On Ordinals: Where do you stand?

[fillippone]

Unstoppable money or unstoppable spam? Who is willing to pay more to dominate the mempool?

Well RBF has been a thing for years, it just has been enabled by default when it was opt in before. But, having to redo the transaction with a higher fee should be an exception, and not a norm.

I want to see how long this second (post Ordinals) 1 sat/b transaction takes, first one took a whole week.

Unstoppable spam is going to win.

Cannot agree with that.
Firstly what is spam? All the transactions in the mempoool are valid transactions; some are spam. What gets inserted in a book cannot be considered spam, as they paid market fees.
You might not like it, but it's a valid and fee-paying transaction cost.
Of course, fees are elevated, and the associated cost will be higher, spam attack funds will soon be depleted, and the attack will extinguish itself.

[1714504387]

1714504387

[1714504387]

1714504387

[1714504387]

1714504387

[n0nce]

the whole ploy is not to have a cheap functional decentralised payment network. but a middleman payment network with an expensive to use vault/reserve value network
which only the elitists can afford to use becasue they are only moving large amounts

i don't want to send my money on some level 2 network. if i'm doing that, i might as well be using an altcoin not bitcoin right? because level 2 = bad.

Not sure whether you're mocking franky or if you need a primer on Lightning. If you have any questions, feel free to ask in the respective threads.
The Lightning Network FAQ
{Table} All Lightning Network Threads In One Place

Unstoppable spam is going to win.

Cannot agree with that.
Firstly what is spam? All the transactions in the mempoool are valid transactions; some are spam. What gets inserted in a book cannot be considered spam, as they paid market fees.

I brought it up before, but by that definition, spam does not exist. Classic email spam is not spam, because those emails are valid emails? Spammy web ads are not spam, because they consist of valid HTML?
We typically categorize spam through content and not through whether something uses the technology correctly. If I send myself Bitcoin over and over again, just to fill the mempool, that could (should? you be the judge on that) be considered 'spamming the network'.

or simply repeatedly sending the same message to the same user

[larry_vw_1955]

I want to see how long this second (post Ordinals) 1 sat/b transaction takes, first one took a whole week.

does anyone know why this person keeps uploading tons of the same image?
https://ordinals.com/inscription/f378a7375771019b4fd99245be37d835c6b24c3b999dc229c6d753547bf0eaaei0

it must be a collection of like 10,000 identical pieces of garbage.   he's sucking up all the 1 sat/b transactions for sure! it would be nice if bitcoin had a feature where someone could do another transaction with a higher amount to remove someone else's junk from the blockchain. that way people would be forced to pay a fair price for uploading their junk and you really can't call stuff like this anything but that...

[thecodebear]

So I don't really understand how these ordinals work - something about like each satoshi is a unique NFT in the ordinals project and what they use the data of the transaction to hold NFT data or something?


But is there a possible non-hard fork solution to not allowing spam like this? Like a data cap on transactions? Or would that just be a bad idea for other reasons?



Anyway, I just saw the link to the ordinals website on this thread and clicked on it and I'm not too worried. It's just a bunch of dumb pictures haha. I very much doubt people are gonna bother messing around with this stuff for very long. And anyway all the NFT people are too busy with Ethereum and random altcoins, most of them don't even own any Bitcoin in the first place. I'm guessing this is just a little fad because it just came out and it'll disappear eventually because who the hell cares about stupid NFT pictures in the Bitcoin community?

[larry_vw_1955]

So I don't really understand how these ordinals work - something about like each satoshi is a unique NFT in the ordinals project and what they use the data of the transaction to hold NFT data or something?

how many satoshis are there? that's how many nfts there can be in bitcoin.

But is there a possible non-hard fork solution to not allowing spam like this? Like a data cap on transactions? Or would that just be a bad idea for other reasons?

franky already discussed this some i think and if i understood him correctly it would not be a hard fork...

Anyway, I just saw the link to the ordinals website on this thread and clicked on it and I'm not too worried. It's just a bunch of dumb pictures haha. I very much doubt people are gonna bother messing around with this stuff for very long. And anyway all the NFT people are too busy with Ethereum and random altcoins, most of them don't even own any Bitcoin in the first place. I'm guessing this is just a little fad because it just came out and it'll disappear eventually because who the hell cares about stupid NFT pictures in the Bitcoin community?

i mean why would someone waste their money buying a dumb picture on ethereum when it's not even stored "on-chain" ?

you could even store your "members-only" stories from medium.com on bitcoin if you wanted to. but then people could read it for free. 

[franky1]

it must be a collection of like 10,000 identical pieces of garbage.

its simple
a guy makes 1 meme and tries to sell it to himself for XX to set a price he thinks an idiot will pay
..they dont pay
so then he thinks if he caan sell 10,000 similar images for 0.00X each he can then make the same total

meanwhile what he is doing is bloating up the space which could have been used for normal payments

as for others saying "it will just go away lets do nothing. if in doubt just pay more to scare them away"

the actual result is what larry just linked. people dont just go away after dropping 1 image that doesnt sell.. instead they multiply up and start throwing in thousands of images

as for the "do nothing" request of others. well sooner or later more abuse becomes more abuse. thus HOPING it will go away doesnt happen

bitcoin is code. it sets rules trying to suggest to not use code or set rules and instead have a HOPE network goes against all logic

bitcoin is not based on hope system
its based on a coded rule system of united consent.
trying to tell people walk away, dont do anything, dont try to stop bad things. is not the way to go

[thecodebear]

So I don't really understand how these ordinals work - something about like each satoshi is a unique NFT in the ordinals project and what they use the data of the transaction to hold NFT data or something?

how many satoshis are there? that's how many nfts there can be in bitcoin.

But is there a possible non-hard fork solution to not allowing spam like this? Like a data cap on transactions? Or would that just be a bad idea for other reasons?

franky already discussed this some i think and if i understood him correctly it would not be a hard fork...

Anyway, I just saw the link to the ordinals website on this thread and clicked on it and I'm not too worried. It's just a bunch of dumb pictures haha. I very much doubt people are gonna bother messing around with this stuff for very long. And anyway all the NFT people are too busy with Ethereum and random altcoins, most of them don't even own any Bitcoin in the first place. I'm guessing this is just a little fad because it just came out and it'll disappear eventually because who the hell cares about stupid NFT pictures in the Bitcoin community?

i mean why would someone waste their money buying a dumb picture on ethereum when it's not even stored "on-chain" ?

you could even store your "members-only" stories from medium.com on bitcoin if you wanted to. but then people could read it for free.  

Well I mean NFTs on ETH and altcoins is part of the whole speculative gamble of that stuff - buy random stuff and hope to get rich quick. The Bitcoin community has moved beyond that now. So I'm saying I'd be surprised if there were very many people in the Bitcoin community that are interested in that sort of stuff on Bitcoin, especially when Ethereum and other smart contract chains already have those communities and markets, even if the way NFTs are handling are worse on those chains. These NFT communities don't care about dumb pictures not being stored on-chain, otherwise they wouldn't be into NFTs in the first place, they just care about selling NFTs for a profit as long as the fad lasts (or lasted as it has mostly collapsed already). For people into NFTs ETH is the market you want to be in because that's where NFTs are still sort of popular, Bitcoin would not be a good choice so I gotta imagine the number of people involved with ordinals has gotta be very small and will probably diminish with time.

[nutildah]

its simple
a guy makes 1 meme and tries to sell it to himself for XX to set a price he thinks an idiot will pay
..they dont pay
so then he thinks if he caan sell 10,000 similar images for 0.00X each he can then make the same total

wut

do you have the slightest shred of proof this is what is actually happening or your source is once again your ass, per usual

[franky1]

@nutty
try to read.. try to learn
if you need to be spoonfed then you have not done any learning at all

if your read. even posts in this topic you will see others saying about one guy posting 10,000 memes

such as i was replying to a guy  that was asking why some guy was posting a tonne of memes
the answer is logical and common sense

its the same in real life art
if an artist cant sell 1 painting to become a millionaire. he instead sells 10,000 for $100 each to be a millionaire

or sells 1 million prints(posters) for $1
its basic economics

i thought you would be proud of an idiot trying sell/trade crap memes. seeing as you love the idea of a meme market

because the only other conclusion is that its just crap dead weight data they just want to spam bloat the blocks for no other reason than just to spam bloat.. something you dont want to think is the purpose

so you pick the reason

[pooya87]

does anyone know why this person keeps uploading tons of the same image?

Maybe they are trying to prove there is no "uniqueness" despite what the attackers are advertising The Ordinals Attack as.

it would be nice if bitcoin had a feature where someone could do another transaction with a higher amount to remove someone else's junk from the blockchain.

That is similar to basically what the fee market does. Nodes all have a finite amount of memory to keep unconfirmed transactions in, when they surpass their limit they start dropping transactions with lowest fee.
Although you don't remove the junk from blockchain, just the mempool and until they rebroadcast the same junk or the junk with higher fee.

[nutildah]

ok so no, you don't have the slightest bit of evidence to back up your claims. thanks for answering truthfully.

[Hispo]

I started a new 1 sat/b actual Bitcoin transaction yesterday. Lets see how many days the current spam wave will make me wait... Remember, it used to be 2~12 hours before Ordinals and friends invaded.

I would have set that transaction at 2 sat/bit at least, considering I have been noticing some important accumulation and delay on those that have opted for 1 sat/bit. Nonetheless, I am confident enough that this weekend we could see a significant drop in the mempool memory and the cheapest transactions could go through without much problem.

If there is no reduction, then next week would be one of high fees, similar to what we witnessed in mid February.  

This year, I believe we will truly start to understand the point of RBF and the fee market. It will not be the perfect situation, especially for those coffee-transactions, but with censorship-resistant, unstoppable money will come a price. I'm starting to understand that if it's not Ordinals, it's going to be another situation that there's more demand for block space. Maybe if there's more demand for payments in Bitcoin perhaps?

I believe one needs to understand the point of view of Artemis3 and people who agree this is spam. If we talk of Bitcoin as "free money" or a P2P payment system. Then where do the NFTs/ordinals find their place in this concept? Or isn't Bitcoin to be a tool to transfer value rather than a decentralized storage for thousands of pictures?

While I agree RBF is useful, one should not expect it to be an ultimate solution if one wants to pay something in a reasonable period of time. Specially in countries where each dollar counts.

I am very curious on what satoshi would think about this situation.

[franky1]

these ordinal junk are not fit for purpose as "nft" they dont have any representation of ownership in their recipients transaction.

its just dead data that stays in the creators transaction with nothing to represent it in the blockchain data when "spent"

ordinal meme spam has no place in bitcoin as it serves no blockchain function but to bloat it up into a meme library

..
as for those saying the rest of the network just has to "pay more"
that does not work as many examples show that these meme spam transactions pay less than the average and in some cases no fee at all. so no matter what other pay doesnt change the pools selection decisions. becasue they are not selecting to add these meme spam tx due to any rational fee proposition

yep many meme spam tx pay less than 1sat/byte and yes there are a few that pay ZERO

https://www.blockchain.com/explorer/transactions/btc/0301e0480b374b32851a9462db29dc19fe830a7f7d7a88b81612b9d42099c0ae

 3,938,383 Bytes - fee: ZERO

[larry_vw_1955]

these ordinal junk are not fit for purpose as "nft" they dont have any representation of ownership in their recipients transaction.

its just dead data that stays in the creators transaction with nothing to represent it in the blockchain data when "spent"

that's because the whole thing is just a creative use of a loophole that probably shouldn't have existed in the first place. you gotta wonder why the devs haven't shown up here to address the issue.  

ordinal meme spam has no place in bitcoin as it serves no blockchain function but to bloat it up into a meme library

you would think the devs would understand that point of view and do something about it. why did the witness need to be so big anyway?

https://www.blockchain.com/explorer/transactions/btc/0301e0480b374b32851a9462db29dc19fe830a7f7d7a88b81612b9d42099c0ae

looks like blockchain.com has to store this nft data twice. once in the witness and then once as the decoded jpeg so they can show the images on their website...so they're disc space is getting eaten up even more than bitcoin nodes is.  

3,938,383 Bytes - fee: ZERO

it costed them cpu cycles to do the proof of work to get that block into the blockchain though. so it wasn't free. yes i guess they got the block reward but they didn't include peoples transactions so they missed out on whatever those transaction fees would have been...

[franky1]

3,938,383 Bytes - fee: ZERO

it costed them cpu cycles to do the proof of work to get that block into the blockchain though. so it wasn't free. yes i guess they got the block reward but they didn't include peoples transactions so they missed out on whatever those transaction fees would have been...

what it costs a POOL stratum owner. vs a asic owner are 2 separate things

asics do the PoW and they never see the transaction data. it doesnt matter if the block is 0.0001mb or 4mb an asic processes the same data length

a pool stratum owner. only needs to manage 1 sig operation and no validation checks on the dead weight
this a big difference to handling 2000 transactions with thousands of sig operations and validation checks

[pooya87]

you would think the devs would understand that point of view and do something about it. why did the witness need to be so big anyway?

Historically the bitcoin consensus rules about things that aren't checked have been loose (they still are) for example your output script can be literary anything like an invalid script or any arbitrary data of any size like a picture that is not even a script.
This is a good thing because it allows future expansion through soft forks but also it could lead to abuse of the system and spam attacks.

Over the years to prevent such abuse (eg. placing arbitrary junk in your scriptpub) more and more standard rules were introduced where the nodes rejected such non-standard transactions from their mempool and refused to relay them hence it successfully prevented spam.

When it comes to SegWit, the rules are flexible in many places that allows future expansions but only some of them were prevented as non-standard while others fell through the cracks and helped creation of attacks such as Ordinals.

[franky1]

you would think the devs would understand that point of view and do something about it. why did the witness need to be so big anyway?

Historically the bitcoin consensus rules about things that aren't checked have been loose (they still are) for example your output script can be literary anything like an invalid script or any arbitrary data of any size like a picture that is not even a script.
This is a good thing because it allows future expansion through soft forks but also it could lead to abuse of the system and spam attacks.

historically pre 2017 there was only ONE opcode that allowed things unchecked
it was called "anyonecanspend" but even that had a byte limit

it was the 2017 events that opened that up

[mindrust]

I know there's already a thread on Ordinals in the Development & Technical Discussion board but it's more on the technical side of things.

Since this is a very technical matter, I don't think any common pleb should have an opinion on that. It is because they can't understand what an "ordinal" is. If they can't understand it, how are they going to give an opinion about it? If they do it anyway, then their opinions will be worthless just like most of you that posted their opinions in this thread. I bet only a few of you actually understood what this is about and how it is going to affect bitcoin.

The general people don't care about these stuff. We care about the charts. Just tell us when moon, when lambo. Don't give us that boring crap.

Alright here is my take:

Ordinals... I stand where I always stood. As long as ordinals and cardinals can get along well, I am all for it.  I don't care if it is an ordinal who sits on the throne or a cardinal. The devs will know the best. I trust them.

Like it?  

[Wind_FURY]

I started a new 1 sat/b actual Bitcoin transaction yesterday. Lets see how many days the current spam wave will make me wait... Remember, it used to be 2~12 hours before Ordinals and friends invaded.

I would have set that transaction at 2 sat/bit at least, considering I have been noticing some important accumulation and delay on those that have opted for 1 sat/bit. Nonetheless, I am confident enough that this weekend we could see a significant drop in the mempool memory and the cheapest transactions could go through without much problem.

If there is no reduction, then next week would be one of high fees, similar to what we witnessed in mid February.  

This year, I believe we will truly start to understand the point of RBF and the fee market. It will not be the perfect situation, especially for those coffee-transactions, but with censorship-resistant, unstoppable money will come a price. I'm starting to understand that if it's not Ordinals, it's going to be another situation that there's more demand for block space. Maybe if there's more demand for payments in Bitcoin perhaps?

I believe one needs to understand the point of view of Artemis3 and people who agree this is spam. If we talk of Bitcoin as "free money" or a P2P payment system. Then where do the NFTs/ordinals find their place in this concept? Or isn't Bitcoin to be a tool to transfer value rather than a decentralized storage for thousands of pictures?

My personal opinion is, we may have our own opinions about it, positive or negative, BUT calling for its censorship is going against the ethos/philosophy that founded Bitcoin, and brought it where it currently is = Permissionlessness/Censorship-Resistance.

But the problem = it opens an attack vector for self-sustaining network congestion.

While I agree RBF is useful, one should not expect it to be an ultimate solution if one wants to pay something in a reasonable period of time. Specially in countries where each dollar counts.

I wasn't debating the fact that it will be expensive, or some users will be priced out. I was merely saying that censorship-resistance and decentralization come with a price. Are you willing to pay for it? Or do you want PayPal?

[BlackHatCoiner]

it was called "anyonecanspend" but even that had a byte limit

You mean a standardness limit? Protocol rules only got stricter since then. You don't have any advantage other than standardness-related.

But the problem = it opens an attack vector for self-sustaining network congestion.

What attack vector? The only problem Ordinals create (or bring, it is years created) is higher fees for Bitcoin users. It pretty much works the other way for the miners, who're the ones who sustain the network.