Why running NFTs on Bitcoin blockchain is a dumb idea.

[serveria.com]

Will Ordinals and NFTs Destroy Bitcoin?
www.youtube.com/watch?v=mJr8yUf3dYk


Energy usage of bitcoin is high enough as it is and should be reserved for more worthwhile applications. Transferring around monkey jpegs and/or porn images on the network is a pointless waste of energy. The congestion and bloat this would create will lead to higher fees for users, clog and slow the network with useless traffic that can potentially compromise security with overcomplexity and bloat. Bitcoin should remain true to its core mission and principles-- the most sound money ever created and greatest store of value.

Once you try to be too many things and try to please everyone, you just become another stupid altcoin.
Leave the idiots to play around with their ethereum and solana, monkey pics, etc.

NFT is a scam and just plain stupid and it doesn't matter which network it's being run on. Running it on any shitcoin blockchain doesn't affect me as a Bitcoin maxi (haha) as long as it stays away from Bitcoin network. Ethereum is notorious for letting various scammers use their network so nothing new here. Perhaps it will help some peeps to see the light and steer clear from shitcoins.

[DooMAD]

Clogging up the bitcoin network with pointless traffic and congestion has adverse effects on everyone else using it, in the form of longer waiting periods and higher fees. The cost isn't just paid by the sender. That is not the purpose of bitcoin.

Just because someone values something (whether it be monkey jpegs and videos, cat memes, animal porn, gay porn, child porn etc.) does not mean they should be allowed to do whatever they want with it. There are limits to free speech and the miners have the right to refuse to accommodate such nonsense.

Some would argue that the moment the US opted to trade liberty for security was the true moment they lost the so-called war on terror, because they gave up one of their fundamental principles in order to try to win.  The same argument could be made here for Bitcoin right now.  If we truly value freedom, we can't abandon that principle at the first sign of concern.  Not only does it set a dangerous precedent, it cheapens the thing as a whole if we start to espouse totalitarianism.  That's the biggest issue here, in my humble view.

Besides that, if one side escalates, the other entrenches in response and it becomes a drawn out conflict.  I personally believe Bitcoin is resilient enough to withstand any sort of "abuse", as many tend to see this idea.  I also get the impression that market forces will make NFTs on the BTC chain non-viable over the long term.  You could fan the flames, but it's probably better just to let it fizzle out on its own.

[crypticj]

I think at this point we just need to accept that NFT is a bad idea and it turned out to be a scam and gambling object. So I don't think that it will be a good idea to associate the bitcoin blockchain with NFT.

[pooya87]

Full node developers should get to work and non-standard that to prevent such spams from growing on the chain.

Or we just leave it as is, as it isn't harmful for non-NFT users?

That's debatable. Remember a couple of years ago when fees were so high that everyone was complaining? That was the result of the biggest spam attack bitcoin has experienced in its short history. A big chunk of that spam attack were altcoins spamming the network as a method of mining their shitcoin!
I'd say that is enough harm for us to do something about such attacks like Ordinals on bitcoin before they become a threat.

[BlackHatCoiner]

Your argument makes as much sense as saying a bank is practicing censorship when it refuses to be a marketplace for NFTs and pornography.

No it's not. A bank isn't an immune, censorship resistant, pro-freedom, transparent, globally accessible payment network with no intermediaries involved.

That's debatable.

It's debatable only if we accept that making a transaction constitutes a burden for the network. In my opinion, it doesn't. Everyone can make as many transactions as they wish if they're willing to pay the fee. It's a feature.

[yazher]

This is what I always said to my friends when they ask me which altcoins are good to invest in, they said can you recommend any NFT to buy?

I said, it's better for you guys just to remain and stick with bitcoins forever because these altcoins are truly uncertain when it comes to their preservation as we can truly see, there are some altcoins that haven't been recovered after it falls hard, their developers abandoned the project and jump to another one. Because of tight competition, it always ended up losing its value except for a few of course. but in reality, most of them didn't really make it until now and you have these NFTs joining the list which surely will gonna be like the other altcoins in the upcoming future as well.

[Flexystar]

Transferring around monkey jpegs and/or porn images on the network is a pointless waste of energy.

 

This got me dead man, laughing hard. Finally someone with all the energy bursting out about how NFT's are making fun around the internet. I am also till date finding that sweet spot to understand what interests people more, the bored ape monkeys or just he money that they might make in the future? Definitely not the art but it's all about money and that is why it got dragged all the way up here. Otherwise NFT was worst idea. It just got pumped because of the guy who made millions of dollars by combining few hundreds digital photos into single one. Lolz.

You never know, what surprise might come along the way in crypto.

May be in some years we will be buying stars and planets with the crypto sitting on the earth itself. 

Bitcoin should be kept clean as it is. Let it prosper with the Satoshi's idea of free monetary outflow and inflow.

[BenCodie]

That's not even to mention how useless the NFT idea is as a whole.

I have to chime in and disagree with you here. While I agree that the whole NFT hype bubble is ridiculous, I won't say it is useless. I think NFTs have immense potential in the music industry for artists. The artist usually receives less than 50% of revenue from using streaming avenues and this is being a best case scenario. For selling their music, they receive less than 20% of the revenue and that does not include the costs they outlay on production. I think for music artists, cutting out the middlemen is a great use-case of NFTs. For art it has some use case too, such as the rights to ownership.

[headingnorth]

Your argument makes as much sense as saying a bank is practicing censorship when it refuses to be a marketplace for NFTs and pornography.

No it's not. A bank isn't an immune, censorship resistant, pro-freedom, transparent, globally accessible payment network with no intermediaries involved.

LMAO. I doubt the idiots who are uploading porn and donkey jpegs care or even know about immunity, censorship resistance, freedom, transparency or whatever cliche buzzwords you are trying to spout. You give them way too much credit. Do you work for the government or banking industry? Honestly you sound like a shill for either one or both.

[franky1]

NFT is not about uploading a whole song/pic/video on a blockchain
NFT is a registry of the HASH ID of a file*.. not contain the whole file itself

yep there are some NFT blockchains that dont even have a unique hash of the file and just some nonce-count ID of version X of a listing..(facepalm)

*EG the "first tweet" on twitter exists in twitters servers(obviously)
but the HTML webpage code for that tweet would be SHA256'd and its that sha256 ID thats put into a NFT blockchain

NFT do have utility, but currently the greedy idiots just want to create memes and pay influencers to buy them for a % of the influencers pay, thus created a fake but endorsed value for one version of the item..

if it was used properly for its proper utility of registering ownership of a IP, copyright, patent, landclaim then it can have purpose

but these things should be done on subnetworks of a monetary mainnet. not on the monetary mainnet

[nutildah]

Few points that haven't been brought up yet:

- Bitcoin already had NFTs by way of Counterparty. Its had them since 2014. The main difference is image data for them is stored off-chain (with one famous exception where the image data is small enough to be embedded in a transaction).

- The image data for Ordinals NFTs can be added in such a way that it is entirely prunable as it mostly relies on witness data, thereby minimizing the blockchain bloat factor.

- Once an Ordinals NFT has been minted, future transactions do not require "movement" of the image data but rather a single satoshi which is the "ordinal" that has been associated with the image data.

- Ordinals NFT sales & transfers are already happening although an automated marketplace hasn't been built yet, so they are all P2P sales for now.


Personally I'll never use it as I'm quite content with Counterparty, although some Counterparty artists are already devising ways to combine the two platforms.

I don't know totally what to think about it yet, am kind of on the fence about it as it pertains to the longevity of Bitcoin. What I do know is that being mad at it is pretty dumb and reflects a steadfast refusal to learn new things.



Most anti-NFT people can only bring up the same arguments that no-coiners have used for a decade against Bitcoin:

- its silly
- its useless
- its a Ponzi scheme
- the real thing is better

NFT haters are basically the new no-coiners  

[BlackHatCoiner]

I think for music artists, cutting out the middlemen is a great use-case of NFTs.

But, NFTs don't replace intermediaries. Music artists can upload their songs as NFTs, but they need a platform to have them available for the audience. Be it Spotify, YouTube, iTunes, Opensea. They will all take a commission along the way. The solution to this problem isn't NFTs, but more competitive platforms, which will be in favor of the artists.

LMAO. I doubt the idiots who are uploading porn and donkey jpegs care or even know about immunity, censorship resistance, freedom, transparency or whatever cliche buzzwords you are trying to spout.

I don't know for sure, I make a guess. Either way, I don't know their good better than they themselves.

Do you work for the government or banking industry?

Yes, I'm the president of Greece, and millions from our government spending goes straight to NFT shilling. You got me.

- its silly
- its useless
- its a Ponzi scheme
- the real thing is better

Those rather sound counter-arguments for shitcoining.

[nutildah]

- its silly
- its useless
- its a Ponzi scheme
- the real thing is better

Those rather sound counter-arguments for shitcoining.

They could be used to describe anything of value that somebody doesn't like, but the facts remain that they are applied to Bitcoin by its critics on a daily basis and the thing of value continues to possess value regardless of your personal opinion of it.

[franky1]

1. you dont need to bloat a blockchain with the actual file data.. thats what hashs are for

2. you can create a bitcoin lock. and then referece that as value on a subnetwork(one designed better than some subnetwork designs thus far) and then put all that hash ID+meta data+any dream and fantasy you like on that subnetwork, which has some consensus chain of file hash accountability and verification and also accountability(again unlike some shoddy subnetworks designed today)

3. i know for years dev politics has been that payment transaction data should only consist of the 1mb block 'base'(weight/4 cludge) wall but then have 3mb of space for bloaty scripts and signature mass. but that does not mean its then default acceptable to bloat blocks upto 4mb with the said crap. especially if that 4mb weight rule then depreciates how many payment transactions can then be used in the 1mb base if there were say just 20 meme files of 150kb each

4. the cludgy code of vbyte/weight was meant to be a temporary thing that should have been removed years ago to allow full transaction space of 4m to increase transaction count. it was not to just bloat up blocks with 3mb of crap non payment data

5. idiots that think we should just lay down, go sleep and pretend it didnt happen to then allow 4mb of bloaty non payment data which consist of maybe 20 transactions of some meme. those idiots need to be the ones that go quietly into the night and forget themselves

6. suggesting "it doesnt matter" becasue after downloading people can strip/prune..
well it actually does matter becasue full nodes would need to archive data(in a scenario of foolishly holding full files of memes) to then seed to leacher fool nodes that would then prune/strip at the fool node peer layer group

7. bitcoin should not be letting in bloat of non payment data that is 3x of payment data. if people want bloaty crap. do it on a subnetwork. just make that subnetwork actually function, have a real niche and actual utility (unlike certain subnetworks that failed to met expectations and left us waiting years for progress)

7. bitcoin should not become the bloaty meme file library just to offramp users that want btc payment being told to go elsewhere.. it should be the other way round

[BlackHatCoiner]

They could be used to describe anything of value that somebody doesn't like

Yeah, I'm definitely not going to derail this thread with this debate again. Just a question of mine though: What's your reaction if lots of people you trust don't recognize value in something you do?

[teosanru]

Will Ordinals and NFTs Destroy Bitcoin?
www.youtube.com/watch?v=mJr8yUf3dYk


Energy usage of bitcoin is high enough as it is and should be reserved for more worthwhile applications. Transferring around monkey jpegs and/or porn images on the network is a pointless waste of energy. The congestion and bloat this would create will lead to higher fees for users, clog and slow the network with useless traffic that can potentially compromise security with overcomplexity and bloat. Bitcoin should remain true to its core mission and principles-- the most sound money ever created and greatest store of value.

Once you try to be too many things and try to please everyone, you just become another stupid altcoin.
Leave the idiots to play around with their ethereum and solana, monkey pics, etc.

Energy usage is still a very first world problem, i mean a user might not be directly impacted by it. But the biggest problem is the scaling of the chain. Doing such things will put unnecessary pressure on already a very crowded chain which might become even slower and expensive. Obviously it makes zero sense to bring this NFT shit in bitcoin chain. I remember how bad the Eth chain went during that crypto kitties saga.

[Artemis3]

I agree with kicking NFTs out, that's what the altcoins are for, go pollute elsewhere and leave Bitcoin for actual transactions. Honestly, it looks like a type of attack. This is going to be abused no doubt.

[nutildah]

Just a question of mine though: What's your reaction if lots of people you trust don't recognize value in something you do?

That's been my entire adulthood, since well before cryptocurrency was a thing. So my reaction is to not care and continue doing it for myself and the people who do find value in it.

Sometimes it just takes time for them to come around. Nobody recognized the value of the early stuff I did with Bitcoin and Dogecoin. They do now.

[franky1]

I remember how bad the Eth chain went during that crypto kitties saga.

good example. which is why ether then done coloured coins and nft on subnetworks

[pooya87]

That's not even to mention how useless the NFT idea is as a whole.

I have to chime in and disagree with you here. While I agree that the whole NFT hype bubble is ridiculous, I won't say it is useless. I think NFTs have immense potential in the music industry for artists. The artist usually receives less than 50% of revenue from using streaming avenues and this is being a best case scenario. For selling their music, they receive less than 20% of the revenue and that does not include the costs they outlay on production. I think for music artists, cutting out the middlemen is a great use-case of NFTs. For art it has some use case too, such as the rights to ownership.

The problem you are describing is about centralized platforms and the companies behind them that are taking advantage to make money. The solution to this is to publish their music on a decentralized platform and cut the middle man as you mentioned in the last line. Something like OpenBazaar.

But using NFT is not doing either of those things! With an NFT the artist is still publishing their music on a centralized platform and only creates a token which they claim is linked to that music! So the middle man is still there, they just add an extra step to make additional money by selling an unrelated and useless token.
In simple terms, the music is not the token. The token is just a hash/script or basically an arbitrary data that can not be used itself. Hence why the token itself is useless.