Ordinals are making waves all of a sudden

Ordinals So I've been noticing this term popping up way more often lately compared to the last few months when I was MIA. It's not just a few weeks ago, but really spiked just days after the halving and the few days before it. Some folks on here have been bashing it, calling it: - Some trash that doesn’t belong in the Bitcoin space - Something that seems to have little or no real value - Basically saying it should be separated from Bitcoin entirely. Honestly, I don’t fully grasp it all, but how did this seemingly undervalued aspect of Bitcoin gain such attention? I'm not clear on the concept, but it doesn’t seem to get the respect it deserves. From my searches, it looks like Ordinals are linked to Bitcoin NFTs. Basically, Satoshi Nakamoto assigned specific signatures to satoshis, allowing them to act like NFTs (Non-Fungible Tokens). Should a currency like this really have something like that? Just a thought. Bitcoin is already unique and valuable enough on its own, its influence will always loom large over anything it’s associated with. But that's besides the main point. When they mention that there are certain signatures tied to the sats, can’t that apply to every other sat too, making them unique with their own signatures? I might be missing something here, but it seems like the halving has really brought this into the spotlight. I’d appreciate any insights on this topic. Thanks!

For the most part, you understood this well, and this has already been discussed so many times. All Bitcoin enthusiasts and users will agree with you, while speculators will be on the opposite side because they see NFT on the BTC network as an opportunity to make money. There is not much to halving except that many people thought that their token could have a higher value if it was written in a specific halving block.

Satoshi never did that, it's mentioned by Casey Rodarmor as part of Ordinal theory. Probably no, currency usually expected to be fungible. At least for ordinal numbering purpose, the answer in yes.

That is why Ordinals can be categorized as a scam because it is not an NFT. To be a "token", first Bitcoin has to be a token creation platform (which it isn't) and it has to contain actual script/smart contract that is executed inside and enforced by the Bitcoin protocol (which it isn't). Ordinals is just arbitrary data that is being injected into the bitcoin blockchain by exploiting a flaw in the SegWit rules consensus rules. Satoshi didn't do that. Someone else created this whole fakery! Satoshi Nakamoto has already answered that (just replace DNS with the Ordinals crap and it's pretty much the same thing): It kinda is! Considering how Ordinals work (a completely separate and centralized place where people put a value on random UTXOs) you can decide to place a value on any UTXO the same way! and call it a "unique unit".

By using up most of the block space storing ordinals, it makes transaction fees higher, which makes it more expensive for us to send money on-chain.

Oh wow, impression noted and corrected. I’m essence, it’s just the same as with every sat which is though significant as per numbering, I really find little to no significance as per its placement in the blocks anyway. It’s not the first block ever, is it and as such, it doesn’t really matter. For the most, it doesn’t really matter what block it is, that’s as insignificant as every other block. For what is worth, this is something I find the most recent halving and this whole Ordinal shit to have been tailored with. Like, how could such a thing that isn’t really helping as per the ease of Bitcoin transaction be of any value to the whole technology in itself, it just doesn’t work by letting it stay!

Here is the official ordinals documentation, wheree they explain how to determine if a satoshi is common /rare/ uncommon etc https://docs.ordinals.com/overview.html