Altcoins Talks - Cryptocurrency Forum
Learning & News => For Beginners => Basic Questions about Cryptos => Topic started by: Learn Bitcoin on January 18, 2024, 03:15:21 PM
-
Hey everyone!
We all know there is a massive spike in transaction fees, and you probably know when and why it's started. Taproot development on the bitcoin network allowed developers to create tokens and release them on the Bitcoin network which have been identified as BRC-20 tokens. BRC-20 token developers mint their tokens on the network but they are using the same Bitcoin network. Bitcoin mempool has been congested for a couple of months now due to these massive transactions. Even though I am not a coder or developer, I would love to know more about how these things work. Why they are doing these massive spam transactions? Sometimes I feel like why those stupid weirdos spending 30K sat to send 1K sats? Does it make sense?
-
Hey everyone!
We all know there is a massive spike in transaction fees, and you probably know when and why it's started. Taproot development on the bitcoin network allowed developers to create tokens and release them on the Bitcoin network which have been identified as BRC-20 tokens. BRC-20 token developers mint their tokens on the network but they are using the same Bitcoin network. Bitcoin mempool has been congested for a couple of months now due to these massive transactions. Even though I am not a coder or developer, I would love to know more about how these things work. Why they are doing these massive spam transactions? Sometimes I feel like why those stupid weirdos spending 30K sat to send 1K sats? Does it make sense?
I am quite shocked to see this question after that long because we already had discussed this issue on BTT so many times but hey here we go again, when all this started for the first time I created a topic on BTT, and due to Ordinals, the fee touches the all-time high of $32 per TX. I prefer you to read that thread of mine if you don't mind.
- Why BTC Transactions Fees are Skyrocketing? (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5452050.msg62216999#msg62216999)
In this thread, I mention the reason which caused the creation of these new shit tokens, and that was not due to the taproot upgrade, instead, it was due to a bug in ordinals To know more about Ordinals I prefer you should read this:
- https://chain.link/education-hub/ordinals-bitcoin-nfts
According to the latest update of V27, developers has stated that, in near future we won't see any new inscription of token as this update will unable this feature of creating BRC-20 Tokens. (source (https://coinmarketcap.com/academy/article/bug-fix-on-bitcoin-core-could-end-bitcoin-ordinals-and-brc-20))
-
I am quite shocked to see this question after that long because we already had discussed this issue on BTT
You should not be shocked. Either I missed your thread, or I didn't pay too much attention because there are a lot of spammy threads every day and people are focusing on their signature requirements. Sometimes I do not check the Bitcoin discussion section for a while and I participate in a discussion that I have already commented on before.
In this thread, I mention the reason which caused the creation of these new shit tokens, and that was not due to the taproot upgrade, instead, it was due to a bug in ordinals To know more about Ordinals I prefer you should read this:
- https://chain.link/education-hub/ordinals-bitcoin-nfts
According to the latest update of V27, developers has stated that, in near future we won't see any new inscription of token as this update will unable this feature of creating BRC-20 Tokens. (source (https://coinmarketcap.com/academy/article/bug-fix-on-bitcoin-core-could-end-bitcoin-ordinals-and-brc-20))
Thanks for the info. That was useful. I have read both articles and it's nice to know in detail. I am glad to know that devs also thinking to stop this shit. If they want to do such bullshit inscription, they should use a different blockchain like BSC or other cheap chains. These shit developer ruining Bitcoiners life. Only miners are profitable at this moment.
-
I am quite shocked to see this question after that long because we already had discussed this issue on BTT
You should not be shocked. Either I missed your thread, or I didn't pay too much attention because there are a lot of spammy threads every day and people are focusing on their signature requirements. Sometimes I do not check the Bitcoin discussion section for a while and I participate in a discussion that I have already commented on before.
It is entirely possible that there are users here who do not visit Bitcointalk or find this forum more user-friendly and find it easier to navigate here than on BTT. So this discussion may have some sympathetic answers. Especially if we know that users here are more in favor of altcoins, and I would guess that Ordinals are some kind of that, right?
Here's an example, I'm still looking for the right answer, what exactly gives value to ordinals? Why does someone pay huge sums for a pixelated image, which a skilled designer can make in 5 minutes?
-
In other words, BRC20 tokens are the cryptocurrencies that use the Bitcoin blockchain.
They are the same as erc20 tokens that use the Ethereum blockchain. They are called tokens because they do not have their own blockchain.
They will be only called coins if they create their own blockchain.
-
Taproot development on the bitcoin network allowed developers to create tokens and release them on the Bitcoin network which have been identified as BRC-20 tokens.
That's not true. BRC-20 which created with Ordinals use witness data which have 10000 bytes for SegWit and no bytes limit for Taproot[1]. And before SegWit exist, USDT token already exist on Bitcoin.
BRC-20 token developers mint their tokens on the network but they are using the same Bitcoin network.
Actually anyone with wallet which support BRC-20 and willing to pay some TX fee can mint BRC-20 based token, even when they're not the one who deploy that[2].
[1] https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0342.mediawiki#resource-limits (https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0342.mediawiki#resource-limits)
[2] https://www.xverse.app/blog/how-to-mint-brc-20-tokens (https://www.xverse.app/blog/how-to-mint-brc-20-tokens) under section "How Does Minting BRC-20 Tokens Work?".
-
Sometimes I feel like why those stupid weirdos spending 30K sat to send 1K sats? Does it make sense?
Don't you think they have their own plan and target which they are running after and not minding the cost towards the fulfilment of what they are running after, on a normal reasoning, no one could have done such, paying more than what you're sending, but when there's hidden agenda attached, thing like this happens, we will have to keep and eye on the whole show to see what gets unfold next with them and their tokens, just that many would have been massively affected using the bitcoin network as bitcoiners.
-
Hey everyone!
We all know there is a massive spike in transaction fees, and you probably know when and why it's started. Taproot development on the bitcoin network allowed developers to create tokens and release them on the Bitcoin network which have been identified as BRC-20 tokens. BRC-20 token developers mint their tokens on the network but they are using the same Bitcoin network. Bitcoin mempool has been congested for a couple of months now due to these massive transactions. Even though I am not a coder or developer, I would love to know more about how these things work. Why they are doing these massive spam transactions? Sometimes I feel like why those stupid weirdos spending 30K sat to send 1K sats? Does it make sense?
I'm not a developer but logically, I know how this works. BRC20 tokens also known as ordinals are inscription made on each sats of transactions and this inscription is unique from one another making it look like NFTs that we have on other networks. This inscription are made on each meta of bitcoin and this is possible because the developers are intentionally allowed it to be so. When people make this metadata transactions, it makes the transaction weight to be heavy and hence they need high sats to make it go through the mempool without having to wait for long.
Now this BRC20 tokens are high in demand and there is profit because of the intense trend and fear of missing out, so they pay high transaction to make it quick for the transaction to be included in the next block which is affecting other typical transaction on the bitcoin network.
This looks like an attack but since the developers allowed it to be exploited by people that like it, they let it be because the miners of course are been compensated with high fees but I don't see the use since bitcoin price is high enough for them for profit.
-
I am quite shocked to see this question after that long because we already had discussed this issue on BTT so many times but hey here we go again, when all this started for the first time I created a topic on BTT, and due to Ordinals, the fee touches the all-time high of $32 per TX. I prefer you to read that thread of mine if you don't mind.
- Why BTC Transactions Fees are Skyrocketing? (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5452050.msg62216999#msg62216999)
In this thread, I mention the reason which caused the creation of these new shit tokens, and that was not due to the taproot upgrade, instead, it was due to a bug in ordinals To know more about Ordinals I prefer you should read this:
- https://chain.link/education-hub/ordinals-bitcoin-nfts
According to the latest update of V27, developers has stated that, in near future we won't see any new inscription of token as this update will unable this feature of creating BRC-20 Tokens. (source (https://coinmarketcap.com/academy/article/bug-fix-on-bitcoin-core-could-end-bitcoin-ordinals-and-brc-20))
I also missed your thread in Btt and due to one or two reasons and like OP mentioned there are more spam threads there than the usual that makes people miss some important threads but visiting this forum have educated me more about the cause of high transaction fees and Ordinals by reading your post that directed me to the other forum to read your post.
You mentioned that the creation of the BRC20 token was due to a bug in the ordinals, does that mean that we should worry about bitcoin is such can happen and challenge its existence?
I hope they are working towards a possible solution to eliminate the bug in the Ordinal and also eliminate all the tokens created on the bitcoin network because if nothing is done sooner some other developers might create more tokens in the network which will lead to more congestion in the mempool.
-
We all know there is a massive spike in transaction fees, and you probably know when and why it's started. Taproot development on the bitcoin network allowed developers to create tokens and release them on the Bitcoin network which have been identified as BRC-20 tokens. BRC-20 token developers mint their tokens on the network but they are using the same Bitcoin network. Bitcoin mempool has been congested for a couple of months now due to these massive transactions. Even though I am not a coder or developer, I would love to know more about how these things work. Why they are doing these massive spam transactions? Sometimes I feel like why those stupid weirdos spending 30K sat to send 1K sats? Does it make sense?
BRC-20 tokens are those tokens which are based on BTC blockchain, they are actually not tokens but mostly behave as NFTs because we can't list token on BTC blockchain like we can list on Ethereum blockchain or any other blockchain that allows us. A person by the name of lightning I think (don't know the name for sure) was poking around with ordinals theory.
And he found a bug, which made him able to inscribe any data, into the BC blockchain, the data could be of an image, video, text, media etc. This data then becomes a part of BTC blockchain. This inscription method became famous as it helped people to earn millions of dollars in no time. More and more people started to inscribe BTC which result in high congestion and more fee. Now, in my opinion, authorities are the ones who are dusting the BTC blockchain, because they want BTC to give a bad fame.
-
This inscription are made on each meta of bitcoin and this is possible because the developers are intentionally allowed it to be so.
I don't think developer intentionally allow it. IMO it's more accurate to say developer didn't expect people would try creating token on Bitcoin again since old token (such as USDT) on Bitcoin isn't popular.
-
Now, in my opinion, authorities are the ones who are dusting the BTC blockchain, because they want BTC to give a bad fame.
No. I don't think it's the authority who is doing that. It is the people who are minting tokens in the Bitcoin network. A few days ago I noticed some unusual fee bumping and posted it on Bitcointalk, and then Nutildah came up with a response that shows those transactions were made by a few users who were minting their tokens.
Several platforms released tokens using BRC-20 and a lot of start up planning to launch their token on this network. One of the project is Farcana game which will release their token $FAR soon and it will be on BRC-20 network. They have created a huge hype already.
-
No. I don't think it's the authority who is doing that. It is the people who are minting tokens in the Bitcoin network. A few days ago I noticed some unusual fee bumping and posted it on Bitcointalk, and then Nutildah came up with a response that shows those transactions were made by a few users who were minting their tokens.
Several platforms released tokens using BRC-20 and a lot of start up planning to launch their token on this network. One of the project is Farcana game which will release their token $FAR soon and it will be on BRC-20 network. They have created a huge hype already.
You are right, I can't disagree with you because users are minting new BRC-20 tokens in the hope of making thousands, because past experiences of those who adopted BRC-20 tokens motivates them as they also made thousands of dollars. I did not had clear idea about Farcana token that its a BRC-20. I did heard about it and tried to join its campaign which I think is going to end in 48 hours.
Government alone can't dust the network, users minting tokens, making transactions of these tokens, even miners can be involved in this because the most of the benefit of this congestion is to miners only. I just shared my opinion that government might be causing this dust too because they don't like BTC as they have to allow its ETF according to the rule book of USA.
-
Government alone can't dust the network, users minting tokens, making transactions of these tokens, even miners can be involved in this because the most of the benefit of this congestion is to miners only. I just shared my opinion that government might be causing this dust too because they don't like BTC as they have to allow its ETF according to the rule book of USA.
Is there any reason for them to do that though? Let's say they don't like BTC and want it dead, why would they approve ETF since they can simply cite manipulation, etc as a reason for the rejection? Is there any law preventing them do this? Wouldn't it be easier and faster to just reject and try to control the market if that was the case instead of spending time making dust transactions? If they truly want to do that, I'm sure they can spend a hundred million or so to hire or run a bot to spam the network easily. It sounds counterintuitive considering how many times the media calls BTC is related to crime etc if they opt to spam the network and BRC20 just to annoy people imo.
-
Government alone can't dust the network, users minting tokens, making transactions of these tokens, even miners can be involved in this because the most of the benefit of this congestion is to miners only. I just shared my opinion that government might be causing this dust too because they don't like BTC as they have to allow its ETF according to the rule book of USA.
I don't think the Government is involved in something like that. There was a time when the government tried to limit Bitcoin in many ways, but they were unable to do anything. Once they understood that they could not stop Bitcoin, they started to adopt it as well. If you talk about banks, some banks still consider crypto users like criminals. Some of them accept Bitcoin, yet they treat their customers like they are criminals. There will be a time when all of them will try to collaborate with Bitcoiners. About dust transactions, some stupid miners could do it. But, I am not sure. But the fact we all know is, these massive congestion is happened because of the Ordinals.
-
This inscription are made on each meta of bitcoin and this is possible because the developers are intentionally allowed it to be so.
I don't think developer intentionally allow it. IMO it's more accurate to say developer didn't expect people would try creating token on Bitcoin again since old token (such as USDT) on Bitcoin isn't popular.
Why I said they intentionally allowed it is not because they are not aware of BRC 20 tokens and minting of them. They knew about the Javascript inscription, not like they don't know anything about it, they know and instead of them to soft fork if and release an update to clean that bug, they didn't and live it openly for everyone to mess around with Bitcoin network, if it was another error they see in the network, they will be quick to solve this but because this particular involved transaction fees that compensate the miners, they let it be.
Who are in even the developers, majority of them are miners and they as also run a node so most of the activities of the Bitcoin network is known to them, they see and can point transaction that are ordinals and ordinary transactions, so I still think it's intentional but since it's doesn't security wise affect the network, I think we just need to keep watching.
-
This inscription are made on each meta of bitcoin and this is possible because the developers are intentionally allowed it to be so.
I don't think developer intentionally allow it. IMO it's more accurate to say developer didn't expect people would try creating token on Bitcoin again since old token (such as USDT) on Bitcoin isn't popular.
Why I said they intentionally allowed it is not because they are not aware of BRC 20 tokens and minting of them. They knew about the Javascript inscription, not like they don't know anything about it, they know and instead of them to soft fork if and release an update to clean that bug, they didn't and live it openly for everyone to mess around with Bitcoin network, if it was another error they see in the network, they will be quick to solve this but because this particular involved transaction fees that compensate the miners, they let it be.
Who are in even the developers, majority of them are miners and they as also run a node so most of the activities of the Bitcoin network is known to them, they see and can point transaction that are ordinals and ordinary transactions, so I still think it's intentional but since it's doesn't security wise affect the network, I think we just need to keep watching.
Now i get your point, although IMO term negligence is more accurate. And AFAIK most miner (based on total hashrate) aren't developer since mining these days.
-
Why they are doing these massive spam transactions?
Because they see potential profit from the Ordinals NFTs and also the BRC20 tokens. It is just like asking why there are ethereum (fungible and non fungible) tokens transactions.
Sometimes I feel like why those stupid weirdos spending 30K sat to send 1K sats? Does it make sense?
I guess you are referring to the NFTs because if it is BRC20 tokens, you can see that the fee is used to transfer tokens just as bitcoin is used to transfer bitcoin on the bitcoin blockchain. You can see coins like ORDI, SATS and many BRC20 tokens sent using bitcoin as transaction fee on bitcoin blockchain.
I don't think developer intentionally allow it. IMO it's more accurate to say developer didn't expect people would try creating token on Bitcoin again since old token (such as USDT) on Bitcoin isn't popular.
I can be wrong but I always think that bitcoin developers knew about it and they made made Ordinals to exist intentionally, although not all the developers. That is why some developers are now supporting it while some are against it.
Why I said they intentionally allowed it is not because they are not aware of BRC 20 tokens and minting of them. They knew about the Javascript inscription, not like they don't know anything about it, they know and instead of them to soft fork if and release an update to clean that bug, they didn't and live it openly for everyone to mess around with Bitcoin network, if it was another error they see in the network, they will be quick to solve this but because this particular involved transaction fees that compensate the miners, they let it be.
Do you mean that the developers knew about it after miners are already making money through Ordinals NFT and BTC20? Any improvement that will change that will make miners to either support or against it. Developers can propose but miners have the power in something like. No miners will support any developer that againsts Ordinals because they are making money from it and they will be the one that would win.
-
I don't think developer intentionally allow it. IMO it's more accurate to say developer didn't expect people would try creating token on Bitcoin again since old token (such as USDT) on Bitcoin isn't popular.
I can be wrong but I always think that bitcoin developers knew about it and they made made Ordinals to exist intentionally, although not all the developers. That is why some developers are now supporting it while some are against it.
I doubt it. Taproot activated in late 2021[1], while prototype of Ordinal software first released on 5 June 2022[2] and Ordinals only gaining popularity since early 2023.
[1] https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2021/11/13/taproot-bitcoins-long-anticipated-upgrade-activates-this-weekend/ (https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2021/11/13/taproot-bitcoins-long-anticipated-upgrade-activates-this-weekend/)
[2] https://github.com/ordinals/ord/releases?page=4 (https://github.com/ordinals/ord/releases?page=4)
-
In other words, BRC20 tokens are the cryptocurrencies that use the Bitcoin blockchain.
They are the same as erc20 tokens that use the Ethereum blockchain. They are called tokens because they do not have their own blockchain.
They will be only called coins if they create their own blockchain.
This is the most simplest explanation for these BRC 20 tokens, but I guess OP already knew this stuff. Almost everyone knows what are ordinals and BRC 20 tokens but most of the people who simply do trading don't know how do they work and what inscriptions are. Most of the airdrop users do know what an is inscription. Because those who are active in airdrops might have inscribed something yet. It is almost equal to minting.
And I just heard the news today that Binance has made a special marketplace for only ordinals which will increase their adoption despite the fact that many developers are working on a solution to eliminate the inscription method. This will cause a big dump in congestion on the BTC network.
-
We often misunderstand that bsc or bep-20 platform token means the token listed on binance exchange. If we have this idea then we are in a big misconception. BSC Token means that token but not listed on Binance Exchange but BSC is a platform. Some of the important coins have separate platforms, Ethereum has its own platform, Matic has a separate platform Polygon and BSC has a separate platform. Sometimes new coins are introduced from different platforms. The coins on the Ethereum platform are likely to have a slightly higher value, but the gas fees on those platforms are much higher. Gas fee of BSC platform is very low compared to Ethereum platform due to which many investors invest in this platform.
-
We often misunderstand that bsc or bep-20 platform token means the token listed on binance exchange. If we have this idea then we are in a big misconception. BSC Token means that token but not listed on Binance Exchange but BSC is a platform. Some of the important coins have separate platforms, Ethereum has its own platform, Matic has a separate platform Polygon and BSC has a separate platform. Sometimes new coins are introduced from different platforms. The coins on the Ethereum platform are likely to have a slightly higher value, but the gas fees on those platforms are much higher. Gas fee of BSC platform is very low compared to Ethereum platform due to which many investors invest in this platform.
You can't really blame them you know. When Uniswap was first launch as a Dex platform for ethereum but as soon as some group of people created similar bsc Dex platform that was named Pancakeswap, it gain a lot of confidence and people rush into and Binance listed it immediately, other than the projects saw the same thing and they developed many type of projects on BSC and they also got listed. The trend was going finely until when it became over saturated and then a Binance stop all of that listing of a thing. I don't know if you're familiar with phrase like "when Binance", the investors loves using that line to push for Binance listing but since CZ got arrested, all has stop.
-
We often misunderstand that bsc or bep-20 platform token means the token listed on binance exchange. If we have this idea then we are in a big misconception. BSC Token means that token but not listed on Binance Exchange but BSC is a platform. Some of the important coins have separate platforms, Ethereum has its own platform, Matic has a separate platform Polygon and BSC has a separate platform. Sometimes new coins are introduced from different platforms. The coins on the Ethereum platform are likely to have a slightly higher value, but the gas fees on those platforms are much higher. Gas fee of BSC platform is very low compared to Ethereum platform due to which many investors invest in this platform.
BSC tokens are tokens that are printed using the Binance network and do not have Binance support unless they collaborate with Binance Labs. For me, in cryptocurrency, you always have to read because there are so many networks created and you have to be careful when you want to do cryptocurrency so you always pay attention to the network. used the same or not.
-
We often misunderstand that bsc or bep-20 platform token means the token listed on binance exchange. If we have this idea then we are in a big misconception. BSC Token means that token but not listed on Binance Exchange but BSC is a platform. Some of the important coins have separate platforms, Ethereum has its own platform, Matic has a separate platform Polygon and BSC has a separate platform. Sometimes new coins are introduced from different platforms. The coins on the Ethereum platform are likely to have a slightly higher value, but the gas fees on those platforms are much higher. Gas fee of BSC platform is very low compared to Ethereum platform due to which many investors invest in this platform.
Yeah but this is not about BSC, not about bep-20, no about Binance or Ethereum nd not about gas!
It's about brc-20 tokens on the Bitcoin network, that have literally zero to do with the ones you mentioned above!
A person by the name of lightning I think (don't know the name for sure) was poking around with ordinals theory.
And he found a bug, which made him able to inscribe any data, into the BC blockchain, the data could be of an image, video, text, media etc. This data then becomes a part of BTC blockchain. This inscription method became famous as it helped people to earn millions of dollars in no time. More and more people started to inscribe BTC which result in high congestion and more fee. Now, in my opinion, authorities are the ones who are dusting the BTC blockchain, because they want BTC to give a bad fame.
His name was Rodarmor, and it's not a bug and it's nothing new.
Inscriptions and stuff stored in the blockchain happened for years before:
https://www.righto.com/2014/02/ascii-bernanke-wikileaks-photographs.html
It's just that Taproot lifted the limit of the data that can be stored, simple as that, allowing far more data to be linked (inscribed) to a satoshi!
-
We often misunderstand that bsc or bep-20 platform token means the token listed on binance exchange. If we have this idea then we are in a big misconception. BSC Token means that token but not listed on Binance Exchange but BSC is a platform. Some of the important coins have separate platforms, Ethereum has its own platform, Matic has a separate platform Polygon and BSC has a separate platform. Sometimes new coins are introduced from different platforms. The coins on the Ethereum platform are likely to have a slightly higher value, but the gas fees on those platforms are much higher. Gas fee of BSC platform is very low compared to Ethereum platform due to which many investors invest in this platform.
Well, I haven't checked this thread for a while and I didn't notice you posted this. I don't know what we have to do with the thing you explained while this thread is all about BRC-20 tokens that are running on Bitcoin main net and not on the Binance smart chain. Binance just listed a few BRC-20 tokens because those developers had a deal with them to list them. That's it!
The fees on the Bitcoin network have been increased due to the massive transaction volume on the network and I don't think most Bitcoiners like it. Should I lock this thread? I don't think I would be able to learn something new!