Proposal to ban NFTs on Bitcoin sparks heated debate among developers

A recent upgrade proposal involving Bitcoin has sparked heated debate in the digital currency community. Developer Luke Dashjr, known for his work on Bitcoin for more than a decade, was at the center of the discussion when he put forward a proposal that could ban Bitcoin NFTs.

The crux of the matter revolves around the Ordinals protocol, which was introduced a few months ago and allowed users to subscribe data to the Bitcoin blockchain, such as NFTs and new tokens.

Ordinals changed Bitcoin, which until then was mainly used as a peer-to-peer payment network. The popularity of Bitcoin-based NFTs has skyrocketed, evidenced by the sale of one asset for around $450,000 at auction house Sotheby’s.

However, the Ordinals project did not come without challenges. The Bitcoin network has experienced congestion due to the popularity of the new protocol, raising concerns about the effectiveness and original purpose of the digital currency network.

The proposal to ban NFTs on Bitcoin is closed

Dashjr’s proposal, presented on Github, aimed to update Bitcoin to adapt it to new data transport styles. While it seemed like a simple, technical goal, the discussion quickly turned into a broader debate: Should the Bitcoin blockchain be retained as a payment network, or should market forces determine its functionality?

Even among experts who advocate a more purist view of Bitcoin, there was skepticism about the feasibility of Dashjr’s proposal, especially regarding its acceptance by Bitcoin miners, who are essential to the functioning of the network and who have benefited from the fees generated by the new proposal. protocol.

The controversy reached a critical point when Ava Chow, one of Bitcoin Core’s administrators, abruptly ended discussion of Dashjr’s proposal without taking any action to integrate the new code. The decision was justified based on the controversial nature of the proposal and the lack of community consensus.

Dashjr’s proposal aimed to impose strict limits on data size on Bitcoin transactions, in an effort to ban Ordinals transactions.

Blockstream developer Lisa Neigut said the proposal was an advanced way to achieve this goal, although there was intense debate over whether it would be possible or desirable to implement such bans.

Dashjr’s response was quick. He alleged censorship on Chow’s part and stood by his position that the proposal was still relevant and necessary to deal with what he saw as a “spam attack” on Bitcoin.

Spam filters only disappear when the spam disappears, says Luke Dashjr

Dashjr, who recently turned heads for raising $6.2 million for his company Mummolin, led by Block Inc. founder Jack Dorsey, remains a major figure in the Bitcoin community.

His proposal and subsequent responses reflect ongoing tensions over Bitcoin’s direction and purpose.

Interestingly, Ocean, a well-known Bitcoin mining pool, has indicated that it could adopt Dashjr’s design to filter transactions with Ordinal inscriptions.

This position indicates possible support for Dashjr’s vision within the mining community, despite the controversy.

The debate surrounding Dashjr’s proposal illustrates the complexity and continued evolution of the Bitcoin world, while some argue for preserving its original essence.

Luke Dashjr said on this topic that the case is not yet closed: “Spam filtering only stops when spam disappears.”

Source: Live Coins