(Ordinals) BRC-20 needs to be removed - page 24.

lionheart78

legendary

Activity: 2898

Merit: 1152

Quote from: Expressgint on May 10, 2023, 12:23:04 PM

I find it great, that you have something like the BRC 20 standard,

that makes it possible to store & share inscriptions via the btc blockchain.

This is unique.

But destructive at the current level of Bitcoin development. NFT and smart contracts need to have a proper blockchain application that can process its creation, transactions and transfers without affecting the entire blockchain network. If it posses a problem to the network then obviously that said token isn't for that blockchain network.

Quote from: Expressgint on May 10, 2023, 12:23:04 PM

Crypto is also about art, and not only about storing numeric value.

If we want to achieve a higher adoption, Art, NFTs etc. should also become possible on the btc network.

And not just left for the world of alt coins.

Regards

No, crypto itself is all about the implementation of security. BTC does not need NFT for higher adoption, BTC adoption is doing fine without it. I would not mind if the implementation of this NFT does not bring problems to the Bitcoin network but in the current state of Bitcoin technology, it does, which simply means, the Bitcoin network isn't ready to be spammed by NFTs.

pooya87

legendary

Activity: 3444

Merit: 10558

Quote from: ?? on ??

That depends on people's definition about smart contract. Some people define smart contract as turing complete scripting/programming.

That is a subcategory of smart contracts and this definition was popularized after the introduction of Ethereum. Otherwise ever since 1990s a smart contract is technically a program or a protocol that can be executed automatically without human intervention, trusted third parties, etc.

The best and simplest example of a smart contract is the vending machines which is the oldest implementation of them too.

Quote from: BlackHatCoiner on May 11, 2023, 02:15:29 PM

because the network's security relies on the fact that it's congested.

That is incorrect.
Having a block size cap which would create a fee market in case of a spam attack which discourages/prevents prolonged attacks is not exactly called "network security". Security of the network relies on many things including hashrate and its decentralization. Not to mention that bitcoin was secure when the blocks had barely any transactions in them (in early couple of years) and it was still secure when the blocks were full and it is still secure when the mempool is congested.

joker_josue

legendary

Activity: 1638

Merit: 4508

**In BTC since 2013**

Quote from: BlackHatCoiner on May 11, 2023, 02:15:29 PM

Probably not for too long. This whole Ordinal and BRC-20 business is a hyped-up bubble, waiting to be burst. Hopefully, until that happens, I hope the community won't begin block size wars II.

The problem is not the size of the block, but the organization of the block.

For example, always having 25% of the block reserved for transactions older than 72 hours, regardless of the fee, would make much more sense. This would allow all transactions to flow through the network, preventing them from being held on hold for weeks. At the same time, those who want to move to the front of the queue can pay more fees.

BlackHatCoiner

legendary

Activity: 1512

Merit: 7340

Farewell, Leo

Quote from: Z-tight on May 11, 2023, 05:11:33 AM

The most important one of BTC use cases is to transfer funds peer to peer, and to do that one has to pay tx fees, if anything is bloating the network and restricting people from making transactions, maybe we can call that thing a problem.

Congestion can also happen by merely making "normal" transactions, so in accordance with your reasoning, making "normal" transactions is also a potential problem. Needless to say it's a false reasoning, because the network's security relies on the fact that it's congested.

Quote from: Kryptowerk on May 11, 2023, 08:18:35 AM

What uprises me about this mess is the quetion, how long can it be "profitable" / sustainable to send bloated data-transactions to the bitcoin network?

Probably not for too long. This whole Ordinal and BRC-20 business is a hyped-up bubble, waiting to be burst. Hopefully, until that happens, I hope the community won't begin block size wars II.

bitmover

legendary

Activity: 2212

Merit: 5622

Non-custodial BTC Wallet

Quote from: ABCbits on May 11, 2023, 08:12:43 AM

Rollback Taproot? That means invalidate/remove all blocks since Taproot activation which occur about 6 months ago. If that actually happens, Bitcoin might as well as die or abandoned. Furthermore, it's possible to re-create Ordinal/BRC-20 standard without Taproot.

I believe something will be done.

A few hundreds of people cannot flood the network like this with a malicious script (and the ordinals can be used like this).

Imagine if Faketoshi (or some other authority) wants to flood the network, making bitcoin unusable.

In my opinion, this is already a security problem. Similar to a DDOS attack.

WillyAp

member

Activity: 672

Merit: 16

Looking for guilt best look first into a mirror

I don't think they remove it, and who would do that.
It opens up a posibilty for other decentral coins which are more thought thru than Bitcoin
There are a few to choose from. Litecoin, Dash, BCH to name a few.

DaCryptoRaccoon

hero member

Activity: 1194

Merit: 573

OGRaccoon

This is a insider attack on Bitcoin allowing this to happen.

If they won't remove it forks will come.

Many are working on it already to take us back to a simpler time no counterparty risk with LN which also had a flaw during the recent events by way of not being able to update the channel state without paying the on-chain fee. which was crazy.

joker_josue

legendary

Activity: 1638

Merit: 4508

**In BTC since 2013**

Quote from: NotATether on May 10, 2023, 02:21:45 AM

So it's up to the rest of us to make Layer 2 implementations that will mitigate it for end users.

But I don't think L2 is the solution, because at some point the money has to go to L1, and extremely high fees will drive people away rather than attracting more users.

The L2 should only be used for day-to-day transactions, with bitcoin having to be loaded and unloaded from there.

Expressgint

newbie

Activity: 3

Merit: 0

DEX (based on stacks) might be the solution:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xdq54yHDUq0

Kryptowerk

legendary

Activity: 2030

Merit: 1401

Disobey.

What uprises me about this mess is the quetion, how long can it be "profitable" / sustainable to send bloated data-transactions to the bitcoin network?
I doubt there are actually too many players involved in creating these. When the hype (if there ever was much of one) is over and everyone sits on their BRC-20 shit-token-pseudo-art, there will not be much incentives left to create these bloating transactions. Slowly but surely I wold expect to see less transaction stuck in mempool over the next few weeks until fees and blocks are at a normal level again.

ABCbits

legendary

Activity: 2870

Merit: 7490

Crypto Swap Exchange

Quote from: Expressgint on May 10, 2023, 12:23:04 PM

--snip--
Crypto is also about art, and not only about storing numeric value.

If we want to achieve a higher adoption, Art, NFTs etc. should also become possible on the btc network.
--snip--

I think you're confused between Ordinals and BRC-20. BRC-20 (which is discussion of this topic) is only about token.

Quote from: goldkingcoiner on May 10, 2023, 03:20:35 PM

--snip--

BRC-20 is a useless parasitic existence which needs to definitely be removed. If that means rolling back Taproot, then I am all for it. Althought personally I doubt that the attacks will be a long term thing. Hopefully this is just a dumb fad which will calm down and even perhaps die out, over time.

--snip--

Rollback Taproot? That means invalidate/remove all blocks since Taproot activation which occur about 6 months ago. If that actually happens, Bitcoin might as well as die or abandoned. Furthermore, it's possible to re-create Ordinal/BRC-20 standard without Taproot.

NotATether

legendary

Activity: 1568

Merit: 6660

bitcoincleanup.com / bitmixlist.org

Quote from: Expressgint on May 10, 2023, 12:23:04 PM

Crypto is also about art, and not only about storing numeric value.

If we want to achieve a higher adoption, Art, NFTs etc. should also become possible on the btc network.

And not just left for the world of alt coins.

Not art, because they have flaws that have been completely exposed by Ethereum NFTs (people will just abuse it to make what I call "lazy art", to make a quick buck, which screws over the buyers in the process, which gives the entire NFT system a sour taste in people's mouths.

Much better is for a layer on top of Bitcoin to be used for genuine seals/stamps of approval issued by private companies for their own products.

Z-tight

hero member

Activity: 854

Merit: 1031

Only BTC

Quote from: Expressgint on May 10, 2023, 12:23:04 PM

Crypto is also about art, and not only about storing numeric value.

If we want to achieve a higher adoption, Art, NFTs etc. should also become possible on the btc network.

BTC network has its use cases, that is why it is valuable and is used all around the world, from all i have read and understood about BTC, art isn't one of its use cases. The most important one of BTC use cases is to transfer funds peer to peer, and to do that one has to pay tx fees, if anything is bloating the network and restricting people from making transactions, maybe we can call that thing a problem. BTC has enough use cases for higher adoption, especially in an organic way.

Though this exploit has already happened, and the reason why i can't find a middle ground on this situation is if you call for ordinals to be removed, you now sound like you are promoting censorship in a censorship resistant and permissionless network. Maybe a chance for the network to be exploited in this way should not have happened, but i believe its end has to happen in a non-censorship way.

goldkingcoiner

legendary

Activity: 2030

Merit: 1643

Verified Bitcoin Hodler

Quote from: logfiles on May 10, 2023, 12:10:34 PM

With this confidence and the innocence you have, I am sure they (the attacker) gave up on the fees on the Ethereum Network that spiralled past $100 even when they had hundreds of thousands of Dollars in their pockets after selling scam coins to gullible traders. Grin

Our hope is the congestion stops when the hype dies down, but let say it continues for 2–3 years like it happened in another network. What next?
How many of us do you think will start using alternative networks in order to make transactions?

Only time can tell how long that is going to take or how long we will have to keep enduring high fees. But I believe the attack to be unsustainable. There is a limit to the number of idiots who buy NFTs/scamcoins. If that makes me naive, then so be it.

BRC-20 is a useless parasitic existence which needs to definitely be removed. If that means rolling back Taproot, then I am all for it. Althought personally I doubt that the attacks will be a long term thing. Hopefully this is just a dumb fad which will calm down and even perhaps die out, over time.

I would not call it a "fatal flaw which can bring an end to Bitcoin". Its rather an irritating thing which can and will be carved out of the Bitcoin chain "ecosystem".

logfiles

copper member

Activity: 1960

Merit: 1638

Top Crypto Casino

Quote from: Expressgint on May 10, 2023, 12:23:04 PM

I find it great, that you have something like the BRC 20 standard,

that makes it possible to store & share inscriptions via the btc blockchain.

At the cost of bloating the Blockchain and stopping it's intended use.

Quote from: Expressgint on May 10, 2023, 12:23:04 PM

Crypto is also about art, and not only about storing numeric value.

You might as well tell us where in this whitepaperdoes it talk about Bitcoin being a peer to peer electronic art system.

Quote from: Expressgint on May 10, 2023, 12:23:04 PM

If we want to achieve a higher adoption, Art, NFTs etc. should also become possible on the btc network.

What higher adoption if more users are going to stop using the network because of very high fees due to the unnecessary network spam that wasn't supposed to be there in the first place?

Expressgint

newbie

Activity: 3

Merit: 0

I find it great, that you have something like the BRC 20 standard,

that makes it possible to store & share inscriptions via the btc blockchain.

This is unique.

Crypto is also about art, and not only about storing numeric value.

If we want to achieve a higher adoption, Art, NFTs etc. should also become possible on the btc network.

And not just left for the world of alt coins.

Regards

logfiles

copper member

Activity: 1960

Merit: 1638

Top Crypto Casino

Quote from: philipma1957 on May 10, 2023, 09:01:07 AM

Yeah if BTC hodlers panic and cry for a dev rescue BTC deserves to crash out.

This is a test of wills and BTC needs to hodl hodl hodl. Also do a few small btc moves to support net work.

Forget about Hodlers, I doubt if they even care about the current fees.

The problem is that the high fees are not sustainable for people making day to day transactions in the long run. This is supposed to be one of the strong points of Bitcoin. Eliminate the middleman who could charge you exorbitant fees like how banks and all those other payment providers do.

Quote from: goldkingcoiner on May 10, 2023, 10:43:57 AM

I doubt there is any need for concern over the whole BRC-20 debacle. The truth is that its not sustainable for the attacker,

With this confidence and the innocence you have, I am sure they (the attacker) gave up on the fees on the Ethereum Network that spiralled past $100 even when they had hundreds of thousands of Dollars in their pockets after selling scam coins to gullible traders. Grin

Our hope is the congestion stops when the hype dies down, but let say it continues for 2–3 years like it happened in another network. What next?
How many of us do you think will start using alternative networks in order to make transactions?

we-btc

member

Activity: 105

Merit: 20

Personal financial freedom and sovereignty

The Bitcoin white paper is titled: "A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System".

Bitcoin was designed to be an alternative to the current monetary system. The reason it is slow is because it needs to be distributed, decentralized and immutable.
If we continue to allow it to be used for things other than currency it will loose it's value as a currency. It was not designed to be an efficient network which could support non cash functions. In order to keep Bitcoin as a "Cash System" ordinals need to be removed from the system.

I urge the developers to make this change immediately!

I run three nodes and if necessary, I would support a hard fork to remove ordinals.

Thank you!

goldkingcoiner

legendary

Activity: 2030

Merit: 1643

Verified Bitcoin Hodler

Quote from: BrianH on May 09, 2023, 05:31:16 PM

Bitcoin was designed as a method for peer-to-peer exchanges (see quote from Satoshi in sig). It was not originally intended to support tokens or smart contracts.

Bitcoin has essentially become digital gold. These changes are breaking the network and eroding the years of trust that Bitcoin has created. This is what gives it value.

Bitcoin will never offer the transactions per second to support these type of transactions. There are many altcoins that do a better job of providing this utility. Let them do that.

The change to allow BRC-20 in Taproot needs to be rolled back. This is a dangerous, fatal flaw to the network that could be used to bring an end to Bitcoin.

What are your thoughts? Should BRC-20 be removed? What is the best way to do this?

I doubt there is any need for concern over the whole BRC-20 debacle. The truth is that its not sustainable for the attacker, while profitable for the miners and irritating for the Bitcoiners making transactions.

In the worst case scenario, a soft fork will cut out the entire system but at the same time who is to say it will not return under a different disguise?

I am not worried. The only reason why money launderers and scammers are so interested in it right now is because its heavily unregulated. Its still a separated market, though. And without a means of trade such as a centralized exchange, there is no point to it, making BRC20 incredibly centralized. Once its declared a security, which it most likely will be, nobody will want to touch it.

philipma1957

legendary

Activity: 4116

Merit: 7849

'The right to privacy matters'

Quote from: Yamane_Keto on May 10, 2023, 07:28:57 AM

Fees were high in 2017, and the same discussions took place regarding increasing block size, as it is the easy idea to solve this problem, and we all know what happened to those who chose that solution BitcoinCash does not represent 10% of the current Bitcoin value.

Putting pressure on developers and trying to change things will lead to bad results in the long run. This fever will not last long because all those who use tokens and smart contracts will not be able to pay higher fees for a long time, while the average Bitcoin user who believes in its ability to survive in the long run, will know that it is a temporary tax.

~~Consider what happened as a forced HODLING and try to Delay your Bitcoin transaction for this week| Volunteer campaign~~
Edit

Yeah if BTC hodlers panic and cry for a dev rescue BTC deserves to crash out.

This is a test of wills and BTC needs to hodl hodl hodl. Also do a few small btc moves to support net work.

Topic: (Ordinals) BRC-20 needs to be removed - page 24. (Read 6547 times)