And then there's also the issue of fungibility considering that a Satoshi assigned with a unique inscription such as an image or even a video is no longer the same with the rest.
What is your opinion on this? Are you in favor of this or not?
I think this is what everyone will have a problem with.
I feel that if a satoshi that is part of the real bitcoin network gets modified at the fungible level, then it kinda defeats the whole purpose of having fungible electronic cash in the first place. This is especially true when considering proof-of-work, and the amount of work that the miners and full node operators have done over the years to secure and defend the network from attacks. It's almost offensive IMO.
This is most likely why people are considering this as an attack on the network itself, and you know what, I kinda see it that way to be completely frank.
I mean there are other chains in the crypto ecosystem that deal with NFT's such as Ethereum and Solana. Then again, "bitcoin can already do stuff these other shit-coins are doing". Haha right? -.-
Furthermore, I have a problem with this because not only are you ignoring other ecosystems that are built for NFT's and stuff, but you go right back and force something bitcoin was never meant to do.
Can't have your cake and eat it too sometimes I guess.
Then again, having satoshi's get taken out of circulation can be looked as them getting burned? If that's the case, then some people might support ordinals because of the fact that it will make their ₿ags more valuable when they want to start $elling.