Creating an analogue of NFT and tokens based on the Bitcoin network involves embedding certain data – be it a picture, video or text – into the BTC blockchain itself. However, the latter does not support smart contracts, so this kind of interaction directly stresses the blockchain.

And with these assets growing in value, there was more than enough willingness to transact with them. As a result, the equivalent of $31 was paid per BTC transaction, which turned out to be the average transaction fee on May 8, 2023.

We checked the current data: today the commission rate is back to normal. Now you have to pay less than one dollar to send a quick BTC.

At the same time the number of transfers in the mempool or unconfirmed transaction queue is 245 thousand transactions. To illustrate, last week there were about 450 thousand units.

All in all, last week’s events were an occasion to rekindle old discussions among radical Bitcoin-maximalists and other cryptocurrency fans. To understand their essence, one has to go back to the days of the so-called block size war, i.e. a few years ago.

The block war on the Bitcoin network

By 2017, the controversy between miners, developers and investors was at its peak. At the time, many in the community noted that Bitcoin urgently needed to increase block size in order to increase the cryptocurrency’s throughput.

As a reminder, each transaction has a weight, which depends not on its value, but on the number of inputs and outputs. We wrote more about the method for calculating fees and the role of transaction weights in this article. We recommend reading it to get a better understanding of what is happening in the blockchain world.

At the time, the community was divided into two camps – those in favour of increasing block sizes and those who were convinced of the negative consequences of such a decision. The logic of the former is that the bigger the block, the more transactions it will be able to include, and therefore fees should in theory become lower. The logic of the latter is that interfering with the BTC protocol would open the way for other more radical changes to the cryptocurrency to benefit certain groups of people, and that would hit decentralisation.

The public debate has led to the creation of forks of Bitcoin Cash and Bitcoin Satoshi Vision (SV), in which the blocks have become significantly larger than the ‘original’ Bitcoin. Nevertheless, both forks have lost their popularity over the years and are generally not much appreciated within digital asset fans. In addition, Bitcoin SV is sided by Craig Wright, who has been trying to impersonate Bitcoin creator Satoshi Nakamoto for years – and to no avail.


As a result, now in 2023, a similar narrative has begun to spread among cryptocurrency enthusiasts that Bitcoin supposedly needs a radical change again to combat high fees. In light of this, some developers at Bitcoin Core suggested, among other things, that transactions involving NFTs and tokens should simply be blocked, i.e. that censorship should be applied.

But in general, it is not the first time such statements about the need to improve BTC have been made, though it is the "original" Bitcoin that "survives" after all modifications.


Taproot and Ordinals on the Bitcoin network

According to Decrypt sources, the number of transactions in the confirmation queue now exceeds the 240,000 transfer mark. This is already almost half the number we reported a week ago.

At the root of the problem of the recent increase in transactions was the Taproot upgrade, activated on the Bitcoin network in November 2021. One of Taproot’s features was the ability to add third-party information to blocks – the very principle on which the Ordinals project is based.

???? YOU CAN FIND MORE INTERESTING STUFF ON US AT YANDEX.ZEN!

The Ordinals protocol has gone from an interesting experiment to a headache for Bitcoin users. However, not everyone sees it as a problem – for example, former MicroStrategy head Michael Saylor called Ordinals another catalyst for BTC adoption growth. Here’s a relevant rejoinder.

Every time someone creates a cool Bitcoin app like Ordinals and stuff that increases transaction fees, it’s a catalyst [for the popularity of digital assets – editor’s note].

The controversy surrounding Ordinals dates back to early 2023, i.e. after the launch of the project. The dilemma is perfectly explained by a tweet by a user nicknamed Bitcoin is Saving.

People with small incomes in developing countries will have to pay more to run Bitcoin’s network nodes and send transactions, because privileged rich whites want to put pictures on the blockchain as status symbols. Just because you can do something doesn’t mean you have to do it.

Note that there are far more convenient and cheaper solutions for transferring value. For example, because of the nature of the Solana network, one cent in it is enough for hundreds of transactions. Read more about setting up one of the most popular wallets for this blockchain in a separate article.

So far, the possibility of a Bitcoin hardfork or any other radical change within the cryptocurrency ecosystem doesn’t look realistic in the near term. NFT, gaming and other information on Bitcoin are interesting, but a new trend is unlikely to lead to such serious consequences. Besides, commissions are now basically back to normal, so there will be fewer such discussions over time.


It seems that the technical limitations of the Bitcoin network will continue to cause problems within the cryptocurrency community. Still, no matter how long this blockchain works, there will always be people among BTC developers and users who do not want to deviate from the rules of anonymous cryptocurrency creator Satoshi Nakamoto. In their opinion, any rejection of his precepts is hardly a betrayal of the crypto and decentralization world. Although with such an approach, alas, it is unlikely to develop actively.


What do you think about it? Share your opinion in our cryptochat of former rich people. There we remember how easy life was under the bullpen.