Pages:
Author

Topic: NFTs in the Bitcoin blockchain - Ordinal Theory - page 11. (Read 9195 times)

legendary
Activity: 2898
Merit: 1823

Ordinals is a good example. I may not like dick pics and fart sounds in the blockchain, but it's impressive, for Bitcoin as a protocol, that Casey Rodarmor built his project on top of the network without asking permission. This is the ethos Bitcoin lives by, and saying that it's merely for "spending" cheapens the protocol.

I'm just referencing Satoshi's original intentions. He didn't create bitcoin to be an investment, even though somewhat ironically that's possibly one of the reasons why its had such success as one.


But we're here in the current situation.

The easy way out of the debate is "because Satoshi", or "because the white paper".

Quote

Ordinals is indeed a novel use case that doesn't have to do with spending, so is the stuff I've been doing on Counterparty since 2014. I think what "cheapens the protocol" to a larger degree is insisting bitcoin shouldn't be spent.


I truly respect your opinion, but not finding out the actual reason why saving Bitcoin makes more sense than spending it like it was a network merely for coffee transactions, makes me believe that we might have only started to scratch the surface.

I'm also still in my Bitcoin journey, and I'm not saying that I'm 100% on the right path. Perhaps I will get a new understanding and agree with you one day.
legendary
Activity: 2982
Merit: 7986
However, if people weren't out there using it for real-world transactions then it would have no value at all.
And there will always be, because electronic cash has a tangible value on its own. But not for all people, again. Some people don't care about that, and are quite fine with electronic fiat, alone. For them, electronic cash represents nothing more than an investment – an asset appreciated in practice solely by the faction that truly esteems the concept of electronic cash.

OK, so we're in agreement... I don't understand why you bothered replying to me in the first place.

Even though I don't care much about Satoshi's intentions, I'm just going to quote two parts where he's pretty much arguing it's more than currency;

As a thought experiment, imagine there was a base metal as scarce as gold but with the following properties:
- boring grey in colour
- not a good conductor of electricity
- not particularly strong, but not ductile or easily malleable either
- not useful for any practical or ornamental purpose

and one special, magical property:
- can be transported over a communications channel

If it somehow acquired any value at all for whatever reason, then anyone wanting to transfer wealth over a long distance could buy some, transmit it, and have the recipient sell it.

This further hammers home the point that I was trying to make. He also referenced bitcoin as being a commodity, but commodities only have value because they are useful in some way or another. They don't have value simply because people expect the price to keep going up.

Honestly, I don't give a damn about being in history. I wouldn't want to be the known one who traded 10,000 BTC for two pizzas.

legendary
Activity: 1512
Merit: 7340
Farewell, Leo
However, if people weren't out there using it for real-world transactions then it would have no value at all.
And there will always be, because electronic cash has a tangible value on its own. But not for all people, again. Some people don't care about that, and are quite fine with electronic fiat, alone. For them, electronic cash represents nothing more than an investment – an asset appreciated in practice solely by the faction that truly esteems the concept of electronic cash.

I'm just referencing Satoshi's original intentions.
Even though I don't care much about Satoshi's intentions, I'm just going to quote two parts where he's pretty much arguing it's more than currency;

As a thought experiment, imagine there was a base metal as scarce as gold but with the following properties:
- boring grey in colour
- not a good conductor of electricity
- not particularly strong, but not ductile or easily malleable either
- not useful for any practical or ornamental purpose

and one special, magical property:
- can be transported over a communications channel

If it somehow acquired any value at all for whatever reason, then anyone wanting to transfer wealth over a long distance could buy some, transmit it, and have the recipient sell it.

Maybe it could get an initial value circularly as you've suggested, by people foreseeing its potential usefulness for exchange.  (I would definitely want some)  Maybe collectors, any random reason could spark it.

I think the traditional qualifications for money were written with the assumption that there are so many competing objects in the world that are scarce, an object with the automatic bootstrap of intrinsic value will surely win out over those without intrinsic value.  But if there were nothing in the world with intrinsic value that could be used as money, only scarce but no intrinsic value, I think people would still take up something.

(I'm using the word scarce here to only mean limited potential supply)


What the OP described is called "cornering the market".  When someone tries to buy all the world's supply of a scarce asset, the more they buy the higher the price goes.  At some point, it gets too expensive for them to buy any more.  It's great for the people who owned it beforehand because they get to sell it to the corner at crazy high prices.  As the price keeps going up and up, some people keep holding out for yet higher prices and refuse to sell.



It will remember Laszlo Hanyecz, Silk Road & others who established its first use cases.
Honestly, I don't give a damn about being in history. I wouldn't want to be the known one who traded 10,000 BTC for two pizzas.
legendary
Activity: 3710
Merit: 10196
Self-Custody is a right. Say no to"Non-custodial"
I don't "sell" bitcoin, I (primarily) use it for what it was originally meant to do, which is act as electronic cash. For someone who is purely using it for speculative reasons, that's fine, nobody said you can't do that. Indeed most people are only interested in the speculative gains aspect. However, if people weren't out there using it for real-world transactions then it would have no value at all.

History won't remember long-term bitcoin holders. It will remember Laszlo Hanyecz, Silk Road & others who established its first use cases.
Ordinals is a good example. I may not like dick pics and fart sounds in the blockchain, but it's impressive, for Bitcoin as a protocol, that Casey Rodarmor built his project on top of the network without asking permission. This is the ethos Bitcoin lives by, and saying that it's merely for "spending" cheapens the protocol.
I'm just referencing Satoshi's original intentions. He didn't create bitcoin to be an investment, even though somewhat ironically that's possibly one of the reasons why its had such success as one. Ordinals is indeed a novel use case that doesn't have to do with spending, so is the stuff I've been doing on Counterparty since 2014. I think what "cheapens the protocol" to a larger degree is insisting bitcoin shouldn't be spent.

Part of the "freedom," power and greatness of bitcoin is that you can do whatever the fuck you want with it, including but not limited to HODLing it...

and by the way, appealing to authority seems pretty lame here.. in regards to what supposedly were "satoshi's intentions" in regards to the various ways that bitcoin could be "used" (including whether HODLing fits into the category of uses contemplated by satoshi).  

Another use case, recently discussed as plausible/feasible/reasonable, is the use case of going to your grave with your satoshis... which (if you want to talk about satoshi) seems to be what satoshi did.
legendary
Activity: 2982
Merit: 7986

I don't "sell" bitcoin, I (primarily) use it for what it was originally meant to do, which is act as electronic cash. For someone who is purely using it for speculative reasons, that's fine, nobody said you can't do that. Indeed most people are only interested in the speculative gains aspect. However, if people weren't out there using it for real-world transactions then it would have no value at all.

History won't remember long-term bitcoin holders. It will remember Laszlo Hanyecz, Silk Road & others who established its first use cases.

Ordinals is a good example. I may not like dick pics and fart sounds in the blockchain, but it's impressive, for Bitcoin as a protocol, that Casey Rodarmor built his project on top of the network without asking permission. This is the ethos Bitcoin lives by, and saying that it's merely for "spending" cheapens the protocol.

I'm just referencing Satoshi's original intentions. He didn't create bitcoin to be an investment, even though somewhat ironically that's possibly one of the reasons why its had such success as one. Ordinals is indeed a novel use case that doesn't have to do with spending, so is the stuff I've been doing on Counterparty since 2014. I think what "cheapens the protocol" to a larger degree is insisting bitcoin shouldn't be spent.
legendary
Activity: 2898
Merit: 1823
But they should to educate the newbies and make them think hard before spending their precious Bitcoins. A Bitcoin now is better HODLed than spent.


While I'm not exactly sure when you think its good to spend bitcoin, I disagree with this. Bitcoins were made to be spent, not held.


Sorry, the point I was making was made through an incomplete post. I was talking more about from an investment perspective and how Bitcoin isn't designed to use for mere "coffee transactions".

Bitcoin's purchasing power grows after the end of a 4-year cycle, so unless you have no choice and truly need to spend your Bitcoin, it's better to use fiat to purchase your personal needs.

Plus "money", could be spent AND held.

Quote

The ability to spend them is what gives them their value. When you spend your bitcoin, you are fulfilling its purpose, its destiny. If everybody held their BTC, well first of all there'd be no market, and second of all it would be no different than a Ponzi scheme centered around an illiquid asset.


That's partly true. In my opinion, Bitcoin's main value proposition derives from the fact that it's censorship-resistant. The way it's spent and the way the network is utilized also matters. If people truly believe that Bitcoin was built to be a network for personal/consumer finance, then they're only scratching the surface.

Ordinals is a good example. I may not like dick pics and fart sounds in the blockchain, but it's impressive, for Bitcoin as a protocol, that Casey Rodarmor built his project on top of the network without asking permission. This is the ethos Bitcoin lives by, and saying that it's merely for "spending" cheapens the protocol.
legendary
Activity: 1512
Merit: 7340
Farewell, Leo
I realize that. What I was trying to get across was the "another story" aspect, which is the logical result of everybody holding their bitcoin, which is the mentality that some bitcoiners like to insist upon... that it should just be held indefinitely.
If you don't have liquidity problems, then holding it indefinitely is proved to be a good financial decision until now.

This is if you treat it purely as an investment, which its not.
For you. For someone who doesn't care about electronic cash, but only for the potential capital gains, it's purely an investment.

It was meant to be a digital currency or "electronic cash" first and foremost.
But, in practice, you're not encouraged to do that, unless you need to use cash via the Internet. The reason is pretty simple: bad money, fiat, drives out bitcoin. Fiat is better for consumption purposes, as it's getting less valuable comparably to bitcoin overtime.
legendary
Activity: 2982
Merit: 7986
If everybody held their BTC
Everybody don't hold bitcoin. That's what matters. What would happen if everyone did, is another story.

I realize that. What I was trying to get across was the "another story" aspect, which is the logical result of everybody holding their bitcoin, which is the mentality that some bitcoiners like to insist upon... that it should just be held indefinitely.

The fact is, if you're living off the basic income, need cash and you're out of liquidity, you're going to sell your bitcoin. People who don't run out of liquidity (i.e., rich), with the same mindset and reasoning, will probably hold it for longer.

This is if you treat it purely as an investment, which its not. It was meant to be a digital currency or "electronic cash" first and foremost.
legendary
Activity: 1512
Merit: 7340
Farewell, Leo
Aren't Phoenix, Breez and Blixt trying to accomplish some kind of a semblance of self-custody?
No mobile app with lightning functionality does that, unless you're running node / hub from home.

Bitcoins were made to be spent, not held. The ability to spend them is what gives them their value. When you spend your bitcoin, you are fulfilling its purpose, its destiny.
Money, in general, is made to be spent. Spending your savings fulfills their purpose, but you should obviously be cautious on when and where to spend them. Same as with bitcoin.

If everybody held their BTC
Everybody don't hold bitcoin. That's what matters. What would happen if everyone did, is another story. The fact is, if you're living off the basic income, need cash and you're out of liquidity, you're going to sell your bitcoin. People who don't run out of liquidity (i.e., rich), with the same mindset and reasoning, will probably hold it for longer.
legendary
Activity: 2982
Merit: 7986
But they should to educate the newbies and make them think hard before spending their precious Bitcoins. A Bitcoin now is better HODLed than spent.

While I'm not exactly sure when you think its good to spend bitcoin, I disagree with this. Bitcoins were made to be spent, not held. The ability to spend them is what gives them their value. When you spend your bitcoin, you are fulfilling its purpose, its destiny. If everybody held their BTC, well first of all there'd be no market, and second of all it would be no different than a Ponzi scheme centered around an illiquid asset.

The tough thing about using bitcoin as a currency is when you buy it at a higher price and then it goes down significantly... This has always been a risk, however. Thankfully BTC has spent more of its life going up than down.
legendary
Activity: 2898
Merit: 1823
Maybe it's just me, but I don't see bitcoin being destined for coffees and pizzas. Transactions like that are, in a manner, as plain as a pikestaff. You don't care about censorship-resistance when buying a pizza. You don't care if third parties know which toppings in that pizza you prefer. You're never going to buy a pizza overseas.  You just want the transaction to complete the soonest, and pay the least in commissions.


It's not just you. In fact, I believe there are many people here in BitcoinTalk who also has the same opinion, although they don't express it as much they should. But they should to educate the newbies and make them think hard before spending their precious Bitcoins. A Bitcoin now is better HODLed than spent.

Quote

Bitcoin is the good money from Gresham's law. As long as there's "bad money", it will not circulate much in the economy. Unless fiat currencies collapse completely, and both EU and US become poor, merchants will pretty much go in the fiat-way when stuff like censorship-resistance, privacy and being permissionless are not prioritized. And even in that chaotic scenario, there will be banks afterwards, in just another form. People without technical expertise will be required to forfeit their custody, unless some second layer can reach them with near zero disadvantages (I highly doubt about that).


But have a shower thought about a simple concept - Unlimited fiat, only 21,000,000 Bitcoin in existence and demand for sats is increasing.
legendary
Activity: 3710
Merit: 10196
Self-Custody is a right. Say no to"Non-custodial"
That's a custodial solution, isn't it?

yeah apparently, i didn't really notice at first but it says it here:

Wallet of Satoshi is a mobile app for iOS and Android that lets you send and receive Lightning payments.

It is a zero-configuration custodial wallet with a focus on simplicity and the best possible user experience. It can be downloaded using the links at walletofsatoshi.com

Simply download and install the app and you are on the Lightning Network!


But is there a non-custodial wallet where you can buy bitcoin inside of it and "Simply download and install the app and you are on the Lightning Network" ?
Self-custody in LN requires way more effort than a cold wallet, not mention constant micromanagement (backing up & rebalancing channels etc.)

Aren't Phoenix, Breez and Blixt trying to accomplish some kind of a semblance of self-custody?  These three all work on IOS, and surely there are likely some other wallets that try to be somewhat user-friendly and perhaps are trying to be self-custodial too.. and I don't claim to really know all of the trade-offs.. .

Of course, Bluewallet requires running your own node, though they did previously let you connect to one of their nodes (and hold coins there) - which caused Bluewallet really not to be self-custody, and Muun wallet has some weird swaps that end up not being as lightning network dependent/reliant as some folks had been presuming.

Rather than my somewhat lame attempts at categorizing lightning network wallets, maybe it is better to show how darthcoin categorizes the various level of custodial versus non custodial lightning wallets and their various features?

https://darthcoin.substack.com/p/lightning-wallets-comparison
sr. member
Activity: 1624
Merit: 294
That's a custodial solution, isn't it?

yeah apparently, i didn't really notice at first but it says it here:

Wallet of Satoshi is a mobile app for iOS and Android that lets you send and receive Lightning payments.

It is a zero-configuration custodial wallet with a focus on simplicity and the best possible user experience. It can be downloaded using the links at walletofsatoshi.com

Simply download and install the app and you are on the Lightning Network!


But is there a non-custodial wallet where you can buy bitcoin inside of it and "Simply download and install the app and you are on the Lightning Network" ?
Self-custody in LN requires way more effort than a cold wallet, not to mention constant micromanagement (backing up & rebalancing channels etc.)
sr. member
Activity: 1036
Merit: 350
That's a custodial solution, isn't it?

yeah apparently, i didn't really notice at first but it says it here:

Wallet of Satoshi is a mobile app for iOS and Android that lets you send and receive Lightning payments.

It is a zero-configuration custodial wallet with a focus on simplicity and the best possible user experience. It can be downloaded using the links at walletofsatoshi.com

Simply download and install the app and you are on the Lightning Network!


But is there a non-custodial wallet where you can buy bitcoin inside of it and "Simply download and install the app and you are on the Lightning Network" ?
sr. member
Activity: 1624
Merit: 294

Not even Lightning?

well yeah i forgot about lightning but if something like Wallet of Satoshi could work for you then I think that's a good solution to the high fee problem.

https://www.walletofsatoshi.com/

looks like they have it really dumbed down so that an average joe bitcoin user could be using lightning. you can even buy bitcoin from within the wallet (hopefully their rates are not a ripoff) so you don't have to transfer any bitcoin in (and pay a transaction fee). I guess the big question then becomes does the coffee shop take lightning payments?  Undecided

that doesn't solve the having to tell the irs i sold crypto when i bought coffee but i guess i could live with that...
That's a custodial solution, isn't it?
sr. member
Activity: 1036
Merit: 350

Not even Lightning?

well yeah i forgot about lightning but if something like Wallet of Satoshi could work for you then I think that's a good solution to the high fee problem.

https://www.walletofsatoshi.com/

looks like they have it really dumbed down so that an average joe bitcoin user could be using lightning. you can even buy bitcoin from within the wallet (hopefully their rates are not a ripoff) so you don't have to transfer any bitcoin in (and pay a transaction fee). I guess the big question then becomes does the coffee shop take lightning payments?  Undecided

that doesn't solve the having to tell the irs i sold crypto when i bought coffee but i guess i could live with that...
hero member
Activity: 2030
Merit: 789
Top Crypto Casino
Maybe it's just me, but I don't see bitcoin being destined for coffees and pizzas. Transactions like that are, in a manner, as plain as a pikestaff. You don't care about censorship-resistance when buying a pizza. You don't care if third parties know which toppings in that pizza you prefer. You're never going to buy a pizza overseas.  You just want the transaction to complete the soonest, and pay the least in commissions.

Bitcoin is the good money from Gresham's law. As long as there's "bad money", it will not circulate much in the economy. Unless fiat currencies collapse completely, and both EU and US become poor, merchants will pretty much go in the fiat-way when stuff like censorship-resistance, privacy and being permissionless are not prioritized. And even in that chaotic scenario, there will be banks afterwards, in just another form.

TIL about Gresham's law (thanks for the reference). Also, I agree with you. if nothing is done to improve the technology of Bitcoin - that is, increasing the tx finality speed and significantly bringing down the costs per transaction, then we won't see Bitcoin gaining traction for that kind of activity. One of the most popular ideologies in computer science is that:

Given two services
- service_A with completion of < secs, and $0.00002
- service_B with a completion of >= 3mins and $4 tx cost.

People would only flock to service_A. That's why we have had an influx of other 'layer one' blockchains in the past - all trying to be better than bitcoin forgetting that the blockchain trilemma is still unsolved.

Unless fiat currencies collapse completely, and both EU and US become poor, merchants will pretty much go in the fiat-way when stuff like censorship-resistance, privacy and being permissionless are not prioritized. And even in that chaotic scenario, there will be banks afterwards, in just another form. People without technical expertise will be required to forfeit their custody, unless some second layer can reach them with near zero disadvantages (I highly doubt about that).

Most people don't care as long as long as all transactions they conduct are completed in near-instant times.

legendary
Activity: 1512
Merit: 7340
Farewell, Leo
Maybe it's just me, but I don't see bitcoin being destined for coffees and pizzas. Transactions like that are, in a manner, as plain as a pikestaff. You don't care about censorship-resistance when buying a pizza. You don't care if third parties know which toppings in that pizza you prefer. You're never going to buy a pizza overseas.  You just want the transaction to complete the soonest, and pay the least in commissions.

Bitcoin is the good money from Gresham's law. As long as there's "bad money", it will not circulate much in the economy. Unless fiat currencies collapse completely, and both EU and US become poor, merchants will pretty much go in the fiat-way when stuff like censorship-resistance, privacy and being permissionless are not prioritized. And even in that chaotic scenario, there will be banks afterwards, in just another form. People without technical expertise will be required to forfeit their custody, unless some second layer can reach them with near zero disadvantages (I highly doubt about that).
sr. member
Activity: 1624
Merit: 294

They can. But it's centralized, custodial and has limited to merchant which accept Visa debit without strict limitation. By strict limitation, i mean only accept card from reputable issuer. In addition,
1. There's concern about fee and conversation rate which might feels unfair for the user.
2. Such service only available to user in certain country.
well, i'm not a big fan of using something like coinbase's crypto debit card for the simple reason that i don't feel a coffee purchase at starbucks should be something i should be needing to keep track of and report to the IRS. so i'd just open a throwaway checking acct that I can put a small amount like $50 or $100 and use a debit card on that account. that beats using bitcoin to buy coffee by far. and makes more sense. and no i'm not worried about my bank shutting down and taking my $50 or $100 with them.

with something like the coinbase debit card,

buying coffee at starbucks =  you sold crypto and need to report that on your federal tax return so the irs knows about it..

but to tie it back into the discussion, there's just some things that bitcoin can't do. it can't be everything to everyone  maybe it can't be the solution to buying tiny things like a cup of coffee. not as time goes on.
Not even Lightning?
sr. member
Activity: 1036
Merit: 350

They can. But it's centralized, custodial and has limited to merchant which accept Visa debit without strict limitation. By strict limitation, i mean only accept card from reputable issuer. In addition,
1. There's concern about fee and conversation rate which might feels unfair for the user.
2. Such service only available to user in certain country.
well, i'm not a big fan of using something like coinbase's crypto debit card for the simple reason that i don't feel a coffee purchase at starbucks should be something i should be needing to keep track of and report to the IRS. so i'd just open a throwaway checking acct that I can put a small amount like $50 or $100 and use a debit card on that account. that beats using bitcoin to buy coffee by far. and makes more sense. and no i'm not worried about my bank shutting down and taking my $50 or $100 with them.

with something like the coinbase debit card,

buying coffee at starbucks =  you sold crypto and need to report that on your federal tax return so the irs knows about it..

but to tie it back into the discussion, there's just some things that bitcoin can't do. it can't be everything to everyone  maybe it can't be the solution to buying tiny things like a cup of coffee. not as time goes on.
Pages:
Jump to: