Have you seen ERC20 and it’s historical progress. It was highly congested, and there was literally no limit to the number of coins that were getting added every time on the blockchain. The gas fees was so high it used to take days for the single confirmation even if you had paid the desired gas fees. This was the major reason behind ETH got upgraded and they literally switched from PoW to PoS.
The consensus mechanism has pretty much
nothing to do with a blockchain's throughput. And it shows: Ethereum transaction fees are still about $15 a pop, whereas even in the congested state of the Bitcoin blockchain, we pay at most ~$3.50 (100 sat/vB).
I am not sure if same is possible with the bitcoin or not but bitcoin should not be changed.
It cannot and will not be changed and that's a beautiful thing. Related reading assignment for you:
https://bitcoincleanup.com/The scam projects like Ordinals and NFT should be taken down. But again since we are in the decentralised world we can not touch it as long as every investor ignore the ordinals.
Sad to see blockchain getting burdened with such projects.
Exactly; we can't really take them down, no matter how hard we try, since they properly follow the Bitcoin rules. It doesn't stop us from labeling it as an attack and educating people about it, though.
So, people were paying almost ten times more these days in these NFTs but there is a thing that I don't understand. Why does someone pay money to create an NFT and why does someone really buy an NFT? If you want an image, just take a screen and that's all.
The idea is that an NFT is supposed to be a digital ownership contract on the (Bitcoin) blockchain. It should allow you to prove to everyone on the world, as long as the blockchain exists, that you own some digital good.
One of my biggest issues with that is that you also need a way to enforce a contract. As long as legal systems don't recognize NFTs as contracts, they are meaningless in the first place.
Furthermore, this is unnecessary bloat on any blockchain with little added value. Especially since you still need to properly, securely back up your private keys. Just the same way you had to properly and securely back up digital scans of regular, old ownership contracts.
You usually don't need to host this information on thousands of nodes around the world. The 'traditional way' of storing and backing up your important digital files (like contracts) has worked ever since digital media came into existence and there's nothing that really changed lately to create a need for ownership contracts on blockchains.
On May 16th, Ryan Gentry from Lightning Labs announced that they are launching
Taproot Assets v0.2. As far as I understand, this update should allow us to operate with tokens mainly in the second layer and not take up as much space in blocks as happened recently. Will the new solution from the Lightning Network help solve the problem and reconcile the community with tokens without a mempool congestion?
Thanks for sharing. Sounds like a step in a right direction.
I mean, Lightning Network NFTs is nothing new. The
RGB team has been working on this for years. That's one more reason that frustrates me with the Ordinals team; instead of joining forces with RGB or Taro to do a
sensible thing, they straight up mounted an attack on Bitcoin.
Yes, but the payment will be even worse buddy because I have to move the BTC from my personal wallet (non-custodial) and I have to use a competitive fee since I need the internet network asap.
i guess that's a good reason for keeping a bit of cash on a custodial wallet then. that way you can just cash it out with no exhorbitant fee. and you're not being held hostage by the network with a fee as the ransom... they always say "not your keys not your crypto" but now its "not your keys, not your fees".
Or keep some BTC in a Lightning wallet / on a Lightning node. Guide for full node setup here:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5366854.0
