pull down to refresh
0 sats \ 3 replies \ @crrdlx 1 Jul 2023 \ on: Can Ordinal Theory and Inscriptions really break the fungibility of sats? bitcoin
Seems to me that the answer is, yes, ordinals do make sats non-fungible. I have a couple of Bitcoin ordinals, that is to say, I have a couple of sats with inscriptions to them. If I were to drop some sats somewhere, I definitely don't want those ordinal inscription sats to leave my wallet. They're different.
Clear.
Let's say that one day you decide to sell them out (a buyer will make you a very good proposal), how can you be sure that at the end of the transaction these two specific sats will reach the buyer's address? Is this automatically managed by the ordinals software?
reply
I'm certainly still learning on this, so, I'm not entirely sure. They are in a taproot wallet address. This is where it gets tricky, at least to me and I have homework to do. As I understand, in a "regular" wallet or perhaps Segwit, when you send sats they just send "random" sats. You've got 1000 and you send 10, it just grabs and sends 10. In a taproot wallet you can avoid this, you can say, "Don't send this one sat." Wallet types: https://bitpay.com/blog/crypto-wallet-addresses/ So to try to answer your questions: 1. to ensure it "get's there", I just check a block explorer. 2. I think the Taproot wallet avoids sending the sat you don't want to send. Again, I'm learning though. :)
reply
Thank you! You gave me an interesting direction of further investigation
reply