-
P2TR txs taking off!
- https://twitter.com/murchandamus/status/1624834282534449153
- Almost no one was using P2TR before ordinals
- context: TR = taproot
- TR was the softfork added to bitcoin ~2 years ago
- it was deemed so important and such an obvious win for bitcoin that it took precedence over other BIPs
- it was, arguably, rushed through the approval process using speedy trial only to not be adopted much for 2 years
- TR provides lots of benefits: multiple spending paths (MAST), schnorr sigs (efficieny gain)
- These primitives provide benefits like: key tweaking, coin recovery, complex spending scripts, taro, ordinals, more privacy, etc.
- BUT! noone was using it, soooooo ... ??
- Now, P2TR txs are skyrocketing which begs the question: Are ordinals bad for bitcoin?
-
Ord has benefits for bitcoin! (whoa 🤯)
- https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/cd91-ordinal-inscriptions-with-casey-rodarmor/id1546393840?i=1000599243477
- Casey spoke to ODELL in a Citadel Dispatch couple weeks ago
- In the episode he made many interesting points:
- ord requires a full node, but what exactly is a "full node"? historically, this is an area of much debate
- https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Full_node
- full node, pruned node, archival node
- how Casey expained it:
- Pruned node = verify txs, but doesn't save all data (i.e. no witness data)
- not fwd compatible w/ segwit nodes
- can receive new tx and block data, and validate it all, but missing witness data
- no witness data => cannot create new txs since it does not have full, validated UTXO set w/out witness data
- if it does attempt a send (new tx), it will effectively create a new coin (not bitcoin)
- segwit nodes will not accept the tx
- implies that txindex=0 (i think)
- Archival node = Assume valid is unset or set to something other than 0
- doesn’t check txs "buried deep in chain"
- aka syncs block headers and stores block + tx data
- does not validate every tx + block from genesis to current tip
- implies that txindex=0 (i think)
- By default -txindex=0 when running bitcoin core
- if you do not set txindex=1, bitocin core wont maintain robust tx-level data
- it will, however, store tx data about:
- txs in the mempool or relay set
- txs pertinent to addresses in your wallet
- txs pertinent to your "watch-only" addresses
- so it wont validate and store global tx data
- By default -txindex=0 when running bitcoin core
- Full node = assumevalid=0, txindex=1, segwit v2 (TR) enabled
- what is assumevalid? https://gist.github.com/bnonni/2a46b30fe171bfc8523edd4a835f8644#assume-valid
- More nodes online? good for bitcoin
- More FULL nodes online? very good for bitcoin
- Is this a good externality of ord? 🧐
- Pruned node = verify txs, but doesn't save all data (i.e. no witness data)
- ETH NFT "Degens" Moving to Bitcoin
- created a new feature for ord called
teleburn
- lets you burn a NFT on ethereum and create an equivalent one on bitcoin
- can prove ownership of bitcoin one bc you use your keys to create
- eth "burn" means you send it to an address that you can cryptographically prove has no private key
- no priv key == no ownership (aka no one owns it, its "burned" in affect)
- Is more bitcoin adoption from the ETH / alt chain crowd a good thing for bitcoin? 🧐
- created a new feature for ord called
- Blocks are full, fees are up
- Was this not the point of segwit v1? Blocks with 4 MB weight, 1 MB size => more space for txs
- Drove fees down initially until blocks fill, but did blocks fill? 🧐
- Don't have to adopt ordinal theory
- ordinal theory is opt-in
- while the data does live on-chain, and if you run a segwit v2, full node, you will store that data
- however, you do not need to adopt ordinal theory and index, number and inscribe your sats
- if its not universally adopted, does that make it "real"? 🧐
- its a philosophical question
-
Anythony Towns proposes an alternate method where data is stored off-chain
- To me, this is the same idea as taro
- Create arbitrary assets offchain, submit to chain via tx as origin point, all verification data lives with users
- In this case, you're swapping one open source protocol (tarod, tarocli) for another (nostr)
- Personally, I think this would be a downgrade as compared to taro because its not clear to me that nostr is here to stay
- However, Lightning Labs has a stake, from a company perspective, in seeing that taro comes to life on mainnet
- Aka I would bet SATs that taro gets implemented and adopted by LND nodes; I would not make the same bet on nostr
- Ordinals has taken off BECAUSE it is onchain, at least that's the thinking given the failed past off-chain nft projects (list)
Created
February 22, 2023 15:17
-
-
Save bnonni/aab99dc1f2b40c350a300d58574aa286 to your computer and use it in GitHub Desktop.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment