Minecraft价格

Yes, it’s true—I’ve been spending time on BRC-20. Not for engagement. Not because it’s perfect. But because it opened up a design space on Bitcoin that hasn’t really existed until now—and that shift matters. Here’s why: – BRC-20 is stateless and non-Turing complete. It doesn’t rely on a virtual machine. It encodes intent in inscriptions and relies on off-chain indexers to recreate token state. Crude? Yes. But it works, and it fits Bitcoin’s model. – It exposed real scaling and UX challenges. From bloated UTXO sets to inconsistent indexers, BRC-20 showed us what breaks under real usage. It also forced tooling—wallets, explorers, mempool visibility—to level up fast. – Runes builds on that. Runes replaces the JSON hack with native on-chain logic. It uses UTXOs to encode token balance directly, minimizing bloat and improving auditability. But it likely wouldn’t exist without BRC-20’s chaos proving there was demand. – This matters because Bitcoin is ossified. You can’t ship features at the base layer. That’s a feature, not a bug. But it means any new use case—tokens, DeFi, culture—has to work within hard constraints. That creates better engineering discipline. – The new design space is permissionless, Bitcoin-native experimentation. No wrapped assets. No smart contracts. No bridging risk. Just new protocols built directly on top of Bitcoin’s UTXO model. That’s a big deal. – And culturally, it matters too. Bitcoin has been viewed as “finished software” for years. This wave—BRC-20, Runes, Ordinals—is a reminder that innovation can still happen on Bitcoin, not just around it. I’m not here to farm engagement. I’m here because watching Bitcoin evolve—without compromising its fundamentals—is technically fascinating.