The rise of Bitcoin payments has led to a renewed war on the standard, BRC-20 tokens

The rise of Bitcoin payments has led to a renewed war on the standard, BRC-20 tokens



Bitcoin is booming, and so are network fees. A 20-month high of more than $44,000 – increasing network congestion is creating another battle for the NFT-like Ordinals project and the BRC-20 token.

It remains in the eye of the beholder on what should and should not be allowed on the Bitcoin blockchain. On Wednesday, Bitcoin Core developer and Ocean Mining CTO Luke Dashjer railed against spam and its impact on the Bitcoin network.

“”Scripts are exploiting the blockchain by exploiting a vulnerability in Bitcoin Core,” Dashjir wrote on Twitter. Bitcoin Core allows users to further limit the amount of transaction data. “Scripts bypass this limit by disguising their data as program code.”

Originally launched in January by co-Bitcoin Core developer Casey Rodermore, digital assets similar to NFTs are digital assets written on satoshi, the smallest denomination of Bitcoin. Media such as artwork and video can be written to individual satoshis for the November 2021 update to Taproot, which launched on the Bitcoin network.

Minergate

However, the popularity of transcripts has driven up the cost of sending bitcoin transactions, which Hasan explained is due to the rapid demand for blockchain space. Opponents cite that as another reason the protocol should be stopped.

“These transaction fees are so high that if someone wants to send a transaction, it's instantly verified,” Nick Hansen, founder and CEO of Luxor Technologies, told Decrypt. “It's going to be more expensive, and if you're not willing to pay more, it's going to take longer.”

While Hansen knows that he doesn't follow the NFT space closely, according to commentators, he sees Ordinal as a Bitcoin block space and not just as a source of congestion.

“I'm a big fan of block space, and turns seem like a great way for you to get that space usage right now because it's so important to my customers, the miners,” Hansen said.

More than 46 million such articles have been created since January, and that includes articles tied to BRC-20, a type of fungible token built on the Bitcoin blockchain.

Demonstrating the continued popularity of Ordinals, the Ordinals BRC-20 token, ORDI, set a new high of $68.37 on Wednesday. ORDI now has a capitalization of $1.3 billion. On Sunday, ORDI's market cap was $873 million, according to CoinGecko.

BRC-20 is another standard protocol that allows users to spread MiM coins on the network.

However, detractors call Ordinals abusing the Bitcoin network and call for it to be banned. Dashjr has previously suggested that Bitcoin developers implement “spam filtering” to block legitimate transactions.

“Action had to be taken,” Dashjir wrote at the time. “Spam filtering has been a standard part of Bitcoin Core since day 1.”

In the year In 2011, Dashjar released the Bitcoin Notation Protocol, a version of Bitcoin Core that adjusts transactions to exclude non-monetary transactions and additional information such as text that does not change blocks to avoid hijacking the network.

Bitcoin Knots was captured by Dashjr, who proposed on Twitter that the next version of the protocol would help push Ordinal off the Bitcoin network.

“This bug was recently fixed in Bitcoin Knots v25.1,” Dashjr wrote. “Bitcoin Core is still vulnerable with the upcoming v26 release. I hope it will finally be fixed before v27 next year.”

Dashjr has not yet responded to Decrypt's request for comment.

While Dashjir may view Ordinal as “spam,” Bitcoin miners and those who support them see the practice as a good thing for the network's financial stability and push back against the claim that Ordinal is bad for the blockchain.

“I have a problem on the way [Dashjr] It is described [inscriptions]Hanson comments as spam. He may find this additional information not interesting, important or useful. But that doesn't mean everyone does.

“Luke is not the judge of what is considered spam and what is considered legitimate marketing,” Hanson continued. “My criticism of his approach, or at least the way he describes these types of transactions as spam… is that he's arbitrarily using what he suspects to be spam because it turns out to be something he doesn't want or need. I won't allow it.”

Edited by Ryan Ozawa.

Stay on top of crypto news, get daily updates in your inbox.

Leave a Reply

Pin It on Pinterest