If the market demands a technology, it will persist over time.
Today the Ordinals have fallen into oblivion.
One beautiful thing about the free market and natural law is that it does not conserve waste. What is extra disappears into oblivion. Reality is accommodating itself towards the spontaneous desire of individuals, at the confluence of their multiple wills and actions.
We have seen this happen several times in Bitcoin, but the most recent example is Ordinals. After being one of the most controversial topics in the bitcoiner community for more than a year, today they are practically gone. Nobody cares about Ordinals.
Yes, we can see a peak in new registrations emerging since the end of November of this year, but it is nothing compared to what was its peak and we are not going to let a slight statistical contradiction stop our underlying argument.
Furthermore, if we follow the money, The commissions paid by the Ordinals have not resurfaced. We can thank Runes for this, a version of Ordinals that seeks to make registrations more efficient in terms of rates and block space.
Even considering that the main use case of the Bitcoin network is the storage of value, which means that people keep their BTC immobile for prolonged periods, likewise, the commissions and weight of “normal” transactions, it is much greater than that of runes, inscriptions and other things like that. Weight and commission are the most important variables in the debate because they were what made transactions on the Bitcoin network more expensive and delayed.
We refer to the evidence, your honor: the Ordinals are dead; long live Bitcoin.
“And why talk about a dead person?” He will ask. “What is that background argument What did they mention three paragraphs above?”, he will insist, and we will appreciate his insightful and attentive reading comprehension. We expected nothing less from you. Well, this is a lesson from the French illustration applied to the development of Bitcoin.
If Vincent de Gournay or Francois Quesnay had lived what for historiographical purposes we will call the crisis of the ordinals, his position would probably have been (and, if you pay attention, you can almost hear his voice like an echo from the past) laissez faire, laissez passer, let go, let go.
We, inhabitants of a less impressionable age that requires striking headlines to make you, dear reader, interested in spending your time on our humble words, will give it a mortuary spin and we will call it let die
So much saliva was spilled, so many fingers turned red furiously against the keys, so many hairs turned gray, when the Ordinals apogee, only for the phenomenon to ratify the impermanent nature of all things. Just so that today no one remembers that there was a ordinal crisis (although all registrations live forever on the nodes of those who run the Bitcoin software)
This crisis above all demonstrated the interventionist heart of many bitcoiners, who even wanted to change the code just because there were people using Bitcoin for a purpose other than the one they like.
We are not saying with this that the position regarding the direction of Bitcoin should be one of quietism and passivity. If something interests you, actively participate and argue in the debate. Or, as Blockstream’s Adam Back said, “relax and build.” Because this is neither the first nor will it be the last time that a crisis like the Ordinals will take place in the development of Bitcoin. But Bitcoin, as free and neutral as any human invention, is one of the purest expressions of the market and the desires of individuals. And if something is demanded by people, it will persist; If not, it will be relegated to oblivion. Better to let him die.
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article belong to its author and do not necessarily reflect those of CriptoNoticias. The author’s opinion is for informational purposes and under no circumstances constitutes an investment recommendation or financial advice.
