Why was Ordinal NFTs created?

[larry_vw_1955]

They probably will if it's life or death for Bitcoin, but in my opinion, the tail reward paid in another chain that's merge-mined with Bitcoin, IF implemented securely and IF gets social consensus, would be a compromise. It will continue to incentivize the miners without breaking the social contract.

what's the real difference though? whatever you pay out the tail reward on, someone has to be willing to step up to the plate and buy those worthless piece of crap tokens...

why don't we push your solution to the extreme and say that someone invents a way to pay out the tail reward in ethereum. but they still need someone to put up the actual money...and that's the problem. why would people want to do that?

[Wind_FURY]

They probably will if it's life or death for Bitcoin, but in my opinion, the tail reward paid in another chain that's merge-mined with Bitcoin, IF implemented securely and IF gets social consensus, would be a compromise. It will continue to incentivize the miners without breaking the social contract.

what's the real difference though? whatever you pay out the tail reward on, someone has to be willing to step up to the plate and buy those worthless piece of crap tokens...

The real difference is the social contract of the 21,000,000 Bitcoin limit isn't broken. It's part of Bitcoin's ethos, and in my personal opinion, it must be preserved.

Plus it's not us  plebs who decides what's worthless, just the market. We can call them shitcoins though.

why don't we push your solution to the extreme and say that someone invents a way to pay out the tail reward in ethereum. but they still need someone to put up the actual money...and that's the problem. why would people want to do that?

Without doing actual Proof Of Work on those tokens? No.

[larry_vw_1955]

The real difference is the social contract of the 21,000,000 Bitcoin limit isn't broken. It's part of Bitcoin's ethos, and in my personal opinion, it must be preserved.

the problem is, it's not preserved in the sense that people lose access to bitcoin meaning there no longer 21M of them but less. i think if they could recycle lost bitcoins back into the system via increasing the coinbase rewards to miners then maybe that would help miners to not need to worry about decreasing income over time and thus needing things like ordinals to make up the difference. but even if not, it just makes sense that if 21M is really 21M then coins shouldn't be lost forever. because then it's less. 

Without doing actual Proof Of Work on those tokens? No.

just because something has proof of work done on it doesn't make it useful. maybe its a necessary condition but surely not sufficient otherwise all the bitcoin forks would be useful which clearly no one wants to use most of them if any at all.

[Wind_FURY]

The real difference is the social contract of the 21,000,000 Bitcoin limit isn't broken. It's part of Bitcoin's ethos, and in my personal opinion, it must be preserved.

the problem is, it's not preserved in the sense that people lose access to bitcoin meaning there no longer 21M of them but less. i think if they could recycle lost bitcoins back into the system via increasing the coinbase rewards to miners then maybe that would help miners to not need to worry about decreasing income over time and thus needing things like ordinals to make up the difference. but even if not, it just makes sense that if 21M is really 21M then coins shouldn't be lost forever. because then it's less. 

But from the standpoint of the protocol, it must be preserved. 21,000,000 coins mined.

Without doing actual Proof Of Work on those tokens? No.

just because something has proof of work done on it doesn't make it useful. maybe its a necessary condition but surely not sufficient otherwise all the bitcoin forks would be useful which clearly no one wants to use most of them if any at all.
 

Usefulness, what coin is, what coin isn't, that's another debate for another topic. But for "BTC-Miner coin", if it truly works to incentivize the miners to continue maintaining Bitcoin's security, then for that reason, it will already be useful.

[philipma1957]

well if btc is 30k a 6.25 block with 0.15 rewards = 6.4 coins or 192k these numbers do work

it is likely the .15 in rewards is up due to Ordinals and Nfts.


If btc is 60k a 3.125 block with 0.075 in rewards = 3.2 coins or 192k these numbers work

and I dropped out 0.075 in rewards with the assumption that ordinals and nfts reduce due to lack of demand this will hopefully be all true in 2024

So we could be okay for a few more jumps. Without nfts or ordinals


But 2028 120k a 1.56125 block with 0.075 in rewards.

problems start showing. the 20 mill x 120k = 2.4 trillion value and for the numbers to be okay

difficulty needs 50% growth and efficiency should go from 29 watts to 20 watts per th.

The value of your protection will have went up a bit but price of coins is 4x/

It just get wonky when you project into the future.

[larry_vw_1955]

well if btc is 30k a 6.25 block with 0.15 rewards = 6.4 coins or 192k these numbers do work

it is likely the .15 in rewards is up due to Ordinals and Nfts.


If btc is 60k a 3.125 block with 0.075 in rewards = 3.2 coins or 192k these numbers work

and I dropped out 0.075 in rewards with the assumption that ordinals and nfts reduce due to lack of demand this will hopefully be all true in 2024

So we could be okay for a few more jumps. Without nfts or ordinals


But 2028 120k a 1.56125 block with 0.075 in rewards.

yeah, i dont think anyone really has a good answer for this problem but it does seem to limit bitcoin's upside potential in usd value. bitcoin can't just shoot up higher and higher just because miners want to offset their dwindling block reward. 

problems start showing. the 20 mill x 120k = 2.4 trillion value and for the numbers to be okay

difficulty needs 50% growth and efficiency should go from 29 watts to 20 watts per th.

The value of your protection will have went up a bit but price of coins is 4x/

It just get wonky when you project into the future.

imagine 1btc is worth $1M usd. maybe miners would be happy then if they could scrape out a .0001 block reward but it's not going to $1M...not unless the usd experiences hyperinflation but that wouldn't help anyone either.

But from the standpoint of the protocol, it must be preserved. 21,000,000 coins mined

and zero coins lost. how's that?

[Wind_FURY]

well if btc is 30k a 6.25 block with 0.15 rewards = 6.4 coins or 192k these numbers do work

it is likely the .15 in rewards is up due to Ordinals and Nfts.


If btc is 60k a 3.125 block with 0.075 in rewards = 3.2 coins or 192k these numbers work

and I dropped out 0.075 in rewards with the assumption that ordinals and nfts reduce due to lack of demand this will hopefully be all true in 2024

So we could be okay for a few more jumps. Without nfts or ordinals


But 2028 120k a 1.56125 block with 0.075 in rewards.

yeah, i dont think anyone really has a good answer for this problem but it does seem to limit bitcoin's upside potential in usd value. bitcoin can't just shoot up higher and higher just because miners want to offset their dwindling block reward. 

That's true, but since when did Bitcoin surge because miners simply wanted to offset their rewards that are halved every four years? The price is what the market - buyers and sellers - makes.

problems start showing. the 20 mill x 120k = 2.4 trillion value and for the numbers to be okay

difficulty needs 50% growth and efficiency should go from 29 watts to 20 watts per th.

The value of your protection will have went up a bit but price of coins is 4x/

It just get wonky when you project into the future.

imagine 1btc is worth $1M usd. maybe miners would be happy then if they could scrape out a .0001 block reward but it's not going to $1M...not unless the usd experiences hyperinflation but that wouldn't help anyone either.

Don't speak that it's absolutely impossible. A person from 2012 would also say the same about Bitcoin surging to $10,000.

But from the standpoint of the protocol, it must be preserved. 21,000,000 coins mined

and zero coins lost. how's that?

Did it say about zero coins lost? No, check the code.

[BlackHatCoiner]

I think you're overthinking the incentive. As a recent poster questioned, the potential incentives can be: transaction fees, investments in bitcoin, and protocols running on top of it. And we still have about twice the age of bitcoin until it starts becoming an observable problem.

And, to repeat myself: if there are no transactions happening on-chain, there is no point in having a bitcoin in the first place, let alone to secure it.

[larry_vw_1955]

Don't speak that it's absolutely impossible. A person from 2012 would also say the same about Bitcoin surging to $10,000.

bitcoin going from $1 to $10,000 is not the same thing as going from $10,000 to $1,000,000. it's going to need alot of help to reach $1 million things like hyperinflation come to mind...gonna take more than just being useful for some purpose in my opinion.

you got fednow coming out soon and countries are jumping on the bandwagon to want to make their own digital currencies. bitcoin can't compete with that. (I mean in terms of the convenience and ease of use factor...why subsidize pictures of monkeys when you just want to transfer money electronically with little to no fee? ) plus you throw in government regulations and it makes it even harder for people to get involved in it in the first place. even if they wanted to. coinbase might not even be in the usa for alot longer.  

but yet somehow bitcoin is going to go to $1,000,000. americans might not be able to buy it but somehow it will be worth that much. go figure.

Did it say about zero coins lost? No, check the code.

maybe that's one of the things about the code that need to be reconsidered.

[Wind_FURY]

Don't speak that it's absolutely impossible. A person from 2012 would also say the same about Bitcoin surging to $10,000.

bitcoin going from $1 to $10,000 is not the same thing as going from $10,000 to $1,000,000. it's going to need alot of help to reach $1 million things like hyperinflation come to mind...gonna take more than just being useful for some purpose in my opinion.

you got fednow coming out soon and countries are jumping on the bandwagon to want to make their own digital currencies. bitcoin can't compete with that. (I mean in terms of the convenience and ease of use factor...why subsidize pictures of monkeys when you just want to transfer money electronically with little to no fee? ) plus you throw in government regulations and it makes it even harder for people to get involved in it in the first place. even if they wanted to. coinbase might not even be in the usa for alot longer.  

but yet somehow bitcoin is going to go to $1,000,000. americans might not be able to buy it but somehow it will be worth that much. go figure.

Probably, but if Bitcoin surges to a six digit price during the next bull cycle, which is very possible in my opinion, then wait for the possibilty of a seven digit price narrative to arise. It just starts as a narrative, then as a possibility, then a?

 

Did it say about zero coins lost? No, check the code.

maybe that's one of the things about the code that need to be reconsidered.

 

I'll pretend I didn't see that part of your post.

[larry_vw_1955]

Probably, but if Bitcoin surges to a six digit price during the next bull cycle, which is very possible in my opinion,
then wait for the possibilty of a seven digit price narrative to arise.

it's one thing for btc marketcap to go from half a trillion dollars to 4 times that. but another thing entirely go to 40 times that. do we really think that's going to happen?

It just starts as a narrative, then as a possibility, then a?

 

ordinals is not going to drive that. so what's going to drive it? you would need 1000 projects like ordinals to get you up to $1,000,000 maybe more.

I'll pretend I didn't see that part of your post.

ok. don't tell satoshi either.  

[philipma1957]

2040

 0.195 btc lets argue .205 in fees total btc is .4

6.4 x 30000 = 192,000 a block

.4 x 480000 = 192,000 a block

so lets argue that efficiency is 2x

lets argue that diff is 2x

miners would  profit pretty much the same as now…

so they are happy.

but the marketcap grew to about 9.6 trillion

and for miners to be happy i made power used flat =unlikely and gear value pretty much flat = unlikely

i also made fees raise from about .15 a block to .20 (loose rounding)

96000 in fees maybe 1000tx in a block = 96 usd for fees.

1 dollar fee now is decent
96 dollar fee in only 17 years is not good.

as coin goes up 16x and fee goes up 96x

It is hard to see this staying very stable even by 2040

3.125
1.56125
0.780625
0.3903125


0.0195xxxx 2040.  plug in your numbers here.

I am thinking lower coin prices for this to work.

more than higher numbers.

100k a coin forces less gear and less difficulty which could balance system. in the 2040 time frame.

[Wind_FURY]

Probably, but if Bitcoin surges to a six digit price during the next bull cycle, which is very possible in my opinion,
then wait for the possibilty of a seven digit price narrative to arise.

it's one thing for btc marketcap to go from half a trillion dollars to 4 times that. but another thing entirely go to 40 times that. do we really think that's going to happen?

Probably another thing, but what's going to happen and what's not going to happen is not for you and me to decide, it's the market, and probably we can agree that the market doesn't care about the marketcap. It will take Bitcoin where it wants to take it. If it goes to a seven digit price valuation, OK. If not, OK.

 

It just starts as a narrative, then as a possibility, then a?

 

ordinals is not going to drive that. so what's going to drive it? you would need 1000 projects like ordinals to get you up to $1,000,000 maybe more.

I don't know, I neither thought nore suggested that Ordinals is going to drive it to new valuations. Let's wait for the next halving.

I'll pretend I didn't see that part of your post.

ok. don't tell satoshi either.  

"Satoshi"? Are you talking about the person who demanded that the Core Developers write code to recover his lost coins? That "Satoshi"?

[larry_vw_1955]

Probably another thing, but what's going to happen and what's not going to happen is not for you and me to decide, it's the market, and probably we can agree that the market doesn't care about the marketcap. It will take Bitcoin where it wants to take it. If it goes to a seven digit price valuation, OK. If not, OK.

 

so if bitcoin just stays under $100,000 forever that's ok too? what if the us dollar devalues alot and bitcoin still stays the same? that's ok too?

I don't know, I neither thought nore suggested that Ordinals is going to drive it to new valuations. Let's wait for the next halving.

apparently bitcoin is supposed to go up in price at each halving.

"Satoshi"? Are you talking about the person who demanded that the Core Developers write code to recover his lost coins? That "Satoshi"?

never heard of that satoshi. that sounds unreasonable of a demand though. but recirculating old coins that haven't been used in 250 years does seem kind of reasonable. at least to me.  

[Wind_FURY]

Probably another thing, but what's going to happen and what's not going to happen is not for you and me to decide, it's the market, and probably we can agree that the market doesn't care about the marketcap. It will take Bitcoin where it wants to take it. If it goes to a seven digit price valuation, OK. If not, OK.

 

so if bitcoin just stays under $100,000 forever that's ok too? what if the us dollar devalues alot and bitcoin still stays the same? that's ok too?

OK from the perspective that the network will go on whatever the price.

If the Dollar devalues, Bitcoin surges in Dollar units.

I don't know, I neither thought nore suggested that Ordinals is going to drive it to new valuations. Let's wait for the next halving.

apparently bitcoin is supposed to go up in price at each halving.

Theoretically it's supposed to, but practically it also depends on demand.

"Satoshi"? Are you talking about the person who demanded that the Core Developers write code to recover his lost coins? That "Satoshi"?

never heard of that satoshi. that sounds unreasonable of a demand though. but recirculating old coins that haven't been used in 250 years does seem kind of reasonable. at least to me.  

I believe Craig Wright had the same proposal. For me it's laughable and very stupid.

OK, we're off-topic now. This post will be my last reply on that matter.

[larry_vw_1955]

If the Dollar devalues, Bitcoin surges in Dollar units.

i'm not so sure about that as far as being 100% guaranteed. what if whatever causes the dollar to devalue also affects other fiat currencies. what if it also affects bitcoin?

I believe Craig Wright had the same proposal. For me it's laughable and very stupid.

well if you can't explain why something is "laughable and very stupid" then maybe it's not. but if the reasoning has to do with your coins going higher in value because other peoples' coins are getting lost then that's really not a good enough reason...

[Wind_FURY]

If the Dollar devalues, Bitcoin surges in Dollar units.

i'm not so sure about that as far as being 100% guaranteed. what if whatever causes the dollar to devalue also affects other fiat currencies. what if it also affects bitcoin?

I believe Craig Wright had the same proposal. For me it's laughable and very stupid.

well if you can't explain why something is "laughable and very stupid" then maybe it's not. but if the reasoning has to do with your coins going higher in value because other peoples' coins are getting lost then that's really not a good enough reason...

 

You're on ignore.

[larry_vw_1955]

 

You're on ignore.

so that's what you do when someone asks you to defend your statement/position. you put them on ignore. not much respect for that but whatever...

[pooya87]

i'm not so sure about that as far as being 100% guaranteed. what if whatever causes the dollar to devalue also affects other fiat currencies. what if it also affects bitcoin?

In any argument you can bring up any arbitrary condition and then try to make your conclusion. The strong argument is if you first explain your arbitrary condition and why it can happen first then try to extend it to your conclusion.

In here you first have to explain what can cause both fiat and bitcoin to devalue at the same time.
Fiat devalues because it is being printed nonstop whereas bitcoin has a capped supply. And remember to not confuse short term market volatility in bitcoin caused by the mess in the economy as a whole, that is somewhat unrelated with fiat devaluation.

[philipma1957]

i'm not so sure about that as far as being 100% guaranteed. what if whatever causes the dollar to devalue also affects other fiat currencies. what if it also affects bitcoin?

In any argument you can bring up any arbitrary condition and then try to make your conclusion. The strong argument is if you first explain your arbitrary condition and why it can happen first then try to extend it to your conclusion.

In here you first have to explain what can cause both fiat and bitcoin to devalue at the same time.
Fiat devalues because it is being printed nonstop whereas bitcoin has a capped supply. And remember to not confuse short term market volatility in bitcoin caused by the mess in the economy as a whole, that is somewhat unrelated with fiat devaluation.

But btc is designed to be protected by mining.

 and the reward to fee ratio is critical for it to continue to work.

I want someone to make an example for 2056 reward to fee ratio

with btc at

2,000,000
1,000,000
   500,000
   250,000
   125,000

today we do  6.25  + 0.15  = 6.4 btc and about 192,000 value.

today we are in a workable range.

fees are not deadly high.
fees are not too small.

enough gear and power is spent to protect the 0.6 trillion value of btc.

partly due to ordinal and nft existence.

in 2056

rewards will be a lot lower.

0.0244xxx make  fees higher  0.1756 you are at 0.20 means 1,000,000 a coin is a 200,000 block value

which does not work.