Show Posts
Your general idea is correct, you just made some small mistakes:
To put simply it is all about usage. Bitcoin was created to handle transferring money not as a cloud storage.
At this point the best solution is a soft fork to mend the flaw.
It was not originally intended to support tokens or smart contracts.
Bitcoin does support smart contracts, in fact each transaction you make, you are creating and using smart contracts. It just doesn't have certain functionality that would allow creation of tokens.Quote
Bitcoin will never offer the transactions per second to support these type of transactions.
It is not about TPS or capacity. In other words even if bitcoin could handle 1 GB blocks and a billion transactions per second, these types of spam would still not be tolerated.To put simply it is all about usage. Bitcoin was created to handle transferring money not as a cloud storage.
Quote
The change to allow BRC-20 in Taproot needs to be rolled back.
To be clear there is no such thing as "BRC-20" in Bitcoin or Taproot. It is not part of the protocol. It is fake centralized term the scammers are using to give their attack some sort of legitimacy in the eyes of the naive.Quote
This is a dangerous, fatal flaw to the network that could be used to bring an end to Bitcoin.
I don't think this can "end" bitcoin but it is definitely damaging it real hard and must be prevented.Quote
What are your thoughts? Should BRC-20 be removed? What is the best way to do this?
Again BRC-20 does not exist anywhere in the protocol to be removed. There is a vulnerability in bitcoin consensus rules that is being exploited by malicious attackers and that must be patched.At this point the best solution is a soft fork to mend the flaw.
So how can we ask for a fork?
also, whould a fork remove any content related to the submitted Ordinals?
