. This is the opposite of, "Oh you can do it (because we can't stop you, we would if we could), but we're gonna give you hell if you do it."

Here's another view...

Do what you want, do your thing. If you want to pay ridiculous fees for something on chain, even silly pics that someone else feels is a waste, go for it. As far as their value, you decide. As far as long term ROI, the open market will decide. That's freedom and open systems at work.

My view on ordinals and runes: I like the innovation and excitement surrounding them. Who knows what'll get built out or what'll pop up next?

view all related items

70 sats \ 0 replies \ @john_doe 21 Apr freebie

At first I saw ordinals a bit like soccer. I don't care, but I understood that people can appreciate this sport, and I try to ignore them although I see they want try to draw the attention of others. Similarly I don't talk to them about boxing because I know they equally don't care.

Now I discovered Runes with the high fees on the mainnet and if I had to explain it to a friend it would be: "so you bought bitcoins and now you have to wait to transact because... Some people like to speculate with these kind of... Art... No sorry drawings... Hum no sorry I meant sketches..."

By the way I spammed testnet twice because I thought it was fun to send a message never erased from the Blockchain, but at least it was on testnet and I didn't do it again.

So from my perspective there is no good explanation for ordinals. If I see something convincing I will update my node to support it. At the moment the only thing I can do if I am asked why fees are high is say there are stupid people wasting money. If I knew how fees would go, I would have invited people to use Liquid sooner, my only regret.

10 sats \ 0 replies \ @dtonon 21 Apr

that those types of things are not what bitcoin is for. (And who decides that?)

Who invented Bitcoin, Satoshi Nakamoto, who in his white paper speaks of an 'electronic cash system'.

Facts:

Ordinals/runes exploit a bug in the code to achieve something different from the designed electronic cash system;
Ordinals/runes create large and effective problems in the usage of such electronic cash system;
Even if we can be curious about the outcome of this bug, it's absolutely false that the free market necessarily brings healing innovations;

24 sats \ 2 replies \ @kepford 21 Apr

Sovereignty & permissionless doesn't mean everyone has to like, encourage, and embrace what others do. We all have preferences. Humans use shame and mockery to discourage behavior they don't like. I know what you are saying but words can't stop miners from including transactions I don't like. The incentive structure of bitcoin works well.

I don't like this NFT nonsense personally but I don't lose any sleep over it. If I did like it I wouldn't get to upset that others didn't like it. After all there are way more people that hate bitcoin than bitcoiners that hate NFTs. We better have thick skin and deep conviction. I think many of us see bitcoin as something with much higher importance than monkey pics. That's the rub.

The longer I'm around bitcoiners the more I see the same human patterns present in all subcultures. There are no bitcoin culture problems that are unique to bitcoin.

10 sats \ 1 reply \ @Bell_curve 21 Apr

Proof of work was originally intended to incur sufficient cost to email spammers that their business model broke. Back's Proof of work was referenced in the Bitcoin white paper. Now we have people complaining that Bitcoin is being clogged up by spammers. Well, yes, I understand but it's a free market and if they pay the fees, they get in the block. Simple as that really.

10 sats \ 0 replies \ @kepford 21 Apr

Yep, agreed.

21 sats \ 1 reply \ @rtr 21 Apr

Sovereign means controlling one's self or actions without asking for any permission or freedom to do so. It can also mean freedom to do so wothout scolding. This is the opposite of, "Oh you can do it (because we can't stop you, we would if we could), but we're gonna give you hell if you do it."

No, not really. I have a choice if I'll support or even recognize what you're doing. If I don't agree with it, I don't have to deal with it. I'm pretty mum on {ordinals, inscriptions, runes} because I don't really agree with the kind of market that it encourages and the best that I can do is to just ignore and not promote it.

If there's substance to {ordinals, inscriptions, runes} then it will find its market and be sustainable. If not, then it'll just fizzle out and drain liquidity from people who bought into it.

Until I see something coming from {ordinals, inscriptions, runes} that's not: (a) putting images or any kind of arbitrary data in the blockchain, (b) creating an external trading game of "rare" sats, or (c) "minting" new crapcoins to entice the gullible to "invest in their 'Bitcoin-backed' ponzi" then I'm not interested.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @crrdlx OP 21 Apr

I think you're saying exactly what I'm saying, but you might have said it better. I especially like:

If there's substance to {ordinals, inscriptions, runes} then it will find its market and be sustainable. If not, then it'll just fizzle out and drain liquidity from people who bought into it.

and

Until I see something coming from {ordinals, inscriptions, runes} that's not...then I'm not interested.

I guess my hope is that that something might just happen. And if not, that's okay too. I just don't see the silliness as being sustainable long term, think it'll fade eventually, and that something worthwhile may emerge.

124 sats \ 1 reply \ @RdioActiv 20 Apr

Your "sovereignty" ends where it infringes upon mine.

If I want to block degenerate NFT spam relaying through my node, that is MY right.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @crrdlx OP 20 Apr

Absolutely, do your thing.

52 sats \ 1 reply \ @jakoyoh629 21 Apr

I've read on this forum that Bitcoin is anarchy. And it's absolutely true.

11 sats \ 0 replies \ @crrdlx OP 21 Apr

That's an interesting thought. I guess in a way that's true in that there is no authority to run it. In another way I don't think it's true...there are definitely rules. I think about the halving and the OP_CAT argument. The code rules say we half and say no to OP_CAT without changing the rules.

73 sats \ 0 replies \ @nym 20 Apr

I sort of agree. They have a right to use Bitcoin to send valid transactions just as much as you and I do. We have the responsibility to write better code if we are not happy, and modify our behavior so it doesn't negatively effect us as much.

30 sats \ 3 replies \ @TheBTCManual 21 Apr

Sure people have freedoms to do what they want, doesn't mean what they do can't be called out for being disruptive, when a dudes changing lanes every minute on the high way he can do it, he thinks his getting ahead but his getting nothing and just causing an annoyance for more people than his getting

You can use tech as you like spam doesn't work if it didn't follow the rules, spam emails and calls aren't doing anything wrong on a protocol level, remove your spam filters and blockers, let them in

What innovation is there to speak of that hasn't been done before? Tokens have been around for ages, I think the etching/minting model is the veil they're trying to use to claim that there aren't premines to sucker people in, and to pretend that there isn't a central entity to sue when the pump and dump goes wrong, like no bro it was a community open mint yeah right

How many degens have that kind of money to spend per block? Ofcourse there are VCs involved looking for short time to liquidity on a grey market pump n dump

0 sats \ 2 replies \ @Bell_curve 21 Apr

I think it’s people trying to annoy bitcoin users and spread propaganda , see bitcoin is fragile!

10 sats \ 1 reply \ @TheBTCManual 21 Apr

It is working in a sense, definitely been part of the marketing, but I would argue the opinions of maxis don't really matter to the wider world, most people don't know this stuff is going on, they're just going to see tokens on an exchange read a headline or two and buy them and end up rugged

As for the Bitcoin is fragile I guess thats one angle, but if the chain is up and working and no one is doing it on other chains, and those that have tried on other chains have seen those chains go down, is it really an effective attack or a stress test?

If this was just people bidding up fees for transactions to bitcoin its the same thing, but the real attack to me is on the normie as always who will end up being the bag holder for this stuff

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Bell_curve 21 Apr

Good call on normies getting screwed

So maybe the goal is to discourage new adopters

But most likely bandits trying to screw people

10 sats \ 0 replies \ @IamSINGLE 21 Apr

You're right about innovation. But innovation shouldn't come at the cost of another innovation.

They are actually trying to implode Bitcoin with waste of things.

10 sats \ 0 replies \ @Jer 21 Apr

There is almost too much going on right now to keep up with. I could not care less about Ordinals/Runes, BUT, block space is precious. Instead of complaining about Ordinals/Runes, my suggestion to KYCers is to:

go out and find an exchange that doesn’t charge you any withdrawal fee, build to a min of 1M Sat balance and withdrawal;
spend the rest of your energy learning to use lightning/liquid/ecash

Bitcoin is going to be an absolute bloodbath this Epoch and I’m here for it.

51 sats \ 2 replies \ @ZezzebbulTheMysterious 21 Apr

Nah bro. No innovation, just spam. There is nothing here. If you look at what has been done so far, it is literally just spamming strings on the blockchain.

There is nothing new, its just the same old shit. Nothing can come of this, because it is nothing. People have been issuing tokens on blockchains for 11 years, it doesn't go anywhere -- especially as stupid a protocol as this.

The spammers will try to convince you that what they are doing is subjective, and that they are free to do this. This is of course a lie, and their behavior is coercive. You are forced to listen to their noise, and they will drown out those others who believe they are free to speak -- but cannot.

The tragedy of the commons shows us that we cannot permit complete free for all spamming, noise, trash if we are to have freedom ourselves.

0 sats \ 1 reply \ @crrdlx OP 21 Apr

I guess by innovation I was talking about something different than pics on chain, not sure what, something that hasn't been done before.

I'd still sat ordinals and runes are clever in that someone figured it out. Tokens aren't new, doing this way is.

I think 99% of the tokens will be nothing and sadly people will lose money. I think excitement will wane. But an alternate unimagined innovation may be out there.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @ZezzebbulTheMysterious 21 Apr

It’s not even a new way of this doing this. It’s OP_RETURN colored coins, which is what Omni was doing 11 years ago. Their website and explorer looks better than the trash made for ordinals and runes. There is zero innovation, but 100% spam. We have seen it before — but never as well funded.

21 sats \ 0 replies \ @Bell_curve 21 Apr