6 sats \ 2 replies \ @oomahq 16 Apr \ parent \ on: What are Runes? bitcoin
If you actually look in detail what a bitcoin transaction is, sats are just an integer number annotated in each transaction output. Again, you cannot identify the individual units that compose an integer number.
You can pretend you can, of course. But it's not the same thing as actually being able to.
write
preview
6 sats \ 1 reply \ @0xIlmari 17 Apr freebie
I just showed you how. I'm not pretending. You can take any UTXO and point out the lineage of every single sat that composes it, back to the block it was mined in. It's called chainalysis. If you just add a convention by numbering them, you get Ordinals.
reply
16 sats \ 0 replies \ @ZezzebbulTheMysterious 19 Apr freebie
No, you can’t. You are pretending. “By convention”. There is no convention of ordering of sats!
It’s made up nonsense. There is a chain of discrete Satoshi unit denominated value transferred in each UTXO, from a previously unspent transaction. The Bitcoin protocol ensures that value cannot be created from nothing by ensuring that UTXO cannot be spent again. Even If you could make 1 sat txs, and track them as individual sats, they would perfectly fungible, as you could not tell which sat a 1,1->2->1,1 is. The protocol expresses value of some sats, not individual sats.
Blockchain Analysis works by tracking value transfers, not individual sats! The sat can be fungible by the protocol and still represent a node in a value transfer - it’s a ledger. Do not confuse the Bitcoin protocol with made up imaginary nonsense from Twitter.
You are welcome to try to consider each bitpattern that makes up a number in memory, but that’s not how computers work. The number 7 stored in a byte of memory is just 00000111, it is not every bit pattern that makes up 0-7.
This is all magic bullshit thinking that is spamming and destroying value.
reply