Are BRC-20 stablecoins the next big thing?

[Abiky]

It's obvious that it's the new hype right now, just a couple of months ago when it was developed and now it's taking the crypto market. Although want bitcoin maximalist doesn't want is that it run on top of the bitcoin's blockchain causing the mempool to clogged and with that, the fee spike.

The thing is that when bitcoin's developers started to close that loophole, then maybe BRC-20 will be on the side then as everyone is being affected by it negatively so I wouldn't be surprised of a patch before the end of the year.

If the community is ok with Ordinals inscriptions, it's very unlikely they will side with developers to apply the patch on the network. This could trigger another hard fork as we speak. Time will tell us the fate of Bitcoin as its popularity continues to grow worldwide. As much as I'm against censorship (blocking Ordinals even though BTC is open source and decentralized), I'm certainly not a fan of high fees. Things will get worse with new stablecoins issued on the Bitcoin blockchain using the BRC-20 standard.

Instead of blocking Ordinals, why don't developers work on increasing on-chain TX capacity? It would help decrease network fees, while letting Ordinals flow as usual. So far, there's one only BRC-20 stablecoin issued on the Blockchain. Let's see how the experiment will turn out to be in the long run. Either this will "kill" Bitcoin or it will make it stronger than ever. We already have blockchains with smart contract features (eg: ETH), so why should we use BTC for things other than finance? Just my thoughts

[robattfield]

This will become a concern for many Bitcoin investors in terms of massive traffic and increased transaction fees on the Bitcoin blockchain. After all, maintaining low transaction fees and fast confirmation times is one of the most attractive aspects of Bitcoin for many users. While some projects may find value in issuing BRC-20 tokens on the Bitcoin blockchain, we must weigh the potential benefits and downsides to make an informed decision on which direction to go with the ecosystem.

[FanEagle]

I am not entirely sure if we even need it. I mean what would happen if it is BRC-20 instead of bep20 or erc20? It will not really have any change, it will not mean anything at all. If it is 1$=1$ like every other stablecoin then it will not need to be there, it can be anywhere else. I keep suggesting we need to get away from ordinals instead of going into it and yet people do not listen to me, it is going to hurt bitcoin in the end if we keep doing this.

These ordinal stuff that ruins transaction costs could be the number one reason why bitcoin ends up dropping from the top of the list. I am not saying it will, probably it won't, but we are aware that it is putting itself at risk at least and that's going to be the type of thing we do not need right now.

[Abiky]

This will become a concern for many Bitcoin investors in terms of massive traffic and increased transaction fees on the Bitcoin blockchain. After all, maintaining low transaction fees and fast confirmation times is one of the most attractive aspects of Bitcoin for many users. While some projects may find value in issuing BRC-20 tokens on the Bitcoin blockchain, we must weigh the potential benefits and downsides to make an informed decision on which direction to go with the ecosystem.

I don't get what's all the fuzz about BRC-20 tokens, when ETH and its variants have the same thing. Why not move everything to a separate chain or the LN instead? It would make the BTC blockchain less bloated, resulting in lower fees and faster TX confirmations. Imagine if stablecoins on the BTC blockchain become extremely popular. It would be a complete mess!

I'm yet to see whenever Stably (the new BRC-20 stablecoin) will become a success or a failure, especially when the company is not as well established as USDC's Circle or USDT's Bitfinex. All of the attention is on BRC-20 NFTs, so don't expect adoption for Stably to grow anytime soon. If things go wrong, then we'll have no choice but to move towards an alternative chain such as Litecoin or Bitcoin Cash. No matter how you see it, you can't deny miners are the ones that are ultimately winning with the high TX fees. Just my thoughts

[JeffBrad12]

This will become a concern for many Bitcoin investors in terms of massive traffic and increased transaction fees on the Bitcoin blockchain. After all, maintaining low transaction fees and fast confirmation times is one of the most attractive aspects of Bitcoin for many users. While some projects may find value in issuing BRC-20 tokens on the Bitcoin blockchain, we must weigh the potential benefits and downsides to make an informed decision on which direction to go with the ecosystem.

that much is true, we've all known how even a blockchain that was specifically created for the smart contract and to contain its transaction couldn't even help but have really poor scalability after a long time.
this brc-20 will definitely increase the cost of transaction same like in ethereum and I think it will be really detrimental in the long run, at least with ethereum its got so many options and sidechains released since their EVM is really good to be forked or even to make an innovation that acts as a second layer solution but with this BRC-20 technology i'm not really sure about that.
maybe this emergence of brc-20 instead will make bitcoin having really bad scalability, since we all know everything involving with smart contracts require massive transaction for the sake of interacting with the smart contract. though i still don't really understand that much the underlying technology behind these ordinals and BRC-20.

[cryptoaddictchie]

These ordinal stuff that ruins transaction costs could be the number one reason why bitcoin ends up dropping from the top of the list. I am not saying it will, probably it won't, but we are aware that it is putting itself at risk at least and that's going to be the type of thing we do not need right now.

Maybe but theres probably other factor that bitcoin is dropping. The network seems to be okay compared to before, plus the market could move depends on those big orders movement from whales. Id rather worried if an account with thousand bitcoin will dump on market than ordinals. They are the one could really make the price down.

[Chainsmokers]

These ordinal stuff that ruins transaction costs could be the number one reason why bitcoin ends up dropping from the top of the list. I am not saying it will, probably it won't, but we are aware that it is putting itself at risk at least and that's going to be the type of thing we do not need right now.

Maybe but theres probably other factor that bitcoin is dropping. The network seems to be okay compared to before, plus the market could move depends on those big orders movement from whales. Id rather worried if an account with thousand bitcoin will dump on market than ordinals. They are the one could really make the price down.

I don't think it's possible that whales will throw away large amounts of bitcoin just because of ordinal problems,
even though BRC-20 disrupted the Bitcoin network but so far Bitcoin seems to be holding above $ 25k, so stay calm there are no problems for BRC-20 and Bitcoin,
and Regarding stable coins on BRC-20, in my opinion, it will not be phenomenal because the BRC-20 network is still experimental, different from the BSC, ETH or TRON networks.

[m2017]

There's a new stablecoin "in town" that goes by the name of Stably. It's a BRC-20 token issued on the main Bitcoin blockchain. I believe it's the first kind of stablecoin to be ever released on BTC. I'm not sure if it'll be backed by Bitcoin itself, but at least, Bitcoiners can now use stablecoins without having to move to another chain. The downside of this is that it will increase on-chain fees by a large margin. It's an Ordinals inscription after all. Would you imagine USDT, USDC, and other stablecoins launching their BRC-20 version on the BTC blockchain? It would be a complete disaster! The idea is cool, but it's best to move everything else to a separate chain or off-chain scaling solution to keep BTC fast and cheap for everyone to use.

What are your thoughts? Are BRC-20 stablecoins the next big thing? If not, why? Do you think BTC will be able to survive a flood of BRC-20 stablecoin transactions in the long run? What do you think about Stably? Will it have a future? Your input will be greatly appreciated. Thank you.

I think BRC-20 stablecoins is another the next big hype thing, like metaverse, nft and so on, that the crypto community will quickly forget about after playing enough of it. The very concept of a stablecoin doesn't fit very well with the ideas of bitcoin: it's like trying to combine hot with cold. I believe that bitcoin should remain as it was created (of course, acceptable improvements are acceptable) and there is no need to clutter up the network with unnecessary garbage.

[jaberwock]

There's a new stablecoin "in town" that goes by the name of Stably. It's a BRC-20 token issued on the main Bitcoin blockchain. I believe it's the first kind of stablecoin to be ever released on BTC. I'm not sure if it'll be backed by Bitcoin itself, but at least, Bitcoiners can now use stablecoins without having to move to another chain. The downside of this is that it will increase on-chain fees by a large margin. It's an Ordinals inscription after all. Would you imagine USDT, USDC, and other stablecoins launching their BRC-20 version on the BTC blockchain? It would be a complete disaster! The idea is cool, but it's best to move everything else to a separate chain or off-chain scaling solution to keep BTC fast and cheap for everyone to use.

This is going to hurt the market more than people realize today. We can't stop it that's true and we need to move to some other chain as quickly as possible otherwise we are going to be screwed, there is no way around it. We are at a stage where it is doing terrible right now and this fee structure needs to change.

People are aiming at making more money and they are not realizing that while trying to make more money today because others are doing it and why would you stop if they don't mindset still going on, that will result with them not making more money in the future and just be happy with what you got short term and then never recover. Bitcoin could be permanently damaged because of this if we are not careful and that's very crucial and dangerous.

[vv181]

BRC-20 is a completely inefficient standard. Stably, as a stablecoin issuer that I had barely heard of, decided to build on top of a shaky foundation that surely does not cope with any scalability and efficiency progress.

There is two reasoning I suppose. First, they simply do it because BRC-20 is currently the thing, so they joining the hyper for their own branding. Two, they are incompetent issuers that were not able to forecast technical requirements and market growth potency. Either way, this is surely a worthless and useless attempt. That makes, one should be wary if they decided to use anything that is issued/created by this kind of company.

[rhomelmabini]

What are your thoughts? Are BRC-20 stablecoins the next big thing? If not, why? Do you think BTC will be able to survive a flood of BRC-20 stablecoin transactions in the long run? What do you think about Stably? Will it have a future? Your input will be greatly appreciated. Thank you.

For now some users will totally take that hype but if it dies, it will just be abandoned little by little. I think stablecoins that exist today on other chains are on their right seats already and moving it on the Bitcoin Blockchain is just a careless idea. I think Bitcoin will survive but this hype will not, stably is just a hype and no future in my opinion.

[Abiky]

BRC-20 is a completely inefficient standard. Stably, as a stablecoin issuer that I had barely heard of, decided to build on top of a shaky foundation that surely does not cope with any scalability and efficiency progress.

There is two reasoning I suppose. First, they simply do it because BRC-20 is currently the thing, so they joining the hyper for their own branding. Two, they are incompetent issuers that were not able to forecast technical requirements and market growth potency. Either way, this is surely a worthless and useless attempt. That makes, one should be wary if they decided to use anything that is issued/created by this kind of company.

This will fail quickly if developers succeed in their efforts to block Ordinals inscriptions for good. The idea is great, but BTC's limited transaction capacity would not be enough to help spread adoption of on-chain stablecoins at a large scale. For that, we have alternative blockchain networks such as Ethereum, BSC, and Polygon. Or the Lightning Network if we still want to use BTC without affecting the main chain.

The company issuing the stablecoin (Stably) is not as widely known as Tether or USDC's Circle. So don't expect it to gain traction anytime soon. Ultimately, the market will decide the best path forward for Bitcoin. As long as decentralization prevails, nothing else matters. Just my thoughts

[vv181]

BRC-20 is a completely inefficient standard. Stably, as a stablecoin issuer that I had barely heard of, decided to build on top of a shaky foundation that surely does not cope with any scalability and efficiency progress.

There is two reasoning I suppose. First, they simply do it because BRC-20 is currently the thing, so they joining the hyper for their own branding. Two, they are incompetent issuers that were not able to forecast technical requirements and market growth potency. Either way, this is surely a worthless and useless attempt. That makes, one should be wary if they decided to use anything that is issued/created by this kind of company.

This will fail quickly if developers succeed in their efforts to block Ordinals inscriptions for good. The idea is great, but BTC's limited transaction capacity would not be enough to help spread adoption of on-chain stablecoins at a large scale. For that, we have alternative blockchain networks such as Ethereum, BSC, and Polygon. Or the Lightning Network if we still want to use BTC without affecting the main chain.

The company issuing the stablecoin (Stably) is not as widely known as Tether or USDC's Circle. So don't expect it to gain traction anytime soon. Ultimately, the market will decide the best path forward for Bitcoin. As long as decentralization prevails, nothing else matters. Just my thoughts

I honestly don't think the idea is good at all. As an issuer, they should have known better to research the feasibility of a project. So factoring in this stablecoin issuer is not prominent and the questionable nature of making the token as BRC-20, I rather think it is likely they do it for simply pure hype.

As you said, I also do not expect they will gain traction, within the cryptocurrency market as a whole. What such bad publicity they make, I can't think of any better.

[paid2]

What are your thoughts? Are BRC-20 stablecoins the next big thing? If not, why? Do you think BTC will be able to survive a flood of BRC-20 stablecoin transactions in the long run? What do you think about Stably? Will it have a future? Your input will be greatly appreciated. Thank you.

I don't know to what extent this is just a passing or lasting hype, and no one can really know.

But, several factors are worrying me about it:

-the mempool will become saturated over and over again, I don't know if this is really good for the use and reputation (adoption) of the BTC blockchain
-if stablecoins or other BRC-20 coins fail, won't this discredit the BTC network and give people false cause for concern? Wouldn't this damage the reputation and trust of the BTC network, even though it is in no way responsible for these projects?

In any case, I'm going to follow this with interest, as it's something new and will no doubt cause a lot of noise in the near future.

I just hope it doesn't give a spotlight to the BTC network and a new reason for regulators to go after it again and again...

[timoshani]

This will become a concern for many Bitcoin investors in terms of massive traffic and increased transaction fees on the Bitcoin blockchain. After all, maintaining low transaction fees and fast confirmation times is one of the most attractive aspects of Bitcoin for many users. While some projects may find value in issuing BRC-20 tokens on the Bitcoin blockchain, we must weigh the potential benefits and downsides to make an informed decision on which direction to go with the ecosystem.

Prospects are visible not only in the low cost of payment for transactions and confirmation time. The main thing that Bitcoin is more reliability. I do not remember the hacking of the bitcoin network in recent years, which cannot be said about other blockchains. Therefore, the launch of tokens on the BRC-20 is welcomed by many cryptophanes.

[Psynthax]

currently it seems that everytime there's minting of BRC-20 it's always gone within a minutes, I guess it's now the hot thing right now.
moreover every minting gives good returns just in few hours, this shows the demand that this BRC-20 has honestly.

[TastyChillySauce00]

Seeing how minting competition in BRC was going on is pretty much the same like seeing how people were massively joining in the meme coin trend. BRC is prety much the same like meme coin trend and it's only disrupting the bitcoin.

There's no useful project. all of them were exist only for money and no more.

[WalkerIVIV]

its currently on its peak fame i think, some coin become expensive without proper reasoning, but mostly just hypes that revolves around the coin.
just because it's BRC-20 many are minting it and the price also climbs up like there's no tomorrow but we still don't know whether this could be long lasting ones.

[JeffBrad12]

the thing with BRC-20 is that right now it seemed to be popular but doesn't seem that it gonna replace ERC-20 anytime soon.
the experiences as I have seen from this new protocol beforehand just doesn't seem to be refined experiences honestly.
moreover, the platform was still largely premature, but the thing that i think should be of concern is the fact that it's gonna be increasing the traffic that bitcoin blockchain currently has.
it will affect the fee in the long term even now it is already affected so i'm, doubtful that this gonna be the next big thing.

[Abiky]

Seeing how minting competition in BRC was going on is pretty much the same like seeing how people were massively joining in the meme coin trend. BRC is prety much the same like meme coin trend and it's only disrupting the bitcoin.

There's no useful project. all of them were exist only for money and no more.

You're right about that. BRC-20 tokens are nothing but pure cash grabs. They don't provide any real use cases to the world. With Bitcoin Core developers planning to block Ordinals inscriptions, you can say goodbye to the BRC-20 craze soon. I think Stably should focus on other chains with built-in smart contract features. But with competitors such as USDT and USDC, I highly doubt it will survive in the long run.

With BRC-20 tokens out of the way, Bitcoin users can finally enjoy low fees and decent confirmation times. That is if the community agrees to take down Ordinals for good. Miners are too greedy to let this all go to waste, so time will tell us what path BTC will take. As long as decentralization wins, we should have nothing to worry about. Just my thoughts