This is an opinion editorial by Robert Hall, content creator and small business owner.
Over the past few weeks, I’ve noticed a disappointing trend that has split the bitcoin community into two warring factions. On the one hand, “Maximum Bitcoin Transactions” believes that only Bitcoin Layer 1 should be used to process transactions. On the other side of the spectrum, “ordinal lovers” want to use bitcoin layer 1 to insert random data and generally want to try the base layer.
Personally, I don’t have a dog in this fight. I think both sides make compelling arguments for their use cases. The purpose of this article is not to say that one is right and the other is wrong, but rather to sound the alarm about what will happen if the infighting continues and how that might hinder the movement.
Sympathy for Bitcoin Extremists
The current schism in the Bitcoin community was rightly shown when Ordinals appeared on the scene in January 2023. The Ordinals protocol basically allows NFTs on Bitcoin. Until then, NFTs were generally left to the Ethereum crowd and their ilk. Ordinals changed that dynamic and brought creators who were minting NFTs on Ethereum to Bitcoin, this new influx brought new developers, and of course higher transaction fees.
As we all know, the Bitcoin blockchain is not optimized for speed. That’s why we have the Lightning Network and other Layer 2 solutions. The purpose of the Bitcoin mainchain is a highly secure and consistent transfer of value. Bitcoin network It has a 99.98% uptimeWhich is an amazing achievement. This is exactly what we want from basic funds that can be trusted: not to degrade us over time.
When new participants enter the Bitcoin ecosystem and want to transact on the network, transaction fees will inevitably rise. It comes down to a simple matter of supply and demand. With each block, there is only a limited amount of block space, so users have to compete to get their transaction in the next block.
This causes users to get bid and stop their transaction actions in the memo pool or run out of price from sending a transaction in the first place.
As someone who is lucky enough to live in the Western world, this is not a huge deal for me because I can wait for the transaction fees to come back. Many users in the Global South do not have the same luxury.
They use Bitcoin as a cash network to conduct day-to-day business, so high layer-one fees hurt their daily survival. This is where I sympathize with the argument that Bitcoin should be used primarily for transactions.
Sympathy for Bitcoin Ordinal aficionados
But the rules are the rules, and the ordinal values follow the parameters of Bitcoin. Since the launch of Ordinals, there has undoubtedly been an explosion of activity on the Bitcoin network. Before the Ordinals, transactions could be sent for pennies, but after the Ordinals, Fees rose to more than $19.20 in May 2023. This is an increase of 560%.
Obviously, this is a massive fee hike, but on the flip side, the Bitcoin community has shown that fees can replace block subsidies in due course. With block 788,695, for example, there was a fee of 6.7 BTCin exchange for permanent block support of 6.25 BTC.
Ultimately, that’s what we want to happen, but from what I can venture to guess, Bitcoin extremists didn’t want this to happen so early in the Bitcoin adoption cycle. Considering how precocious we are, I can see why they would be upset with ordinal lovers.
Many of these extremists believe Ordinals fans are nothing but degenerate altcoins, bringing garbage to the Bitcoin network and clogging it up with images of monkeys and d**k butts. Fair point, there is some of that going on. But there is nothing that can be done about it.
Bitcoin is for everyone, right? It’s not allowed, and people can do whatever they want with Bitcoin as long as it doesn’t break the rules.
But this tension in Bitcoin right now is creating two distinct camps in Bitcoin, which is sad to see because we must unite in the mission of making the world level with Bitcoin.
We are Bitcoin messengers
The division between the pro-arrangement and anti-arrangement camps was mainly present on Bitcoin Twitter, but it certainly came to a head at the Bitcoin 2023 conference in Miami.
If you’ve watched The Great Ranking Debate, you’ve seen the tension from the start. Both camps, represented by speakers on stage, came out swinging against each other, accusing each other of harming bitcoin and bitcoin adoption:
The discussion came across as childish, and the controversy over the BRC-20 tokens was nothing more than a sideshow. This dichotomy was the façade that was presented for the world to see, four men arguing over something the general public did not understand. Perception is everything right now, and if the goal is to include billions of people around the world, arguing about processor images and obscure protocols isn’t the way to go.
In my opinion, this discussion has highlighted the struggle for the soul of bitcoin right now. What does it mean to be a Bitcoin customer? How should the network be used? Should bitcoins tell other bitcoins how to use the network?
These are questions that will likely continue to arise as long as Bitcoin exists and other use cases for Bitcoin are created.
I don’t like the infighting on Bitcoin Twitter or at the conference because it makes the Bitcoin industry look bad and not ready for the big tournaments. How can bitcoin become the world’s reserve currency when we don’t have a home of our own? Don’t be where you eat, guys. We are Bitcoin emissaries, and we should always be careful about how we present Bitcoin to the world.
Bitcoin’s mission is to offer the world a better alternative and take power away from the people who corrupt society with fiat currency. Authorities that won’t take Bitcoin seriously until we get a large number of people adopting it. If we want to change the world, society must remain focused and presentable to a wider audience. Throw away the wizard hats, and turn off the laser eyes. We are all on the same team and working towards the same goal. Let’s not forget what brought us to Bitcoin.
This is a guest post by Robert Hall. The opinions expressed are entirely their own and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of BTC Inc or Bitcoin Magazine.