Ordinals and BRC20 development

[bitcoinordinals]

Hi, community,

I think this is one (even though not the most loved) of the most logical next steps for Bitcoin adoption.
We can't expect that the process of Bitcoin unfolding will go perfectly without crazy/creative explosions here and there.

I think Ordinals will drive a great demand and awareness of Bitcoin and can potentially convince ETH lovers or alt-coin holders to flip back to BTC only.

Anyway, NFTs on Ethereum got soo much liquidity last bull market, I'm definitely expecting lots of that (and new) liquidity going to Bitcoin NFTs and am watching projects very carefully.

The NFTs that I'm so far interested in and also working on are the following:

- Dogepunks  (@DogePunksBTC)
- Bitcoin invaders (@BTCinvaders)
- Bitcoin Punks (@Bitcoin_Punks_)
- Pixel Pepes (@PepesPixel)

What do you guys think of this Ordinals development on Bitcoin?

And are there any NFTs or projects worth looking at?

[1714651980]

1714651980

[1714651980]

1714651980

[1714651980]

1714651980

[1714651980]

1714651980

[1714651980]

1714651980

[Oshosondy]

Bitcoin has been known to the world already and without NFTs and other tokens, bitcoin will continue to grow. But with these Ordinals and Inscriptions, there can be more.

But Ordinals and Inscriptions depends on bitcoin, bitcoin did not depend on Ordinals and Inscriptions.

What I just know is that bitcoin is good and some peoole are finding ways to making money from it.

Those tokens can be risky, they are not bitcoin and not developed by bitcoin developers. They are altcoins that is making use of bitcoin and bitcoin blockchain.

[bitcoinordinals]

That's a very good point.

But if we see a continuation of the Bitcoin adoption then I would say it's very likely that the first images on the BTC blockchain will have a lot of historical value.

Imagine, the first images or games ever created on the internet, people still know them right now, and through blockchain, it can be proven when and where this happened.

You're right they are actually alt-coins on Bitcoin, nevertheless, still could gain significant value due to Bitcoin's adoption.

[Z390]

It's why many crypto influencers believe that Bitcoin will be the major focus in the next bull market, and some believe that Ordinals will have the biggest run instead of any meme coins like 2021, anyways, I don't plan on buying any because this idea is still a way of making money, how will money flow into the space if the idea isn't fresh and new? But the congestion problem of Bitcoin is my concern, ordinals could add more to that problem than solving it. 

I won't mind missing out if ordinals will be one of the biggest gainers in the next bull market, at least there are many other utilities that can still do very well in two years time, I am not ready to risk and thing for ordinals, I prefer Bitcoin.

[avikz]

Nope! I do not agree with the idea of Ordinals and it is also doesn't go with the idea of Satoshi to make Bitcoin a payment processor. This whole Ordinals and BRC-20 staff is not bringing back attention from non-bitcoiners so no help in adoption either. It's just clogging the network with more and more transactions without any real good.

NFT market has already started drying down. In next couple of years, it will be vanished. Because nothing good can happen to the society by selling some nonsense pictures over a blockchain. You can check cyberpunk series of NFTs to know what I mean by nonsense.

[bitcoinordinals]

I know the initial intention was not to create NFTs, images, or any files on the blockchain, but isn't it a regular course of adoption?
It's quite logical as a next step to see what has been hyped and born out of Bitcoin (Ethereum, erc-20 tokens and ETH NFTs) to be created on Bitcoin itself as well.

I really think this will drive massive liquidity and opportunities.

[Renampun]

...

I think Ordinals will drive a great demand and awareness of Bitcoin and can potentially convince ETH lovers or alt-coin holders to flip back to BTC only.

...

it doesn't work that way, you can't expect that a user will leave the Altcoin market and come back to Bitcoin just because of an NFTs, that's not going to happen. moreover, Ordinal is not an innovation on the Bitcoin network, its creators only take advantage of loopholes in Bitcoin, and instead it annoys other users because it causes spikes and makes fees expensive. even though the bitcoin dev has overcome this, the average person on the Bitcoin network is not too happy with the presence of this Ordinal.

besides that, without this Ordinal actually Bitcoin has developed very well, so I think that this Ordinal should create their own separate community, because it makes the Bitcoin network saturated.

[DooMAD]

I really think this will drive massive liquidity and opportunities.

But mostly just chances for shameless opportunists to sell worthless crap to gullible suckers, at first.  

The legit stuff will likely only come later.  It won't have much hype and likely won't have much, if any, speculative potential.  Any legitimate application of this technology won't look like a shady get-rich-quick scheme.  It'll be designed to disrupt traditional finance and legal services like Notaries and won't involve embedding stupid pictures anywhere.  And that's exactly how you'll know it'll be the genuine stuff that provides real utility.  You shouldn't have to buy scummy IOU tokens to gain utility and, provided it's done properly, you likely won't have to.

Avoid worthless IOUs.  They're not an "investment".  Much like how "Magic Beans" are sold to fools.

[tread93]

Hi, community,

I think this is one (even though not the most loved) of the most logical next steps for Bitcoin adoption.
We can't expect that the process of Bitcoin unfolding will go perfectly without crazy/creative explosions here and there.

I think Ordinals will drive a great demand and awareness of Bitcoin and can potentially convince ETH lovers or alt-coin holders to flip back to BTC only.

Anyway, NFTs on Ethereum got soo much liquidity last bull market, I'm definitely expecting lots of that (and new) liquidity going to Bitcoin NFTs and am watching projects very carefully.

The NFTs that I'm so far interested in and also working on are the following:

- Dogepunks  (@DogePunksBTC)
- Bitcoin invaders (@BTCinvaders)
- Bitcoin Punks (@Bitcoin_Punks_)
- Pixel Pepes (@PepesPixel)

What do you guys think of this Ordinals development on Bitcoin?

And are there any NFTs or projects worth looking at?

Honestly I think its natural for this to occur simply because a lot of folks who have come to love crypto and NFTs will see this as a huge win for the blockchain. However, Bitcoiners generally I have found are really not a fan of these ordinals, even the Developers. But maybe some of them are, i'm not entirely sure. Anyways, it is exciting to see a new found love for the first crypto among shitcoiners. So we have that going for us with Ordinals at least. As for me I have yet to get any, but now honestly I want some of them. What is the best wallet to get for BRC-20?

[NotATether]

NFTs are not necessary to increase adoption of a payments blockchain. Besides, the general public is already getting tired of the NFT fad so the only people who are actually buying NFTs now are blokes who already know about Bitcoin or Ethereum (and hate it, or maybe don't give a stick about it).

[pooya87]

I think this is one (even though not the most loved) of the most logical next steps for Bitcoin adoption.

Exploiting a protocol and abusing it is not a way to help its adoption, it is a sure way of destroying the whole system.

I think Ordinals will drive a great demand and awareness of Bitcoin

Wrong.
Those who are scamming people with the Ordinals Attack and those who are gambling in the fake market with fake tokens aren't interested in bitcoin at all. They aren't even using bitcoin, they are gambling with their money in a centralized platform.

and can potentially convince ETH lovers or alt-coin holders to flip back to BTC only.

Wrong.
There are no ETH lovers or altcoin holders, there are bag holders of altcoins who are holding them hoping to recover the funds they lost after they got dumped (eg. ETH going from 0.15BTC down to 0.07BTC). They won't dump it to buy fake tokens.

to Bitcoin NFTs

There are not such thing as Bitcoin NFTs. Bitcoin protocol simply does NOT support NFTs.

The scams that I'm so far bag-holding are the following:

FTFY

[davis196]

Anyway, NFTs on Ethereum got soo much liquidity last bull market, I'm definitely expecting lots of that (and new) liquidity going to Bitcoin NFTs and am watching projects very carefully.

So basically you are expecting another "Pump and Dump" NFT wave.
The people, who were pumping and dumping shitcoins and shittokens years ago moved into pumping and dumping NFTs.
The NFTs markets on the Ethereum blockchain lost their hype and you think that the BTC Ordinals will bring a new wave of "pump and dump" hype? Really? Nobody buys NFTs because they like the art of because the NFT has some kind of utility. The "pump & dumpers" buy NTFs in order to sell them at a bigger price. This is definitely a "tulip mania"/price bubble/"pump & dump" scam to me.
What makes the Bitcoin NFTs(Ordinals) better than the Ethereum NFTs? The obvious answer is only one. NOTHING!

[Aanuoluwatofunmi]

What do you guys think of this Ordinals development on Bitcoin?

Nothing than it makes bitcoin transaction fee high, congested the bitcoin network and then makes bitcoin look like any other meme tokens that are not reliable enough to be trusted, it makes it appears that the normal bitcoin users performing transactions were being override by an external players of NFTs to takeover the blockspace that gives them more priority than the average bitcoin users because they were able to pay higher for their tokens on the host network which is bitcoin.

And are there any NFTs or projects worth looking at?

There are many but at your own risk, we are less concerned about NFTs here because our focus is on bitcoin discussion before the bitcoin tokens in forms of ordinals inscriptions set in.

[Z-tight]

Honestly I think its natural for this to occur simply because a lot of folks who have come to love crypto and NFTs will see this as a huge win for the blockchain.

I don't support this ordinals invention, neither do i think it is a "huge win for the blockchain", the BTC blockchain is for storing records of transactions, this invention found a way through Taproot upgrade to inscribe and sell extra data that isn't necessary, people will get tired of this early and naturally, that's why i don't support stopping it in a way that would mean censoring.

As for me I have yet to get any, but now honestly I want some of them. What is the best wallet to get for BRC-20?

Get yourself an Electrum wallet and buy BTC.

[bbc.reporter]

What do you guys think of this Ordinals development on Bitcoin?

I think very much similar to the scams being created and issued in Ethereum, Binance smartchain and other blockchains, much of these projects being created and issued in Ordinals might also be scams. The community should be very careful before trusting all of these projects. I am quite certain that some of them are taking advantage of the innovation that decentralized ledgers and databases has given us.

Also move this thread to the altcoins discussion subforum. Ordinals and BRC20 projects development is closer to being a development for altcoins.

[d5000]

My opinion differs with respect to Ordinals, Inscriptions and BRC-20:

- Ordinals project itself ("collecting [rare and strange] satoshis"): It's ok. It's not a major innovation, but could be interesting for some collectionists. Not for me, however (but if I find one of these super-rare things I'll sell it ).
- Inscriptions: On Bitcoin-style altcoins they can be a cool feature. I support them above all on data-centered chains like NMC or Doge (although currently it seems both don't support Taproot). But Bitcoin isn't a good place for them. Bitcoin's network effect depends on its main token. That doesn't mean BTC has do be used only for regular transactions (financial contracts are also interesting) but it's of no value to store other kind of data there. I'm against all inscriptions larger than ~1-2 kB and thus would support a developer action to make big Taproot transactions non-standard (but not Ordisrespector and other censorship/"filter" methods).
- BRC-20: the worst and most anachronistic technology I've ever seen on Bitcoin (JSON to save data on-chain? Really? Why not use Protobuf or similar much more efficient methods?). It was started as an experiment but people took it seriously, most likely because many don't know that there are already dozens of competing standards since ~2013-14 which are mostly much more efficient with space (EPOBC, Open Assets, Counterparty, Omni, RGB, Taproot Assets [Taro] - even recommended by the BRC-20 creator!). I expect a sudden and cruel death and a >90% loss for everybody who invested in these tokens straight out of the technology stone age.

[examplens]

I know the initial intention was not to create NFTs, images, or any files on the blockchain, but isn't it a regular course of adoption?
It's quite logical as a next step to see what has been hyped and born out of Bitcoin (Ethereum, erc-20 tokens and ETH NFTs) to be created on Bitcoin itself as well.

I really think this will drive massive liquidity and opportunities.

Yes, surely NFT is something that will bring massive liquidity.
Can you explain exactly what opportunities monkey images offer on the Bitcoin network? What exactly is new here? Everything has been seen a long time ago, dogs, monkeys, frogs... Aren't there monkeys, frogs and the like, and there are too many on ERC20 and others?


note: There is no need to spam the forum by starting new topics with a repetition of the NFT you are interested in.

[franky1]

My opinion differs with respect to Ordinals, Inscriptions and BRC-20:

- Ordinals project itself ("collecting [rare and strange] satoshis"): It's ok. It's not a major innovation, but could be interesting for some collectionists. Not for me, however (but if I find one of these super-rare things I'll sell it ).
- Inscriptions: On Bitcoin-style altcoins they can be a cool feature. I support them above all on data-centered chains like NMC or Doge (although currently it seems both don't support Taproot). But Bitcoin isn't a good place for them. Bitcoin's network effect depends on its main token. That doesn't mean BTC has do be used only for regular transactions (financial contracts are also interesting) but it's of no value to store other kind of data there. I'm against all inscriptions larger than ~1-2 kB and thus would support a developer action to make big Taproot transactions non-standard (but not Ordisrespector and other censorship/"filter" methods).
- BRC-20: the worst and most anachronistic technology I've ever seen on Bitcoin (JSON to save data on-chain? Really? Why not use Protobuf or similar much more efficient methods?). It was started as an experiment but people took it seriously, most likely because many don't know that there are already dozens of competing standards since ~2013-14 which are mostly much more efficient with space (EPOBC, Open Assets, Counterparty, Omni, RGB, Taproot Assets [Taro] - even recommended by the BRC-20 creator!). I expect a sudden and cruel death and a >90% loss for everybody who invested in these tokens straight out of the technology stone age.

you do realise that the ordinals v0 (rare sats) are miscounted and dont go to the destinations the ordinals explorer pretends it does

you do realise the inscriptions (memes and json) are also miscounted and are also just appended after the tx signing process and thus not actually part of the signed tx data.. thus not assigned to any output. thus doesnt actually move/transfer with the transaction.

there are actual mechanisms that could assign hashs of inscriptions to a output. but the ordinals project manager is too dumb to use it. thus the whole ordinals project of all versions has no real transfer protocol or proof of ownership mechanisms, so is broke

he could employ a simple fix, for instance create a multisig of 1-of-2 where by the multisig is a destination owners public key + the hash of inscription.
thus the multisig address the creator uses as destination is the recipients proof of receiving the inscription becasue the creators destination is an address that includes the inscription hash to make the multisig address. thus assigning the inscription to an output/spend

 thus when recipient later want to spend it, the recipient of first(now owner) uses his public key (1-of-2) and as part of the redeem script, reveals the multisig address holds the hash of inscription thus show it owned it.
where by when spending it. he would too combine the inscription hash + his buyers public key to make a 1 of 2 multisig for the destination address. so that the buyer can then claim it in the same way

[Who is John Galt?]

As it turned out, not all inscriptions in Ordinals were correct, some turned out to be wrong, "cursed inscriptions". Among the options, how such incorrect inscriptions were formed:

Multiple inscriptions per transaction, for efficient batching.
Inscriptions on inputs after the first, which is useful for collections.
Multiple inscriptions on the same sat, so that the entire history of a sat doesn’t need to be checked to determine if a new inscription is valid.
Inscriptions with unrecognized even headers, so that new even headers don't cause upgraded clients to disagree about inscription numbers.

https://bitcoinmagazine.com/technical/the-debate-around-cursed-ordinal-inscriptions

There are already more than 71,000 such incorrect entries. As a result, updates were made to the Ordinals protocol to version 0.6.0 to address the issue of incorrect entries.

It seems that not all the consequences of using the Ordinals protocol have become clear yet, if there are still such significant errors in its operation.

[DooMAD]

It seems that not all the consequences of using the Ordinals protocol have become clear yet, if there are still such significant errors in its operation.

Arguably, they're not just operational errors, but fundamental design errors.  Even if they make it work as intended, it'll still be a grossly inefficient and wasteful approach.  

Something far more elegant could be built utilising Taproot Assets, which is ideally suited for this use-case.  The resulting lower fees would make this a more attractive option for anyone who still wants to get ripped off by purchasing silly pictures that clearly have no value.  And it will later pave the way for genuine financial assets like deeds or other documents representing physical goods.  

It's an approach which wouldn't consume so many resources and cause so much congestion.  Something I feel we can all get on board with.