Ordinals, a new way to use and obtain content using Bitcoin, are allowing creators to harness the utility of NFTs (non-fungible tokens) directly from the blockchain, essentially creating native Bitcoin NFTs. This has stirred the pot in some circles, who are now discussing whether this is the way the Bitcoin blockchain should be used and how this new use case will affect Bitcoin nodes and fees in the future.
Ordinals enable Bitcoin NFTs Courtesy of Taproot
A new use case for the Bitcoin chain is being tested by people who have found a way to get content directly on the blockchain. The project, called ordinals, and released just a few days ago, has allowed anyone to create Bitcoin NFTs (called signups) as part of its functionality. This opportunity was inadvertently opened up by the Taproot upgrade the network underwent in November, which extended the duration of Bitcoin transactions to nearly the entire block size.
This has been key to what is currently happening. Before Taproot, transactions could only be 80 bytes in size, which limited the usability of what was stored in block space. Bitcoin NFTs are now saved directly on-chain, allowing for the benefits of portability, durability, and decentralization that Bitcoin is known for.
This could present unique benefits for content creators and users, as each piece of content stored on the blockchain via Ordinals will need to be synchronized by each node, giving them the longevity of the blockchain itself. Most NFT projects leveraging other chains, including Ethereum, only store pointers to information, which does not reside directly on the blockchain.
Controversy behind the new functionality
While there are some apparent advantages to Bitcoin NFT adoption, the emergence of this new feature has sparked a longstanding debate about the true function of the network and what constitutes an attack against the Bitcoin ecosystem. There are already two groups in this public debate: those who support this new face of Bitcoin and those who believe that it is a spam attack that should be avoided and even censored.
The first group argues that this is a net benefit for the chain and that it will contribute to bringing more fees and use cases for the chain. This is the case of the well-known bitcoin influencer Dan Held, who believe that every transaction that pays your fee is not spam and that the chain is not allowed for anyone to build on top of it.
The second group claims that even if there is nothing they can do to stop it, it will hurt the financial and transactional use case of Bitcoin. Blockstream CEO Adam Back, believed by some to be Satoshi Nakamoto, is part of this faction, stating that bitcoin users can “educate and encourage developers who care about bitcoin’s use case not to do it or do it in a space-efficient way, e.g. timestamped.”
Luke Dashjr, a bitcoin developer, I call This is an “attack” on the protocol and I ask so that “spam” filters are developed to counter ordinal functionality. Another Twitter user named “Bitcoin is saving” criticized this from another point of view, explaining that this would affect the viability of marginalized people in developing countries to run Bitcoin nodes and send transactions.
What do you think about ordinals and Bitcoin NFTs? Tell us in the comment section below.
image credits: Shutterstock, Pixabay, Wiki Commons
Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only. It is not a direct offer or a solicitation of an offer to buy or sell, or a recommendation or endorsement of any product, service or company. bitcoin.com does not provide investment, tax, legal or accounting advice. Neither the company nor the author is responsible, directly or indirectly, for any damage or loss caused or alleged to be caused by or in connection with the use of or reliance on any content, goods or services mentioned in this article.
