Radical or stable? An article taking stock of the controversy surrounding the BRC-20 upgrade

Bitcoin ecology, Inscription and BRC-20 have lasted most of 2023. Just when the currency price fell back and everyone thought that the popularity of inscriptions would come to an end, the debate over whether BRC-20 should be upgraded has brought all parties back into the spotlight. The core of the dispute can be summarized as [whether to upgrade the 0.9 version running on the BRC-20 index and keep it in sync with the Ordinals iteration]. At present, this dispute has initially come to an end with the BRC-20 standard following the upgrade of Ordinals to 0.14 (as of the completion of this article, Ordinals has released version 0.15). This article will try to sort out the entire upgrade process from the perspective of technical background, opinions and motivations of all parties, investors and user observations, etc., from which we can get a glimpse of the process of reaching consensus in the Bitcoin community.

1. Dispute Review

1.1 Technology Background

What is BRC-20

BRC-20 is a fungible token (Fungible Token, compared to NFT, Non-Fungible Token) protocol on the Bitcoin chain. Developers can perform currency issuance, accounting and other operations based on this protocol.

The relationship between Bitcoin chain, Ordinals and BRC-20

• BRC-20 is a meta-protocol, built on Ordinals; using the Ordinals protocol as a complete data availability layer, with an off-chain indexer to determine the meta-protocol status;

• Ordinals is also a meta-protocol, built on the BitChain; using the BitChain protocol as a complete data availability layer, with an off-chain indexer to determine the meta-protocol Status;

So, BRC-20 is actually a Yuanyuan protocol, through a protocol called "Index" (Details See 1.1.3) for the mechanism to realize the financial behavior mentioned in 1.1.1.

Index

The index is based on the bit chain The mechanism produced by the mechanism.

Because the tokens on the Bitcoin chain are different from the Ethereum chain, they are not "real" tokens distinguished by contract addresses, but are distributed in various areas. In the block, the transaction information recorded in the "ledger" in the "Remarks" field is stored in text form. Due to the decentralized nature of the Bitcoin chain, anyone can package and upload block content, and the "remarks" field information does not affect the validity of the block, so there are valid/normally operating ledgers and invalid/malicious ledgers. Then In order to maintain information order, certain rules must be followed to collect and verify this ledger information. The verification process is indexing. The program that performs the verification process (called a smart contract on the Ethereum chain) is the indexer.

The indexer is a database that reads and registers all BRC-20 transaction data, such as checking which inscription is the first name to deploy a new token, Track wallet balance changes of minted tokens and related transaction address data, etc. The rules for indexer application are the consensus reached by all relevant parties.

Jubilee Upgrade

The name of an upgrade of the Ordinals protocol, It occurred on block #824,544, and the upgrade time is January 5, 2024. The specific content is to update the Ordinals protocol to version 0.13. Version 0.13 is a routine but irregular update of Ordinals. The main content is to further enrich the protocol functions.

Figure 1-1 Ordinals 0.13 version update content (1) (Source: Ordinals' Github page)

Figure 1-2 Ordinals 0.13 version update content (2) (Source: Ordinals' Github page)

It should be noted that the content of this update of Ordinals is not directly related to the indexing issue. The source of this dispute is [BRC-20’s index results are inconsistent due to different index standards generated by Ordinals 0.8 and 0.9 versions, and may have greater differences in future versions] and [BRC-20’s protocol standards have been frozen In 0.9] these two contents (see 1.2.1 for details).

1.2 Problems and Disputes

Technical issues

As mentioned above, although the technology of Bitcoin itself is no longer developed, Ordinals, as a meta-protocol, has its own technological iterations and updates. Condition. This iteration will naturally affect the protocols and ecological development on it, including BRC-20.

In November, the proposal put forward by Domo, the founder of the BRC-20 protocol, has taken effect on the chain. The content of the proposal is [Standardize and freeze the BRC-20 index based on Ordinals 0.9] (paraphrase), which aims to maintain the stable operation of the protocol and avoid unexpected impacts on technical standards and protocol operations caused by blind iterations.

In the previous October, someone discovered that the inscriptions #35321413 and #35329860 could be indexed by the 0.9 version of the Ordinals protocol, but not by the 0.7 and 0.8 versions. Since different markets use different versions of the Ordinals protocol, some inscriptions cannot be indexed correctly in some markets, causing a de facto inscription number shift.

For the BRC-20 protocol as a whole, this problem is even greater. BUGs in the 0.8 version of the Ordinals protocol may lead to: 1) minting beyond the maximum supply; 2) double spending between different market versions of the Ordinals protocol. Such risks cannot be ignored.

Ecological issues

BRC-20 is "parasitic" Whether the index of a protocol based on the Ordinals protocol should be upgraded along with the Ordinals protocol is a dilemma at this stage. On the one hand, the Ordinals protocol is still rapidly updating and iterating, and more and more new features are being added to the protocol, especially the "Jubilee" upgrade that will be activated at block height 824544. The original method of generating curse inscriptions The method will be repaired, which means that the cursed inscriptions that will be assigned negative numbers in version 0.9 of the Ordinals protocol will be assigned positive numbers in version 0.13. The version difference of the Ordinals protocol will cause the numbering of new inscriptions to appear in the future. Huge difference.

In addition, new features like CBRC-20 that use the new version of the Ordinals protocol have brought performance optimization to the modified version of the BRC-20 protocol, which also has a great impact on BRC- The development of 20 poses certain challenges.

On the other hand, as an asset protocol that has produced a large number of assets with a huge market value, BRC-20 has naturally become the first to remain stable during its development. One priority. If the pursuit of new features to optimize and expand BRC-20 results in a loss of user assets, it will undoubtedly cause huge harm to the BRC-20 ecosystem.

So, under the dual blessing of technical issues and ecological issues, differences have emerged among the parties that have a say in the BRC-20 agreement. The core of the dispute can be summarized [Whether we want to upgrade the 0.9 version running on the BRC-20 index and keep it in sync with the iteration of Ordinals].

1.3 Voices from all parties

UniSat Wallet : Strictly follow the upgrade

UniSat decided to follow Ordinals for the Jubilee upgrade, which may lead to two different sets of BRC-20 on the Bitcoin chain. The same indexing standards lead to different accounting rules. Differences in accounting rules mean that users may have different balances in different places, or account balances may not match, which will fragment the BRC-20 market due to different Ordinals version index standards.

In addition, UniSat also launched a black and white module system. Developers can introduce new features into the black module, and tokens can be placed in the black module, but they cannot be withdrawn until they are approved ("whitened"). UniSat also hopes to use this module to provide convenience to users and further standardize the market.

For other protocols that have not been upgraded, UniSat's attitude is "Split". Although it is "separated", it is not the same as "Fork" like BTC and BCH. According to UniSat’s official explanation, this Split allows two different sets of standards to run simultaneously under two different ecosystems, but token/ledger information and other content can also be freely interacted. However, compared to repeated mentions of technological iterations, UniSat did not explain much about how to deal with risks such as market chaos and double-spend attacks.

BRC-20 founder Domo: temporarily frozen, focusing on testing

Although Domo previously made a proposal to freeze BRC-20 in Ordinals 0.9 and the proposal has officially taken effect, he also recognizes the technical problems and risks and is open to upgrades. However, for the sake of stability and risk prevention, Domo is opposed to directly following Ordinals for the Jubilee upgrade. Instead, it hopes that the current indexers will continue to be frozen at 0.9, while fully testing future versions of Ordinals (not limited to 0.13) in the background. When the tests receive satisfactory results, a decision will be made as to which future version of Orindals the BRC-20 will be specifically upgraded to use and whether it will continue to be frozen.

A few radicals: direct fork

Except UniSat In addition to the two parties facing Domo, there are still a few radicals in the market. Their view is to directly fork (Fork), that is, just like BTC and BCH, they simply implement different standards and the token information is not interoperable. "Everyone plays his own thing." But on the one hand, this plan will have an impact on the fledgling BRC-20 and further create confusion. On the other hand, the holders of this voice are very few in number and will not be as important and ecologically important as Domo or UniSat. A straightforward idea, this view has not received much attention.

1.4 Trend Forecast

Note: This article At the time of writing, all parties have reached a consensus to jointly upgrade to 0.14. To ensure the completeness of the writing, this part of the analysis is retained.

On January 3, the tweeter @lilyanna_btc published a long tweet and analyzed several potential possibilities. In his opinion, there are probably The following possibilities:

• The freezing faction and the upgrade faction coexist

• The upgrade faction compromises and stays at 0.9 with the freeze faction

• The freeze faction compromises and follows the Ordinals Upgrade

See the original text for details: 

https ://twitter.com/lilyanna_btc/status/1742395707624132825

In addition, the author has another point of view:Everyone takes a step back and negotiates. Thing

Domo once said on the L1F forum that it would consider using maintenance mode to slowly accept Ordinals upgrades. In other words, freeze it first and then upgrade it later. This solution is actually not feasible. Freezing first and then upgrading will lead to another debate about whether to change the inscription number or not. If this part of the inscriptions before the upgrade is traced back, the inscription numbers will be rearranged, and the inscriptions and transactions in between will cause greater confusion than the direct upgrade of BRC-20. Without backtracking, the BRC-20 numbers and the Ordinals numbers would never be consistent.

1.5 Final result

After 5 days from all parties After discussion and coordination, all parties finally reached the following consensus and implemented the promotion:

Figure 1-3 The final plan agreed by all parties (Source: Twitter)

• BRC-20 has been upgraded to version 0.14 with Orindals, which is a step further than Jubilee. This version solves the bugs in the indexing process, but there is no obvious difference from 0.9;

• Will not be discussed in the short term Whether BRC-20 will be frozen in Ordinals version 0.14 is currently mainly focused on security, stability and related testing work, and further decisions will be made based on the results.

• As for the problem mentioned in 1.2.2 that may cause duplication of inscription numbers, Ordinals writer Casey once proposed the following: Added a marker to specific parts of inscriptions where numbering is likely to be repeated to indicate that the inscription will be indexed correctly in the future with minor modifications on Ordinals. Indexers can temporarily skip this before updating to that version of Ordinals, and merge the inscriptions after the update. In the current agreement reached by all parties, this proposal called "Vindication" has been shelved, but it may be activated in the future;

• All parties are trying to solve the extreme cases mentioned in "Vindication";

• Ignore proxy and code (Delegation and Encoding) question. However, the consensus did not specify what the agents and codes refer to.

Figure 1-4 Vidication proposal proposed by Casey (Source: Casey's Github page)

2.1 UniSat: “Radical”

The plans and opinions put forward by UniSat throughout the entire incident have always been a very "radical" perspective. This kind of radicalization has good and bad qualities. On the one hand, this kind of radicalization can always maintain synchronization with the Ordinals protocol, or actively or passively promote the update and development of the BRC-20 ecology. On the other hand, it is too radical and lacks the ability to compete with its peers. Communication and coordination do ignore possible bugs, which may further lead to market confusion or even technical faults.

Domo once commented that this kind of radicalization is purely speculative behavior, but this criticism is mainly based on the perspectives of "too short time" and "lack of communication". , rather than wanton behavior at the level of technology, ecology and development route. Considering that UnSat is also a start-up team, it is understandable that it hopes to "do more" in the early stages of the ecosystem to enrich the team's experience. Therefore, the author is unwilling to evaluate UniSat's motives and role as "good" or "bad", but I highly recognize its enthusiasm in this dispute.

2.2 Domo and the founding team: "Stable"

Domo, unlike the team and UniSat, always highlights the word "stability". Even before the dispute occurred, the proposal to freeze the BRC-20 version at 0.9 was mainly to ensure the stability of the entire protocol. Throughout the dispute process, whether it was its views or its voice on social media, it mainly focused on the technology and the protocol itself, with less consideration for the future path.

This way of thinking is actually very common in all walks of life. The main manifestation is that people with technical background attach great importance to the stability and quality of the technical level and believe that quality is more important than anything else. There is insufficient attention to future development, especially from a market and financial perspective. This way of thinking cannot be evaluated simply in terms of good or bad. It can only be said that, like UniSat, it has advantages and limitations.

2.3 Market and user neutrality: focus on customer relationships

Those who hold a neutral view are mainly service providers, such as exchanges such as OKX. For OKX, BRC-20 or the Ordinals protocol is just one of its main businesses. It does not matter whether 0.8, 0.9 or Jubilee's upgraded 0.13 or even 0.14 is adopted. What is important is to reach a consensus as soon as possible on which set of standards to adopt, which not only avoids the additional costs caused by the coexistence of multiple systems, but also helps maintain market order. .

2.4 Conspiracy theories

As small as inscription users, as large as In the Bitcoin chain, all participants have more or less the idea of ​​​​seeking profit, whether the profit here is money, technology, or something else. Naturally, there are also conspiracy theories that the dispute between Domo and UniSat is mainly about grabbing the right to speak ecologically in the future to maximize their own interests.

The author believes that although this logic makes sense, no matter it is the early thinking logic and wording of UniSat and Domo, or the later negotiation process and final result The suggestion that each side takes a step back and directly label both sides as "stealing the right to speak" is somewhat unwarranted. Moreover, considering that BRC-20 has attracted a large amount of funds since its inception, and the mechanisms and gameplay in the ecosystem are still in the early stages of exploration and development, at this time, it is eager to seize the right to speak and achieve a unified voice, and use this to "cut off" Leek" is really short-sighted. In particular, the prospects for future development shown by all parties in the dispute also confirm that the conspiracy theory is indeed untenable.

2.5 Event Evaluation

There is a The very classic impossible triangle: security, decentralization, scalability. For any product or ecosystem, in addition to the product itself, how to balance technical quality and follow the market is also a very important issue, and this dispute is mainly focused on this.

After half a year of development, the BRC-20 ecology is no longer an entertainment product or a speculation direction. Its volume of 3 billion US dollars is enough to arouse everyone's interest. Pay attention to. So how the BRC-20 ecosystem develops in the future should not be decided by users, nor should UniSat or Domo, or exchanges, promote it unilaterally. What I am happy to see is that in the later statements of all parties and interviews with Domo himself, all parties generally did not care about "win" or "lose", but repeatedly mentioned "communication", "cooperation" and "coordination" ” and other words, at the same time, he does not blindly adhere to his own views, but combines the strengths of various schools.

Recently, the United States has also approved the application for Bitcoin spot ETF. Digital currency and blockchain itself are gradually transforming from "speculative products" to "investment products". "evolution. The BRC-20 ecosystem has a capital volume of US$3 billion, which can be said to be large or small. The big thing is that there are a large number of participants and strong market funds, and we will wisely support every healthy development project and community. The small thing is that outside BRC-20 and even the blockchain industry, there is still a larger amount of funds ready to go. After the dispute ended, although the parties only reached a temporary consensus, the good attitude displayed conveyed a very positive message to users, developers, operation teams, and even traditional investors outside the market. signal of. Perhaps when we look back on this incident after some time, we will find that the ecology and industry have just happened to be at the right time and place, and have embarked on a path of rapid and healthy development since then.