This is why we can’t have nice things.
Just when we thought we'd learned our lessons from the blowups of FTX, Three Arrows Capital, Celsius et al., meme-coin fever strikes again.
People are making ridiculous gobs of money from tokens based on a frog image, while others stand to lose massively as irrational bidding takes hold. And this time, the fever is not only infecting greedy human minds, but messing with the functioning of the most valuable blockchain in the world.
The ability to create tokens based on the new BRC-20 standard, which was enabled by Bitcoin’s Taproot upgrade, has fostered a variety of new, Bitcoin-based meme-coins, many mimicking those released on other chains that have recently experienced wild price movements. (This past week, the Ethereum-based Pepecoin rose almost 5,000,000%, then lost 50% off its highs.) This follows the creation of the Ordinals Protocol, which gave rise to Bitcoin-based data inscriptions that function as non-fungible tokens (NFTs).
These use up a lot more data than a basic bitcoin transaction, which means they’re driving up Bitcoin fees. And that means if you want to send a small amount of bitcoin on-chain, it won’t be accepted or you’ll have to pay a prohibitively exorbitant price for doing so.
Not surprisingly, this is causing a stink within the Bitcoin community. Purists who believe Bitcoin’s sole purpose is as an alternative currency are incensed to see it being used for frivolous frog JPGs. On the other hand, those building and using these new BRC-20 and Ordinals-based tokens counter that no one gets to say what Bitcoin is for. It’s an open protocol, after all.
We can all agree that rising transaction fees and blockchain congestion are a problem. It goes to the heart of Bitcoin’s resource efficiency and utility. But what can be done about it?
I’ll go out on a limb and say the answer does not lie in the suggestion offered by Luke Dashjr, a high-profile early Bitcoin developer, who essentially wants to stop BRC token and Ordinals projects by imposing a filter. That, Dashjr’s critics say, is censorship. No matter what you believe Bitcoin is for, surely its censorship-resistance must be preserved.
What is fair game – in my humble opinion – are code upgrades that would take pressure off blockspace limits to improve the overall functioning of the system in a use case-agnostic way. If Lightning is not sufficient to improve Bitcoin’s scalability, is there anything to learn from the various Layer 2 scaling projects of the Ethereum community, such as Zk-rollups or Optimistic rollups?
In any case, the core problem here is not that Bitcoin is being used to represent frog images per se, but that its value as an efficient, intermediary-free settlement system for transferring value of all kinds is undermined by blockspace congestion. That’s where the governance conversation needs to be focused.
The question of how to balance the rights of the individual with the interests of the group is the core challenge of any blockchain community. Bitcoin is no different.
