Congrats rodarmor, you earned it
https://ordinals.com/inscription/25aa0505380d746e9d32ba0108e9dbab4a4a3958912bafb046c3c9c71cef2f65i0
Topic: Ordinals: Rare and exotic sats - page 2. (Read 742 times)
This is by far the most interesting thing happening in Bitcoin at the moment, and except for a couple uppity threads where the usual ninnys are yelling at it, almost zero recognition on the Bitcoin Forum for the accomplishment of bringing so much newfound attention to bitcoin. Its just not a subject that is conducive to sig spamming, hence the relative silence.
Congrats rodarmor, you earned it
https://ordinals.com/inscription/25aa0505380d746e9d32ba0108e9dbab4a4a3958912bafb046c3c9c71cef2f65i0
Congrats rodarmor, you earned it
https://ordinals.com/inscription/25aa0505380d746e9d32ba0108e9dbab4a4a3958912bafb046c3c9c71cef2f65i0
I am still researching and learning about this project but I have to say that I absolutely love the responses to it from certain developers. It shows who is a control freak that only likes Bitcoin when it does what they want it to. Use the code for something they deem as not appropriate and suddenly Bitcoin isn’t free and open software but instead something you can only use how they want you to use it. For that reason I love it. Eat your heart out controlling devs. Miners aren’t going to do your bidding and censor transactions, but it’s cute of you to ask.
You are right, we should store whatever we want on bitcoin blockchain and pay the fees for it. That's called freedom, though at what cost?Some facts and problems, with bitcoin being the leader in crypto, this could result in mass demand leaving normal transactions out the blocks, bumping the fees up. Didn't miners do this fee manipulation trick a few years back bumping the fees up to $50? Isn't there some shitcoin out there doing this NFT thing already?
Do the miners really think they control the network? Not theirs to decide alone, it's called consensus.
It seems like miners and developers have been at odds for years with developers using tricks and lies to get miners to do what they want. Now it seems that miners are giving core developers the finger and doing what they want. This is likely the result or prior said developer behavior and in my opinion is a must to restore balance to Bitcoin. I personally love it and think it is necessary.
I am still researching and learning about this project but I have to say that I absolutely love the responses to it from certain developers. It shows who is a control freak that only likes Bitcoin when it does what they want it to. Use the code for something they deem as not appropriate and suddenly Bitcoin isn’t free and open software but instead something you can only use how they want you to use it. For that reason I love it. Eat your heart out controlling devs. Miners aren’t going to do your bidding and censor transactions, but it’s cute of you to ask.
You are right, we should store whatever we want on bitcoin blockchain and pay the fees for it. That's called freedom, though at what cost?Some facts and problems, with bitcoin being the leader in crypto, this could result in mass demand leaving normal transactions out the blocks, bumping the fees up. Didn't miners do this fee manipulation trick a few years back bumping the fees up to $50? Isn't there some shitcoin out there doing this NFT thing already?
Do the miners really think they control the network? Not theirs to decide alone, it's called consensus.
I am still researching and learning about this project but I have to say that I absolutely love the responses to it from certain developers. It shows who is a control freak that only likes Bitcoin when it does what they want it to. Use the code for something they deem as not appropriate and suddenly Bitcoin isn’t free and open software but instead something you can only use how they want you to use it. For that reason I love it. Eat your heart out controlling devs. Miners aren’t going to do your bidding and censor transactions, but it’s cute of you to ask.
- An NFT implementation which embeds NFT content in Taproot witnesses, assigning them to the first sat of the first output of the transaction, "inscribing" that sat with content
Super interesting to watch the discussion over this bullet point in particular unfolding on Twitter as it now appears to be possible to upload several KB (theoretically up to ~4 MB) worth of data to the blockchain for the purposes of on-chain NFT storage.
https://ordinals.com/inscription/69d500051f9a0812ed41798eeb06d4af93349529480c23e9cf1ef0ccb2a921a8i0
On one side you have lukedashjr calling it an attack on Bitcoin and Adam Back calling for transaction censorship by miners; on the other side you have Peter Todd calling the "freakout" about ordinals "stupid" and reminding everyone that adding non-standard transaction data to transactions has always been possible.
It has reinvigorated the age-old debate of "appropriate use of block space," what "blockchain spam" entails, and whether Bitcoin should be used to store data not related to the actual transaction of BTC (for financial purposes).
Here is a brief overview of how it works as far as NFTs are concerned:
https://read.pourteaux.xyz/p/illegitimate-bitcoin-transactions
Of course the concept of adding non-standard data to the blockchain for other purposes already taken place via Omni and Counterparty for years. In 2014, JP Janssen encoded a thumbnail size image and placed it in a Counterparty transaction -- it is probably the first example of a tokenized, on-chain image.
But using Taproot to do it in this new manner is bumping up the storage capacity by one or two orders of magnitude.
Almost zero mentions of this debate here, so let's mention it.
See, this is my confusion when it comes to units in Bitcoin, which led me to ask this question in this thread.
What I found out from responses there is that inputs are all combined anyway before being transmitted out -- so how do you then keep track of satoshis when mixed with other inputs? It's easy to track inputs if always sent whole and never combined with other inputs, but once consolidated, does this mean you lose their "serial"?
What I found out from responses there is that inputs are all combined anyway before being transmitted out -- so how do you then keep track of satoshis when mixed with other inputs? It's easy to track inputs if always sent whole and never combined with other inputs, but once consolidated, does this mean you lose their "serial"?
I understand that by 'naming' each and every satoshi in entire bitcoin network, you are trying to bring the 'collectible' feature to every satoshi. Basically, even 1mBTC got 100k satoshi which means what some celebrity 'held and sent' may not get the rarity grade due to massive in number.
If it is all about "tracking" then doing that in bigger unit might be helpful.
Probably I am not knowledgeable to realize this tagging each satoshi kind of concept with real world utilization.
Anyway, congrats and good luck with your contribution to bitcoin devotees.
If it is all about "tracking" then doing that in bigger unit might be helpful.
Probably I am not knowledgeable to realize this tagging each satoshi kind of concept with real world utilization.
Anyway, congrats and good luck with your contribution to bitcoin devotees.
I just necroposted to an old thread in which Johnson Lau came up with a numbering system for satoshis, which I independently also came up with a decade later. I think it's worth giving its own thread, so I'll copy what I posted here:
So, funny story, in the beginning of 2022, I came up with the exact same scheme discussed in this thread. After I finished the scheme, I realized that it was basically serial numbers for satoshis, typed "satoshi serial numbers" into Google, and found this post. It feels natural extension to bitcoin, so it makes sense that multiple people have come up with it over the years.
I called it "ordinal theory" or "ordinals", because it uses order in multiple places:
I've spent the last year implementing it, so just 10 years after the OP, you can finally try it out!
The binary, written in Rust, is called ord, and the code is on GitHub at https://github.com/casey/ord.
I has a bunch of functionality:
Everything is open source, permissively licensed, and independently developed, so try it out and let me know what you think! Keep in mind that this is still very much alpha software. We're as careful as possible developing it, but it hasn't been audited and may have bugs
So, funny story, in the beginning of 2022, I came up with the exact same scheme discussed in this thread. After I finished the scheme, I realized that it was basically serial numbers for satoshis, typed "satoshi serial numbers" into Google, and found this post. It feels natural extension to bitcoin, so it makes sense that multiple people have come up with it over the years.
I called it "ordinal theory" or "ordinals", because it uses order in multiple places:
- The order of satoshis in the supply of satoshis, for numbering
- The order of inputs and outputs of a transaction, for inheritance
- The order of transactions in a block, for inheritance of fees
I've spent the last year implementing it, so just 10 years after the OP, you can finally try it out!
The binary, written in Rust, is called ord, and the code is on GitHub at https://github.com/casey/ord.
I has a bunch of functionality:
- Conversion between different, equivalent, notations, including the raw integer notation, block.offset notation, names, and degree notation, which is based on relation to difficulty adjustments and halvings.
- An index that connects to a Bitcoin Core node instance and tracks the location of all sats.
- An NFT implementation which embeds NFT content in Taproot witnesses, assigning them to the first sat of the first output of the transaction, "inscribing" that sat with content
- A rarity system: common = not the sat of the block, uncommon = first sat of the block, rare = first sat after a difficulty adjustment, epic = first sat after a halving, legendary = first sat after a conjunction, which is the difficulty adjustment and the halving happening on the same block, which happens every 6 halvings, and mythic = first sat of genesis block.
- A naming system, which assigns unique names consisting of the letters a through z to each sat, basically base 26, but starting backwards, so that all short names aren't locked in the genesis block.
- A block explorer, with a signet instance hosted at https://signet.ordinals.com and a mainnet instance at https://ordinals.com. The block explorer supports search, try putting in different representations for a sat: 0, 0.0, satoshi, etc.
- A wallet, which can construct transactions to send particular sats and make and send inscriptions.
Everything is open source, permissively licensed, and independently developed, so try it out and let me know what you think! Keep in mind that this is still very much alpha software. We're as careful as possible developing it, but it hasn't been audited and may have bugs
Jump to: