Ordinals founder: Bitcoin maximalists are advised to put aside their complaints about inscriptions

If you ask me what my crypto views are, I think they are pretty much the same as those of the ideological Bitcoin Maxi (for lack of a better term). I have no particular respect for authority, even an aversion, and I believe Bitcoin is a way to escape the degradation of a life and civilization entangled in fiat currencies.

However, I don’t consider myself an ideological Bitcoin Maxi, mainly because ideologies often fail to survive contact with reality.

This is the awkward position that ideological Bitcoin Maxi and its accompanying bland culture currently find themselves in: an anachronistic engagement with reality.

Ideological Bitcoin Maxi has many benefits. It is for this reason that I wrote this article. This article provides suggestions for ideological Bitcoin Maxi, which will hopefully help them avoid making mistakes and avoidable mistakes. In other words, it suggests how they can get rid of the role of loser.

First of all, let me say that the purpose of this article is not to defend Ordinals and inscriptions. They don't need to be defended. The cat is out of the bag and no one can put it back. What happened happened.

Now, here are my suggestions.

My first piece of advice is that complaining about inscriptions only makes you and Bitcoin look weak. It is contradictory to believe that Bitcoin is unstoppable internet money while thinking that a bunch of idiots posting JPEGs on-chain is a problem. We all know that the first half of the conclusion is true, but the second half is not. Bitcoin is unstoppable internet money, but JPEGs are not a problem. However, espousing both beliefs at the same time may weaken the argument that Bitcoin can fight the government.

Despite all the complaints on Twitter, no one has managed to leave even a trace on Ordinals and Inscriptions. Given this, and given that we still have a long way to go in disrupting fiat currency, perhaps what you should do is stop complaining about things you can't change, and adapt to the new, perhaps uncomfortable, reality that NFTs have come to Bitcoin. This will undoubtedly not be the last time people have a bad experience with Bitcoin, so it's good to start accepting that reality now. Then, you can refocus your energy on more important things, like spreading the spirit of Satoshi Nakamoto and helping as many people as possible learn how to use Bitcoin.

Besides, strategically, all coverage is good publicity, and complaining about the inscription will only make more people aware of it, and make inscription supporters more enthusiastic about embedding JPEGs into the blockchain, simply to make you look like an idiot. If the general public likes to do something, then you shouldn't blame them for doing it, because you won't make any friends or make any progress on anything.

If you continue to complain about inscriptions, please at least take the time to understand the person you are complaining about, so that you can avoid using the weakest and least persuasive arguments, such as:

· Everyone can right-click and save a JPEG . Almost every "lowbrow" person who buys inscriptions knows this, without exception. No one buys inscriptions under the illusion of buying access. Accept this and update your perspective to make it closer to reality, so that you are less likely to be vulnerable to reality.

· Ordinals are not real, they are a collective hallucination. I have basically been saying since the beginning that Ordinals and Ordinals are an alternative perspective on Bitcoin. Acting as if they are some kind of revelation makes you look ridiculous. It also shows that you have misunderstood something very basic about humans, civilizations, and cultures: that all that matters is social conventions. In fact, Bitcoin is just a social convention. Or, to put it another way, it is not the software or the data that matters, but the social conventions that surround it. Ordinals are no exception.

You can store data only off-chain. People value on-chain data, which makes inscriptions scarce and greatly improves reliability and user security. Every other NFT ecosystem uses off-chain data, and uninformed users delegate trust to whoever happens to store the file on IPFS, and they may stop at any time. On-chain data is a huge improvement over trustlessness, which I am told is something that Ideology Maxi values ​​highly.

· The inscription is illegal. There is a clear difference between something illegal, like violence, and something you think is stupid. Saying something is illegal because you don't like it or can't see the value in it just makes you look unintelligent.

Inscription is a state attack. Somehow, you see NFTs and shitcoins on other chains and say they exist because of enthusiasm, demand, fraud or even depravity, but don’t think these things are state attacks on Ethereum, but somehow you do think that inscription is a state attack on Bitcoin?

Censorship of inscriptions is exactly the same as any other kind of censored transactions. Generally speaking, any mechanism you build or gather public support for will instantly open up Bitcoin to censorship. Fortunately, processing transactions that some people consider illegal is exactly what Bitcoin is designed to do, so you will eventually fail, but we will all be better off if you don't try to convince people that censoring Bitcoin transactions is something they should bother with. You've managed to fool Ocean Mining into thinking it's possible and a good idea, but they'll end up worse off than they are now. But wouldn't it be nice if we could get another mining pool instead of having them limp out the door one by one (which is unnecessary).

So, how should you think about inscriptions?

Ignore them. More valuable use cases will outpace most inscriptions. There will always be some high-value inscriptions that won't be able to compete with hard money and uncensorable transactions. Bitcoin's fate is high fees. Embrace it. We have more important things to do.