Author: Haotian

Recently, I have seen many early projects in the Bitcoin ecosystem, especially those derived from technical innovations around Ordinals, Lightning Network, Taproot Assets, RGB protocol, and so on. Whether it's narrative overflow or technical breakthrough, explorers, speculators, and critics have always coexisted and coexisted in the Bitcoin ecosystem. So, how should we objectively view the current situation and future of the Bitcoin ecosystem? Here are some shallow thoughts:

1) When it comes to "scaling" the Bitcoin ecosystem, it should not be simply criticized as expanding the narrative or reinventing the wheel;

Admittedly, there are speculators who ignore the native characteristics of the chain and simply copy various market tactics to seek short-term profits. However, upgrading the "narrative" for the Bitcoin ecosystem is a long-term hope to weaken the mining effect of Bitcoin and increase the transactions on the Bitcoin chain, seeking new sustainable sources of income for Bitcoin miners. Therefore, "scaling" Bitcoin is not politically incorrect, as long as it ensures the correct "narrative" path.

2) What is the orthodox narrative?

Within the Bitcoin community, there are two potential rules to follow: 1. Do not change the Bitcoin consensus; 2. Do not increase the burden on the main network. The current ordinals narrative involves users inputting parameters into the Bitcoin network in a decentralized manner, with third-party indexing platforms providing "legitimacy." This narrative can bring txs to the main network, to some extent aligning with the interests of miners. However, under Fomo sentiment, a large amount of unorganized data injection can cause the "dust attack" effect, burdening the main network. While BitVM theoretically can achieve Turing completeness, the probability of its practical application is almost zero. The RGB client verification Solution has a large operational space, but it must be based on trust in the consensus of the RGB client. In comparison, the Taproot Assets protocol, conforming to the mainstream orthodox narrative, is a track worth long-term attention.

3) Taproot Assets achieves a similar layer2, Rollup effect based on the HTLC chain contract of the Lightning Network, with a large number of high-frequency transactions in mutual trust Taproot address channels equivalent to layer2 batch transactions, and timely main network settlement based on hash time lock is equivalent to updating the state.

Although the Bitcoin main network only provides asset settlement, at best it is a limited DA layer. However, this "scaling" method currently seems very solid in terms of technical logic and practical implementation. The only thing that might be criticized is the slow development, but consider that it took 5 months from the emergence of the Ordinals protocol to the surge of Brc20. We also need to give Taproot Assets some time to accumulate energy. 4) I have seen many early projects in the "scaling" direction of Bitcoin, some based on the RGB protocol for Swap, some intending to do layer2 extensions based on the limited DA of ordinals, and some side-chain solutions. Overall, fundraising has not been smooth. On the one hand, VCs are mostly familiar with the project narrative logic on Ethereum and still hold limited skepticism about Bitcoin's technical expansion capabilities, requiring time to study and learn. On the other hand, the "scaling" narrative of Bitcoin is currently very fragmented, and developers of Ordinals, RGB, and the Lightning Network seem to be mutually exclusive. These developers need to converge on a mainstream narrative, just as Ethereum's plasma, validium, and others eventually converged into rollup. I personally judge that the ultimate outcome of Bitcoin's scaling will probably find a space to exert force in the direction of Taproot Assets.

免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。