wmp
@wmp.eth
what's funny is everyone would win with op_cat paves the way to trustless L2s, like Starknet natively settling on Bitcoin this would allow Ordinals and Runes activity to migrate to L2s like we've seen in Ethereum for hardliner purists, this would keep what they see as spam off the L1 and maintain its financial focus for creatives, they get cheaper, faster, and more advanced Ordinals UX etc. while still inheriting Bitcoin security plus imagine a bunch of L2s paying to post their transactions to Bitcoin, the fees would help compensate for the dwindling security budget as block rewards keep declining https://x.com/EliBenSasson/status/1929131920568299568?t=qOjI-i2OtiSCeTy3EPgukQ&s=19
1 reply
1 recast
7 reactions
wmp
@wmp.eth
reenabling op_cat is a political question at this point, not a technical one
2 replies
0 recast
2 reactions
.
@chaskin.eth
Why are bitcoiners against adding it?
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
wmp
@wmp.eth
the gist is that the hardliner purists camp wants Bitcoin to ossify the way it is now, don't add/reenable more opcodes, etc. why? to entrench its reigning digital gold status and prevent further developments that are friendly to Ordinals and so forth the other creative/pragmatists camp sees op_cat as a practical and common sense way to bring more programmability/flexibility to the Bitcoin ecosystem in a way that doesn't drastically change the network so the debate runs along these battle lines lately
1 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
.
@chaskin.eth
Sounds about right - gracias mucho
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction