> and I would like to understand why this problem has not been addressed more 
> seriously

Because if nobody has any good solution, then status quo is preserved. If 
tomorrow ECDSA would be broken, the default state of the network would be "just 
do nothing", and every solution would be backward-compatible with that 
approach. Burn old coins, and people will call it "Tether", redistribute them, 
and people will call it "BSV". Leave everything untouched, and the network will 
split into N parts, and then you pick the strongest chain to decide, what 
should be done.

> However, when it comes to inscriptions, there are no available options except 
> for a patch produced by Luke Dashjr.

Because the real solution should address some different problem, that was 
always there, and nobody knows, how to deal with it: the problem of 
forever-growing initial blockchain download time, and forever-growing UTXO set. 
Some changes with "assume UTXO" are trying to address just that, but this code 
is not yet completed.

> So, I wonder why there are no options to reject inscriptions in the mempool 
> of a node.

Because it will lead you to never ending chase. You will block one 
inscriptions, and different ones will be created. Now, they are present even on 
chains, where there is no Taproot, or even Segwit. That means, if you try to 
kill them, then they will be replaced by N regular indistinguishable 
transactions, and then you will go back to those more serious problems under 
the hood: IBD time, and UTXO size.

> Inscriptions are primarily used to sell NFTs or Tokens, concepts that the 
> Bitcoin community has consistently rejected.

The community also rejected things like sidechains, and they are still present, 
just in a more centralized form. There are some unstoppable concepts, for 
example soft-forks. You cannot stop a soft-fork. What inscription creators did, 
is just non-enforced soft-fork. They believe their rules are followed to the 
letter, but this is not the case, as you can create a valid Bitcoin 
transaction, that will be some invalid Ordinals transaction (because their 
additional rules are not enforced by miners and nodes).



_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev

Reply via email to