On Ordinals: Where do you stand?

[franky1]

NFT on LN is also a failure.. again the proof of ownership /transfer lacks. yep you cant prove ownership in LN
there is a major point of blockchain.. its not just data store, its also the proof that cannot be edited of ownership and transfer
there was a big problem cypherpunks were hitting their heads against for decades before bitcoin was invented. and seems the ordinal adoration brigade and LN supporters do not recognise bitcoin and blockchain purpose.


casey can change which output his ordinal process follows, without messing with data. because his "transfer"(lack of) of such is not dependant on bitcoin code or cryptography or proof in hard data within the outputs to milestone the movements.. meaning that his ordinals do not use the blockchain function of proving the transfer in an uneditable way

there are ways to prove it but casey is not using it, so its a double fail

but the fact that he and his fans adore using blockchain as just a dead weight data store. is the facepalming part. those memes have no value, have no true ownership control and thus are just a waste of space done purely to force everyone else to pay more just to reliably stay in mempools long enough for mining pools to pick up and add to blocks

adding bloat to reduce the number of transactions that fit then charging more per transaction is the complete opposite of an efficient payment system and those idiots who love doing this are the ones that dont care about bitcoin. and yes ordinals is an attack because it uses a crappy cludgy backdoor to be added into bitcoin blocks without being verified as data fit for bitcoins purpose

[1714504892]

1714504892

[1714504892]

1714504892

[larry_vw_1955]

adding bloat to reduce the number of transactions that fit then charging more per transaction is the complete opposite of an efficient payment system

from the outside looking in, this situation makes bitcoin look very bad. since presumably it was designed just to be a way to send digital cash. when people find out that it's being used to store different types of monkeys, it makes bitcoin lose credibility. at least to me.

[franky1]

adding bloat to reduce the number of transactions that fit then charging more per transaction is the complete opposite of an efficient payment system

from the outside looking in, this situation makes bitcoin look very bad. since presumably it was designed just to be a way to send digital cash. when people find out that it's being used to store different types of monkeys, it makes bitcoin lose credibility. at least to me.

yep that too
and that those monkeys are not worth anything but scammed to appear as worth more per monkey than 1btc (triple facepalm)

[larry_vw_1955]

yep that too
and that those monkeys are not worth anything but scammed to appear as worth more per monkey than 1btc (triple facepalm)

i'm just concerned that people new to bitcoin aren't going to take it seriously with all these nft monkeys floating around... we should be presenting a better image to the public at large if we want bitcoin to be adopted by everyday individuals. and selling them on the benefits of transferring cash digitally but if they get wind of all these monkeys increasing their transaction fees, they might be disappointed. bitcoin's dirty little secret. unfortunately that's what ordinals has become.

[franky1]

yep that too
and that those monkeys are not worth anything but scammed to appear as worth more per monkey than 1btc (triple facepalm)

i'm just concerned that people new to bitcoin aren't going to take it seriously with all these nft monkeys floating around... we should be presenting a better image to the public at large if we want bitcoin to be adopted by everyday individuals. and selling them on the benefits of transferring cash digitally but if they get wind of all these monkeys increasing their transaction fees, they might be disappointed. bitcoin's dirty little secret. unfortunately that's what ordinals has become.

yes and no

trying to over hype bitcoin by hiding the issues as dirty secrets by trying to make bitcoin sound like perfection.. makes people think its a "if it sounds too good to be true, it probably isnt good" so some wont use it just from overhyping it,
but if others then use it and then notice a few things off.. is a faster way to lose them too

however being upfront and warning them of the issues and realistic expectations along with all the benefits allows them to make responsible decisions and not get surprised later

i see too many idiots try doing overhyped utopian promise style PR campaigns for silly systems, they have no clue at all about how other people think and what other people want to actually know about something they want to invest in. they are too greedily interested in just recruiting people in just to grab value from them on those other systems and not caring about long term consequences of that person

..
what you realise from just this forum is. the idiots of this forum think they need to be on salespitch snake oil salesmen speech mode telling newbies the utopian dreams of different services, niche systems and such. but what they never realise is the newbies on this forum are actually on this forum because they have already heard about bitcoin. thus no sales pitch needed. the newbies are actually here to find more information. they want to know the risks and features.. the benefits and even the pitfalls so that they can get educated properly. and not lied to and overpromised things and then end up losing value due to those lies

a fair balance of facts is best. both pro and con. then people can make up their own minds and delve deeper doing their own research. rather then being spoonfed dreams while being taken for a ride

[DooMAD]

i'm just concerned that people new to bitcoin aren't going to take it seriously with all these nft monkeys floating around... we should be presenting a better image to the public at large if we want bitcoin to be adopted by everyday individuals. and selling them on the benefits of transferring cash digitally but if they get wind of all these monkeys increasing their transaction fees, they might be disappointed.

Or, in a world becoming increasingly more restrictive on personal freedoms and with privacy at a near all-time-low, maybe some people will see the upside of this situation.  Here is a network where freedom reigns supreme. 

Certain people demand that we shouldn't need Core's approval to introduce new things.  Now we find ourselves in a situation where that's exactly the case and yet those same people are throwing a shitfit.

[franky1]

i'm just concerned that people new to bitcoin aren't going to take it seriously with all these nft monkeys floating around... we should be presenting a better image to the public at large if we want bitcoin to be adopted by everyday individuals. and selling them on the benefits of transferring cash digitally but if they get wind of all these monkeys increasing their transaction fees, they might be disappointed.

Or, in a world becoming increasingly more restrictive on personal freedoms and with privacy at a near all-time-low, maybe some people will see the upside of this situation.  Here is a network where freedom reigns supreme.  

Certain people demand that we shouldn't need Core's approval to introduce new things.  Now we find ourselves in a situation where that's exactly the case and yet those same people are throwing a shitfit.

bitcoin HAD tight rules to protect people. it also had tighter rules to stop core from reigning supreme. core added a hole that does nothing more than allows bloat and loosening of the rules and now they want to pretend they are not involved to avoid closing their own bug

if you think adding bloat monkey memes(breaking bitcoin purpose) is a feature. then you dont understand bitcoins purpose
and funnily enough you love cores moderation censorship that stops random people changing the rules. you stupidly think casey filling in bloat is freedom. no because the rules are still controlled by core even though they now dont want to fix the rules they loosened.

even luke JR cant even introduce a fix into core due to the moderation censorship rejecting any attempts by anyone trying to fix the hole

users can USE the existing rules of the protocol. but its now core and only core and their tribe of corporation sponsors that get to control the rules.. and no caseys project is not a protocol. it a weak assed app

but if you think adding crap into the blockchain unrelated to bitcoin payments is part of bitcoin. well you might aswell throw altcoin tx data and all the social security numbers of mixer users and their photos into the witness area and have multiple coins logged on bitcoins blockchain and totally ruin the monetary supply available on the network

there were clear reasons why bitcoin code was suppose to VALIDATE data and fit a purpose. but now having so many validation bypass "isvalid"(op_success) crap is not what makes bitcoin great, it makes it worse

[ABCbits]

But until now, NFT on LN (with protocol such as RGB and Tro), NFT on sidechain (such as RSK) or Ordinal data stored else-where (such as side-chain layer and BitTorrent) are mostly ignored by people who are NFT enthusiast and own some Bitcoin.

exactly. you can offer people a million alternatives to using ordinals but they won't use it. they want their monkeys being stored on the bitcoin blockchain. and nothing else will suffice. they dont' care about why using alternatives might unburden the bitcoin blockchain. not at all. 

Forget about reduce burden on Bitcoin blockchain, they also either don't know or don't care about cheaper cost to create NFT, embed it's data and transfer NFT ownership.

yep that too
and that those monkeys are not worth anything but scammed to appear as worth more per monkey than 1btc (triple facepalm)

i'm just concerned that people new to bitcoin aren't going to take it seriously with all these nft monkeys floating around... we should be presenting a better image to the public at large if we want bitcoin to be adopted by everyday individuals. and selling them on the benefits of transferring cash digitally but if they get wind of all these monkeys increasing their transaction fees, they might be disappointed. bitcoin's dirty little secret. unfortunately that's what ordinals has become.

Most bitcoin wallet and service don't really show statistic of Ordinal transaction though. So user probably only found out if they curious about NFT or read about news which claim Bitcoin blockchain is clogged by NFT's data.

[Wind_FURY]

NFT on LN is also a failure.. again the proof of ownership /transfer lacks. yep you cant prove ownership in LN
there is a major point of blockchain.. its not just data store, its also the proof that cannot be edited of ownership and transfer
there was a big problem cypherpunks were hitting their heads against for decades before bitcoin was invented. and seems the ordinal adoration brigade and LN supporters do not recognise bitcoin and blockchain purpose.

You make me laugh, franky. How did LN+NFT come into the debate?

casey can change which output his ordinal process follows, without messing with data. because his "transfer"(lack of) of such is not dependant on bitcoin code or cryptography or proof in hard data within the outputs to milestone the movements.. meaning that his ordinals do not use the blockchain function of proving the transfer in an uneditable way

there are ways to prove it but casey is not using it, so its a double fail

 

Are there more technical users in the topic who can ELI-5 for stupid non-technical people like me?

but the fact that he and his fans adore using blockchain as just a dead weight data store. is the facepalming part. those memes have no value, have no true ownership control and thus are just a waste of space done purely to force everyone else to pay more just to reliably stay in mempools long enough for mining pools to pick up and add to blocks

adding bloat to reduce the number of transactions that fit then charging more per transaction is the complete opposite of an efficient payment system and those idiots who love doing this are the ones that dont care about bitcoin. and yes ordinals is an attack because it uses a crappy cludgy backdoor to be added into bitcoin blocks without being verified as data fit for bitcoins purpose

I agree that it's adding more useless bloat. I agree that those memes, dick pics, and fart sounds should not be in the Bitcoin blockchain. I agree that Ordinals can be used as another attack vector. BUT what I can't agree with are people saying, "Ordinals is an attack/exploit".

Be reminded that Ordinals, from the Bitcoin protocol's viewpoint, are valid transactions that follow the consensus rules. You may have your opinions, but you can't misinform the community with what's simply isn't true.

[franky1]

NFT on LN is also a failure.. again the proof of ownership /transfer lacks. yep you cant prove ownership in LN
there is a major point of blockchain.. its not just data store, its also the proof that cannot be edited of ownership and transfer
there was a big problem cypherpunks were hitting their heads against for decades before bitcoin was invented. and seems the ordinal adoration brigade and LN supporters do not recognise bitcoin and blockchain purpose.

You make me laugh, franky. How did LN+NFT come into the debate?

casey can change which output his ordinal process follows, without messing with data. because his "transfer"(lack of) of such is not dependant on bitcoin code or cryptography or proof in hard data within the outputs to milestone the movements.. meaning that his ordinals do not use the blockchain function of proving the transfer in an uneditable way

there are ways to prove it but casey is not using it, so its a double fail

 

Are there more technical users in the topic who can ELI-5 for stupid non-technical people like me?

but the fact that he and his fans adore using blockchain as just a dead weight data store. is the facepalming part. those memes have no value, have no true ownership control and thus are just a waste of space done purely to force everyone else to pay more just to reliably stay in mempools long enough for mining pools to pick up and add to blocks

adding bloat to reduce the number of transactions that fit then charging more per transaction is the complete opposite of an efficient payment system and those idiots who love doing this are the ones that dont care about bitcoin. and yes ordinals is an attack because it uses a crappy cludgy backdoor to be added into bitcoin blocks without being verified as data fit for bitcoins purpose

I agree that it's adding more useless bloat. I agree that those memes, dick pics, and fart sounds should not be in the Bitcoin blockchain. I agree that Ordinals can be used as another attack vector. BUT what I can't agree with are people saying, "Ordinals is an attack/exploit".

Be reminded that Ordinals, from the Bitcoin protocol's viewpoint, are valid transactions that follow the consensus rules. You may have your opinions, but you can't misinform the community with what's simply isn't true.

bitcoin. binary data. numbers. math does not count sats the way you think casey prescribes
economics logic, math, common sense shows different to what casey says.. its not a franky opinion. its a data fact you can research and see

just do so at data level not PR campaign buddy eli-5 spoonfeed level

casey project of adding in memes into the dead weight area of a transaction uses a trojan exploit of an opcode(of many new opcodes added recently) to just auto treat as passed/success without validating it to any protocol format of requirement. its blindly passed rather than having to meet a requirement
learn the difference

for instance a legacy signatures have to meet requirements such as length limit. such as having a relationship to an input and the message hash calculations of signature proofs etc. a meme does not need to meet any format or standard or requirement its just blindly let passed due to an exploit

[larry_vw_1955]

I agree that it's adding more useless bloat. I agree that those memes, dick pics, and fart sounds should not be in the Bitcoin blockchain. I agree that Ordinals can be used as another attack vector. BUT what I can't agree with are people saying, "Ordinals is an attack/exploit".

if it can be used as an attack vector and people are using it that way then that pretty much means it is an attack/exploit.  so i'm not sure what distinction you trying to make.

Be reminded that Ordinals, from the Bitcoin protocol's viewpoint, are valid transactions that follow the consensus rules.

so was the inflation bug but that needed to be fixed otherwise bitcoin would have been destroyed. sometimes consensus rules have to be fixed to prevent unintended things from happening. 

[ABCbits]

I agree that it's adding more useless bloat. I agree that those memes, dick pics, and fart sounds should not be in the Bitcoin blockchain. I agree that Ordinals can be used as another attack vector. BUT what I can't agree with are people saying, "Ordinals is an attack/exploit".

if it can be used as an attack vector and people are using it that way then that pretty much means it is an attack/exploit.  so i'm not sure what distinction you trying to make.

Be reminded that Ordinals, from the Bitcoin protocol's viewpoint, are valid transactions that follow the consensus rules.

so was the inflation bug but that needed to be fixed otherwise bitcoin would have been destroyed. sometimes consensus rules have to be fixed to prevent unintended things from happening. 

IMO it's not good comparison when inflation bug is caused by implementation bug on Bitcoin full node software[1]. Meanwhile those who write BIP 342 intentionally remove limit which exist on previous type of Bitcoin script[2].

[1] web.nvd.nist.gov/view/vuln/detail?vulnId=CVE-2010-5139
[2] https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0342.mediawiki#resource-limits

[DooMAD]

I agree that it's adding more useless bloat. I agree that those memes, dick pics, and fart sounds should not be in the Bitcoin blockchain. I agree that Ordinals can be used as another attack vector. BUT what I can't agree with are people saying, "Ordinals is an attack/exploit".

if it can be used as an attack vector and people are using it that way then that pretty much means it is an attack/exploit.  so i'm not sure what distinction you trying to make.

By the same logic, if a car can be used to mow down a crowd of people in a terrorist attack, should we treat all motorists as hostile entities?  Would you introduce a law that states a road can't be used like this due to the inconvenience it may cause to other road users?  It's a question of 'fair use'.  Some people genuinely believe (even if it's completely ridiculous to us) that these stupid pictures have value.  Their intent may not be to attack Bitcoin, so you can't just leap to that conclusion simply because you disagree with what they are doing.

[larry_vw_1955]

IMO it's not good comparison when inflation bug is caused by implementation bug on Bitcoin full node software[1].

you're probably right. the inflation bug was not a consensus rule. 

Meanwhile those who write BIP 342 intentionally remove limit which exist on previous type of Bitcoin script[2].

but why would they do that? i wonder if any of them considered a use case where it could be used as data storage and were they ok with that? i just dont' get it. maybe they didn't think something like ordinals could sprout up to take advantage of that and become so popular so they kind of opened up a pandoras box looking back on it? maybe that's what they think now or maybe they ok with it still i guess we'll never know. but if we look at their rationale here below it seems like they were oblivious to what is happening now:


Why is a limit on script size no longer needed? Since there is no scriptCode directly included in the signature hash (only indirectly through a precomputable tapleaf hash), the CPU time spent on a signature check is no longer proportional to the size of the script being executed.

By the same logic, if a car can be used to mow down a crowd of people in a terrorist attack, should we treat all motorists as hostile entities? 

no but i'd say to still use defensive driving.

Would you introduce a law that states a road can't be used like this (https://youtu.be/3yDjaj2zP9U?t=5Cool due to the inconvenience it may cause to other road users? 

i dont know how often something like that happens but i don't think other motorists would be too happy being stuck behind that thing. maybe they need to compensate affected motorists stuck behind it by handing out some money. 

It's a question of 'fair use'.  Some people genuinely believe (even if it's completely ridiculous to us) that these stupid pictures have value.  Their intent may not be to attack Bitcoin, so you can't just leap to that conclusion simply because you disagree with what they are doing.

well i think it's more of a question of "intended use" did the developers intend to allow this type of use case for bitcoin? if so then they should put it in the bip to admit it. if not then they should patch the hole. being transparent is important. it's not enough to be open source...

[franky1]

if state laws say highways should be used by cars and motorcyclists at certain speeds, trucks to a certain weight/height limit, driven by responsible people following the highway code.. and then tanks driven by monkeys travelling down the road would usually get state patrol involved to question why they are using the highway causing issues for other drivers.. but then we have doomad saying well lets have no highway code and let everything imaginable use the highway including monkeys driving semi trucks.. get rid of state patrol, have no rules

rational people would look at doomad and realise doomad is the idiot who does not realise the purpose and safety rules of the highway code

here in the UK pedestrians and bicyclists are not allowed to use the motorway. but doomads mindset is to say that motoways should from 2021+ allow pedestrians to stand in the middle of motorways holding up traffic causing congestion and delaying transport. yea he will say its not a terrorist attack. but the reality is that it is a attack on the transport network. just nor "terrorist" one. and no we should not just leave it up to the petrol fuel market to decide what people should use the motoway for.. the whole point of the highway code is because the fuel market does not help decide what is safe and purposeful for the motorway

doomad doesnt want efficient highways he wants rule breaking so that when he (a rule breaker) gets caught he can shout "but everyone else breaks the rules so dont write me a ticket, let me go officer, im just like everyone else"

he doesnt think of consequences or even actions and reactions caused to and by others. he just wants to ruin things for his own sponsored scripted salespitches

his end goals is to destroy highways and try getting people to use 'super fast' Locomotive Network of trains that have to stop at many stations and require many tickets per trip

he wants the highway network to bottleneck and cost more to transport, even though the locomotive network he loves is that network that bottlenecks the most

[Wind_FURY]

NFT on LN is also a failure.. again the proof of ownership /transfer lacks. yep you cant prove ownership in LN
there is a major point of blockchain.. its not just data store, its also the proof that cannot be edited of ownership and transfer
there was a big problem cypherpunks were hitting their heads against for decades before bitcoin was invented. and seems the ordinal adoration brigade and LN supporters do not recognise bitcoin and blockchain purpose.

You make me laugh, franky. How did LN+NFT come into the debate?

casey can change which output his ordinal process follows, without messing with data. because his "transfer"(lack of) of such is not dependant on bitcoin code or cryptography or proof in hard data within the outputs to milestone the movements.. meaning that his ordinals do not use the blockchain function of proving the transfer in an uneditable way

there are ways to prove it but casey is not using it, so its a double fail

 

Are there more technical users in the topic who can ELI-5 for stupid non-technical people like me?

but the fact that he and his fans adore using blockchain as just a dead weight data store. is the facepalming part. those memes have no value, have no true ownership control and thus are just a waste of space done purely to force everyone else to pay more just to reliably stay in mempools long enough for mining pools to pick up and add to blocks

adding bloat to reduce the number of transactions that fit then charging more per transaction is the complete opposite of an efficient payment system and those idiots who love doing this are the ones that dont care about bitcoin. and yes ordinals is an attack because it uses a crappy cludgy backdoor to be added into bitcoin blocks without being verified as data fit for bitcoins purpose

I agree that it's adding more useless bloat. I agree that those memes, dick pics, and fart sounds should not be in the Bitcoin blockchain. I agree that Ordinals can be used as another attack vector. BUT what I can't agree with are people saying, "Ordinals is an attack/exploit".

Be reminded that Ordinals, from the Bitcoin protocol's viewpoint, are valid transactions that follow the consensus rules. You may have your opinions, but you can't misinform the community with what's simply isn't true.

bitcoin. binary data. numbers. math does not count sats the way you think casey prescribes
economics logic, math, common sense shows different to what casey says.. its not a franky opinion. its a data fact you can research and see

just do so at data level not PR campaign buddy eli-5 spoonfeed level

casey project of adding in memes into the dead weight area of a transaction uses a trojan exploit of an opcode(of many new opcodes added recently) to just auto treat as passed/success without validating it to any protocol format of requirement. its blindly passed rather than having to meet a requirement
learn the difference

for instance a legacy signatures have to meet requirements such as length limit. such as having a relationship to an input and the message hash calculations of signature proofs etc. a meme does not need to meet any format or standard or requirement its just blindly let passed due to an exploit

OK, I believe I understand your point of view. That in The Ordinals Theory, Casey Rodarmor merely invented a set of "imaginary" rules within Bitcoin to "govern" the numbering system of satoshis, which isn't truly enforced by anything except that Casey's "rules are the rules". Is that right?

It still doesn't change the fact that Ordinals transactions are still valid transactions that follow the consensus rules at the protocol level.

[DooMAD]

doomad doesnt want efficient highways he wants rule breaking so that when he (a rule breaker) gets caught he can shout "but everyone else breaks the rules so dont write me a ticket, let me go officer, im just like everyone else"

Says the person who constantly breaks the forum's rules by derailing near enough every topic he's ever entered.   

And you still can't name the rule that has been broken.  Not just because you're an illiterate numpty who misinterprets every last thing he's ever read, but also because no rules have been broken.  Ordinals may not be within the spirit of the rules, but they are technically legal. 

he doesnt think of consequences or even actions and reactions caused to and by others.

I think about consequences to freedom, whereas you only care about control and taking away the freedom of others.  You certainly don't think about anyone other than yourself when you try to impose your Stalinist police-state political views upon Bitcoin and its userbase.  Bitcoin will continue to resist narcissistic, ego-maniacal dictators-in-waiting.  If enough users disagree with Ordinals, then something might change.  My suspicion is that a larger number of users would prioritise freedom over efficiency, but I could be wrong, so we'll see what happens.  But nothing is going to change as a direct result of crankyfranky crying like a baby again.  So please spare us the waterworks.

[Artemis3]

What has kicking the spam out of Bitcoin to do with your freedoms? You are free to fork and/or make another altcoin for that purpose. Leave Bitcoin for bitcoin.

[DooMAD]

What has kicking the spam out of Bitcoin to do with your freedoms?

Name a Bitcoin version when the code was updated to "kick out spam".  I'm not convinced that's ever happened.  Why did we collectively not deem it necessary to change the code on any of the prior occasions people have spammed the chain out of greed or malice and yet suddenly it's imperative that we do so now?  Where are you drawing the distinction?

Leave Bitcoin for bitcoin.

Tell that to satoshi when they embedded some text in the genesis block.  That wasn't a transaction.  Should we kick that out too?  It's not a black and white issue.  Again, there's a line to be drawn between 'fair use' and 'abuse'.

[franky1]

What has kicking the spam out of Bitcoin to do with your freedoms?

Name a Bitcoin version when the code was updated to "kick out spam".  I'm not convinced that's ever happened.  Why did we collectively not deem it necessary to change the code on any of the prior occasions people have spammed the chain out of greed or malice and yet suddenly it's imperative that we do so now?  Where are you drawing the distinction?

Leave Bitcoin for bitcoin.

Tell that to satoshi when they embedded some text in the genesis block.  That wasn't a transaction.  Should we kick that out too?  It's not a black and white issue.  Again, there's a line to be drawn between 'fair use' and 'abuse'.

"dust" - rejected
transactions of other altcoins broadcast on bitcoin network - rejected
double spends - rejected
complete random data not in a tx format - rejected
opcodes requiring valid signatures where random data was not a signature related to requirement -rejected
[etc] [etc]

but then they started adding in HUNDREDS of opcodes(op_successxxx) IN RECENT YEARS with no set requirement and activated by default rather than activating when requirements are set for a code and consensus is reached to show acceptance of using such.. meaning people due to the softening of consensus, can use those opcodes to add junk unrelated to witness proofs/signatures/scripts. because those new opcodes which ordinal meme spam is abusing is using opcodes that have no requirement of structure/utility/function that proves a payment

and if you want to now rebut about op_return acceptance
you need to realise that they actually dont like op_return abuse and dont want it sitting in utxo and chainstates
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/280a7777d3a368101d667a80ebc536e95abb2f8c/src/script/script.h#L539-L547