So, you are sure that in this section one more topic is needed to discuss the current situation. What are your constructive proposals for overcoming this crisis?
I prefer people getting their shit together to stop the existential threat to the network if it means the entire Bitcoin Discussion becomes an Ordinals board temporarily.
I for one will support any soft fork for this.
That's what a hard fork does, a soft fork adds rules of the protocol which does not make a second chain.
Enforcing strict Taproot validation script size is something that does not need a hard fork because there is no rule for validation size currently.
There's a difference between putting non-bitcoin data with a niche use case on the blockchain, and putting "worthless" (BRC20 creator's word!) BS on the blockchain in hopes that it will pay for your Lambo and 48 months of house mortgage that you're about to get evicted for.
It is deeply erroneous and selfish to attempt to judge the validity of a transaction by the usefulness of its contents. Before the first bitcoin sold for fiat money, the entire bitcoin network was absolutely useless from the point of view of the layman, although by that time it had already functioned quite stably. The key to Bitcoin's anti-fragility is its architectural simplicity. The miners are not trying to evaluate the usefulness of the contents of the transaction, but for some reason you are trying to get them to start doing it.Selfish? We are talking about the entire bitcoin community having to pay large fees just to do their day-to-day business.
This solution which I have just proposed does not depend on miners doing anything different, it is protocol developers that do all the fixing.
Now please explain to me what kind of use cases BRC20 tokens provide for end users (and trading does not count). Go on, I'm waiting
