Quote from: nutildah on Today at 10:10:31 AM

Quote from: BitcoinBunny on Today at 09:09:06 AM

What about NFTs stored inside the Bitcoin blockchain? Ordinals is causing a huge stir but relative silence on the forum about it.

NFTs Coming to Bitcoin Sparks Handwringing About Crypto Purists

Nothing triggering about that headline at all Cheesy

I don't blame anyone here if they're against it. I'm kind of on the fence about it personally. But it seems to be happening whether anybody likes it or not.

Quote from: nutildah on Today at 07:45:44 AM

Quote from: rodarmor on December 21, 2022, 12:52:36 AM

An NFT implementation which embeds NFT content in Taproot witnesses, assigning them to the first sat of the first output of the transaction, "inscribing" that sat with content

Super interesting to watch the discussion over this bullet point in particular unfolding on Twitter as it now appears to be possible to upload several KB (theoretically up to ~4 MB) worth of data to the blockchain for the purposes of on-chain NFT storage.

https://ordinals.com/inscription/69d500051f9a0812ed41798eeb06d4af93349529480c23e9cf1ef0ccb2a921a8i0

On one side you have lukedashjr calling it an attack on Bitcoin and Adam Back calling for transaction censorship by miners; on the other side you have Peter Todd calling the "freakout" about ordinals "stupid" and reminding everyone that adding non-standard transaction data to transactions has always been possible.

It has reinvigorated the age-old debate of "appropriate use of block space," what "blockchain spam" entails, and whether Bitcoin should be used to store data not related to the actual transaction of BTC (for financial purposes).

Here is a brief overview of how it works as far as NFTs are concerned:

https://read.pourteaux.xyz/p/illegitimate-bitcoin-transactions

...

Almost zero mentions of this debate here, so let's mention it.

As much as I completely loathe NFTs and everything that surrounds that ecosystem, I don't see any problem if people want to store that related data in the Bitcoin blockchain. You still have to pay for it after all.

Peter Todd is correct. That capability has always been there in the blockchain, and like honey badger it gives exactly no fucks as to what people do with that data storage.

Isn't it a tiny amount of data storage anyway? And if the Bitcoin devs really see a potential problem/exploits with it down the road, I'm assuming that in a future release it can be either be reduced or eliminated?