A potential shift has recently been proposed within the Bitcoin Ordinals, a project spearheaded by its creator and primary coder, Casey Rodarmor. At the core of this proposal lies a pivotal component of the protocol: the inscription numbering system.
Launched earlier this year in January, Bitcoin Ordinals are inscriptions (digital artifacts or non-fungible tokens) supported by satoshis (sats) — a way to denominate small amounts of Bitcoin. This type of digital asset has steadily carved its niche in the blockchain world.
Each non-fungible token (NFT) created via the Ordinals protocol receives a distinct inscription, much like a unique serial number.
This element has played a vital role, especially in the domain of digital art generated through this protocol. However, Casey Rodarmor states this inscription number system is set to undergo a revamp.
Rationale Behind The Proposed Change
Casey Rodarmor, a notable force behind Bitcoin Ordinals, has proposed altering the project’s inscription numbering mechanism. According to the proposal, the primary motivation is to streamline the project’s codebase.
While these inscription numbers have been foundational since the project’s inception, Rodarmor opines that maintaining their stability has inadvertently caused complications.
Such an unyielding approach to inscription numbers has, in Rodarmor’s view, resulted in less-than-optimal coding and hindered potential development progress.
I guess the cat is out of the bag! In short, I think that the effort to keep inscription numbers stable hasn’t been worth it, and has led to ugly code and stalled development, since new changes need to be extremely and often awkardly careful not to change the numbers of old… https://t.co/SsEqjdtZFB
— Casey (@rodarmor) September 19, 2023
By introducing the concept of “permanently unstable” inscription numbers, Rodarmor suggests a departure from the existing practice. This decision entails deprioritizing the system for allocating unique inscription numbers within the Bitcoin network.
Rodarmor assures that the numbers would undergo modification, not complete elimination. In practical terms, new inscription numbers could be near their predecessors but might display a variance of approximately 1%.
Community Responses And Implications
This proposition has stirred mixed reactions within the Bitcoin Ordinals community. Some members endorse the proposed change, emphasizing that inscription numbers embedded within the protocol are “unnecessary or not beneficial.”
And then further suggesting alternative solutions, such as utilizing external tools or platforms to index or track these numbers for individuals or entities that might still find value in these inscription numbers.
Concerns about having invested considerably to obtain NFTs with specific inscription numbers have also been voiced. An X user commented on this proposal: “Imagine paying a ton of money for inscriptions like 100, 69, 420, 1000, etc., just for it to be reorganized.”
In response, a segment of the community points out that if numbering remains a priority for certain users, they can always organize their collectibles using timestamps, ensuring the essence of uniqueness remains intact.
Featured image from iStock, Chart from TradingView
