notdevin
@notdevin.eth
I need someone who’s sane to explain to me how Ordinals aren’t the undoing of bitcoin after reading this Ordinal Theory doc. 1) If I’m understanding this, satoshis are being made non-fungible and if successful to the max, would consume all fungibility of the chain https://docs.ordinals.com/overview.html
2 replies
0 recast
0 reaction
notdevin
@notdevin.eth
Ordinals are another form of 51% attack, very loosely speaking. To assume that you can have both modalities on a finite chain with no repercussions seems naive, again, I could be smoking crack here. BTCs value is to create a standard of relative valuation. Now that function has cancer is all I see.
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
notdevin
@notdevin.eth
Ordinals have made me more bullish on eth and I’m not chain maxi. I’ll still personally value ownership over BTC to be higher for awhile. The argument that “number so big” for why satoshis can be converted to NFT seems to be the same mistake as using a signed 32bit int for YouTube likes, fine until it’s not
2 replies
0 recast
0 reaction
_slow_crypto 🎩🤷♂️
@slowcrypto
Could you explain the 32bit YouTube point. (Plenty behind the times on the rest of the Ordinals stuff so can’t really help there either.)
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Hexidethmal 🟪
@hexidethmal
Interesting. I was initially going to explore ordinals but early on I understood that you had to have a clean wallet to house them because if you co-mingled with a wallet that sends txs, an inscribed sat that is part of an ordinal might be sent That was enough for me to pass, but this implication didn’t occur to me
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
