Quote from: d5000 on Today at 04:26:53 PM

Quote from: Wind_FURY on Today at 03:22:04 PM

Bitcoin DeFi could be as big as Ethereum DeFi in my opinion.

If you think "Bitcoin DeFi" includes everything involving the currency "Bitcoin", then I can agree. So if you include tools like RGB/Taproot Assets, where some of the operations are taken off-chain, then I see a bright future for "Bitcoin DeFi".

But on-chain Bitcoin DeFi should be quite difficult, because Bitcoin's blocks are much more limited than Ethereum's, and thus the high fee problem will make many typical DeFi operations unfeasible. Some years ago, the Counterparty project intended to bring a extensive DeFi suite to Bitcoin but even the fees in 2016 (much lower than those today) were too high for an ecosystem to evolve, while Ethereum thrived. They had even planned Turing complete smart contracts (see here) but development stalled for a long time; more recently it seems to have made progress in this field again.

A "good" outcome could be that Runes people could develop a technology similar to OmniBolt using LN for Runes Transactions. But being aware that the Runes community is very much a spinoff of the Ordinals community and they were quite eager to put everything onchain, I doubt that.

I'm talking about everything built on top of Bitcoin that has the potential to unlock those Bitcoins that are being HODLed in users' wallets. It's an opportunity for Bitcoin-only people to do some shitcoinery that's truly denominated in Bitcoin/without currency conversion.

Quote

Quote from: Wind_FURY on Today at 03:22:04 PM

BUT for those users who decide to pay for huge fees, they are technically not wasted. They pay the miners to secure the network and to continue mining new Bitcoins to distribute in the system.

From the standpoint of an user spending fees to "etch" or "mint" a rune which will never see a buyer, the money is wasted. Wink

I still am unsure if it's positive or negative that Runes fees are delaying the effects of halving to miners. I tend towards the latter: the miner income drop will come eventually, so it's currently only delaying it, with the cost of people leaving Bitcoin (delaying adoption "as a currency") because the network is more expensive to use.

It's very annoying for plebs like me who want cheap on-chain transactions.

To zoom out and to think about it from the whole network's viewpoint, it's actually neutral. The network keeps chugging along block after block, no consensus rule is broken, and the fee market works.

Positive for the miners because they are incentivized with more fees.