🔥 🔥 Over 1 BTC irrevocably burned on the Spaces Protocol 🔥 🔥 \ stacker news ~bitcoin

pull down to refresh

🔥 🔥 Over 1 BTC irrevocably burned on the Spaces Protocol 🔥 🔥x.com/spacesprotocol/status/1877366258703675448

816 sats \ 10k boost \ 51 comments \ @ca98am79 9 Jan bitcoin

view all related items

129 sats \ 2 replies \ @ca98am79 OP 9 Jan

more info: https://spacesprotocol.org/ explorer: https://explorer.spacesprotocol.org/

10 sats \ 1 reply \ @kilianbuhn 9 Jan

I see that the auction system is going strong and people seem to be bidding on it.

But are these spaces already used somewhere?

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @ca98am79 OP 9 Jan

a couple of people have started working on using their names with fabric: https://github.com/spacesprotocol/fabric

we plan to launch GUI wallet soon, then a production ready fabric release, then a marketplace, then registry system for selling subspaces. After that we will be working on integrations with , for example, nostr, bip-353, etc

28 sats \ 0 replies \ @lightcoin 9 Jan

kudos for using op_return instead of "burn addresses" that permanently bloat the utxo set!

28 sats \ 3 replies \ @kilianbuhn 9 Jan

how much Bitcoin overall is burned forever? 🤔

Maybe Bitcoin market cap is only half the official number because half is lost forever?

0 sats \ 1 reply \ @dickiegreenlead 9 Jan

Only lost until quantum computers can unlock legacy addresses.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @dickiegreenlead 9 Jan

The lost BTC is actually an incentive for quantum computer devs, more so in 10 years.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @OriginalSize 9 Jan

Couple/few million but you should know that market cap is flawed as a measure. Liquidity matters a whole lot more.

21 sats \ 3 replies \ @ZezzebbulTheMysterious 9 Jan

What a complete waste of sats. Utter trash.

STOP TRYING TO DO IDENTITY ON CHAIN.

Nobody wants it, Nobody needs it. Nostr identity public keys are already interoperable. There is no need to store these on chain.

Why are so many fools coming out of the woodwork lately with these stupid schemes that failed (for obvious reasons) in the last decade.

Spammers and scammers.

Save your precious sats.

88 sats \ 2 replies \ @ca98am79 OP 9 Jan

what is your solution to BIP-353 and centralized domain names and centralized third party certificate authorities? a lot of people want these things decentralized and see the need

15 sats \ 1 reply \ @ZezzebbulTheMysterious 9 Jan

Selling Decentralized DNS and names is like selling moon plots, or plots of land in Scotland for noble titles, etc. its a SCAM. its a scam registry that nobody uses, trusts or consumes valid data from.

Names are not a fundamentally solvable problem with cryptocurrency. This is why i believe these projects failed and always will fail. Names have a real world binding to actual physical entities. We cannot solve this with cryptocurrency.

Cryptocurrency has a single purpose, which is to create an immutable ledger of value between peers. Bitcoin is the cryptocurrency with best value capturing proposition, demonstrated since 2009.

An immutable ledgers of names is meaningless and useless to all parties in the general case. It just is not 'trustworthy'. Why would anyone use it? If i cant bind a name to an actual entity, rather whomever paid the most for it first -- what good is this? Its nonsense.

Because the only thing that matters to me economically in Bitcoin is my own UTXOs, the spam is just spam. If your protocol requires that other peoples spam changes the behavior of my clients; eg: DNS resolution, I am very very uninterested. It is of negative value that some random registered a name. What if they were scammers?

I don't care who owns "sn" in this stupid isolated, proprietary namespace. Who would? What i care about is that stacker.news resolves to the 6 correct IP addresses.

Its analogous to convincing people their Websters dictionary definitions are wrong, and they need to trust urban dictionary definitions instead.

Good luck with that

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @nym 9 Jan

Yea opensea already tried this

20 sats \ 3 replies \ @k00b 9 Jan

Crap I still need to set this up. My life is a mess.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @ZezzebbulTheMysterious 9 Jan

Just ignore it, it will die like every other attempt to do this insanity. Don't encourage spam, and discourage spammers.

0 sats \ 1 reply \ @ca98am79 OP 9 Jan

Here is one way to quickly get started: https://x.com/spacesprotocol/status/1873873441373233398

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @nitter 9 Jan bot

https://xcancel.com/spacesprotocol/status/1873873441373233398

11 sats \ 20 replies \ @0xbitcoiner 9 Jan

What a waste! Why did this happen?

41 sats \ 2 replies \ @_stacktoshi 9 Jan

https://docs.spacesprotocol.org/getting-started/auctions#where-do-proceeds-from-auctions-go

0 sats \ 1 reply \ @0xbitcoiner 9 Jan

Thanks! Do you know how they ensure that no one else has access to these funds?

31 sats \ 0 replies \ @_stacktoshi 9 Jan

I don't fully understand it (some kind of script in OP_RETURN) but each bidder burns their bitcoin bid, then the winner refunds all the losers.

https://spacesprotocol.org/paper/#auction-design

41 sats \ 16 replies \ @DarthCoin 9 Jan

idiots wasting their BTC on useless things.

10 sats \ 13 replies \ @CruncherDefi 9 Jan

I had similar reaction at first, but after reading docs I frame it as "Names should be neutral and not personal, so you buy it out from everyone".

Winning an auction by burning coins is like paying everyone in the ecosystem pro rata. Which seems sensible for things like domains/names.

21 sats \ 12 replies \ @ZezzebbulTheMysterious 9 Jan

Why would you sell an identity? Why do one even WANT an on chain identity.

Nothing good can come of this.

0 sats \ 10 replies \ @CruncherDefi 9 Jan

I never said anything about selling identity. As I understand the use-case here is something like domain registration.

Currently DNS system is permissioned and controlled by a human organization.

This allows for permission-less domain registration. When every web-browsers can resolve such domains we are one step closer towards truly decentralized and permision-less internet.

100 sats \ 8 replies \ @ZezzebbulTheMysterious 9 Jan

No it wont.

There is no such thing as decentralized DNS. There will likely never be decentralized DNS that works for your average person. We have a better chance of decentralizing the money (Bitcoin) than decentralizing names on the internet.

If Namecoin failed and ENS failed and Handshake Failed and DNSchain failed and AlephZero failed

why would some janky hack that relies on bitcoin spam work?

This is the worst possible solution to a non-problem.

110 sats \ 7 replies \ @CruncherDefi 9 Jan

There is no such thing as decentralized DNS.

Exactly, that's why they are trying to create it xD

We have a better chance of decentralizing the money (Bitcoin) than decentralizing names on the internet.

Yeah, and if you have decentralized money, you can use it to power other decentralized projects like decentralized domains.

And who you pay TO for that domain using decentralized money? To every participant pro-rata - that is the decentralized way.

If Namecoin failed and ENS failed and Handshake Failed and DNSchain failed and AlephZero failed

And that proves what? You do realize that before bitcoin there were dozens of failed projects, right? That's how you make stuff work - by trying over and over improving each time.

Also IMHO this idea is way better than shitcoin solutions like Namecoin. It directly uses bitcoin and its POW without any shitcoinery on top.

100 sats \ 5 replies \ @ZezzebbulTheMysterious 9 Jan

Namecoin is a much better protocol than anything done here. It is a true attempt at a decentralized protocol (not a spam on some other unrelated chain). Then Larimer tried with DNS on Bitshares. [edit: BitDNS turned into Namecoin]. Also failed. Every new blockchain tries this. It always fails.

Decentralized still worthless because nobody is going to use your resolver. Its this simple. DNS is a critical security control, and you are weakening that control by allowing any malicious spammer ability to set names.

I call this the "CocaCola" problem. Any DNS system that lets an arbitrary user register 'cocacola.namespace' is fundamentally untrustworthy, and will never be adopted.

Ive seen attempts at alternative dns roots for 25 years. Not a single one works today. The most used "decentralized dns" is ENS, and that broke when Griffith got pinched. Its worthless as the day it was created. 'Decentralized' lol.

You can send your grandmother Bitcoin in a wallet. Easy. You never will be able to get your grandmother to resolve decentralized names on her phone (especially in a way that does not open them up to malicious name risk).

Its never going to happen. Stop trying to make it happen.

view replies

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @DarthCoin 9 Jan

As a matter of fact NMC was also POW, even mined together with BTC for a while. Why it failed? I don't know exactly, I think the code was hijacked or something like that, I can't remember exactly.

reply on another page

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @DarthCoin 9 Jan

No, this is just crap scam.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @DarthCoin 9 Jan

shitcoin mentality to get precious sats from gullible fools

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @ZezzebbulTheMysterious 9 Jan

100%. What a waste of precious sats.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @ca98am79 OP 9 Jan

deleted by author

10 sats \ 2 replies \ @000w2 9 Jan

1BTC? Here is the burn address for counterparty: https://mempool.space/address/1CounterpartyXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXUWLpVr

0 sats \ 1 reply \ @ZezzebbulTheMysterious 10 Jan

ha! yes! Amateurs!

10 sats \ 0 replies \ @000w2 10 Jan

If only the ethereum crowd sale funds had been burned instead of laundered.

10 sats \ 0 replies \ @022fbc9cef 9 Jan

There is so much Bitcoin lost we can't even imagine. Bitcoin is going to be absolutely rare. People don't realize that.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @025738dda8 10 Jan

Useless crap. Nobody has any incentive to use this. BTC is not a storage platform. Full decentralization of everything does not make any sense.

If being short bitcoin by holding more fiat than necessary is so much stupid, it is difficult to estimate what gigant stupidity is behind burning sats.

I hope for you to get so high on-chain fees that such crap dies quickly and never appears again.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @mrsu 10 Jan

What problem does this solve?

0 sats \ 4 replies \ @ZezzebbulTheMysterious 9 Jan

This solution is just awful.

Whenever folks claim to be "cypherpunks", yet want to implement "decentralized identity" using completely centralized code and centralized paradigms.

There is nothing decentralized about any of this. It, just like runes and ordinals and other spammy trash is not decentralized. These fools think that if they store data in a decentralized data structure like a blockchain at great cost their app is decentralized. This is magical thinking, and very very wrong. The PROTOCOL must be decentralized, not the storage. Storage alone is insufficient. Abuse of shared storage resources is called spam, and society (let alone other cypherpunks) very much dislikes it.

It all requires proprietary services to parse the proprietary data that is stored on chain. These services will all fail, like every other attempt in the past. They are a negative value proposition for Bitcoin. Eventually the spammers learn at great cost, but we all suffer the consequences.

The Bitcoin protocol does not have any identity components at all, it is purely pseudonymous by design.

Rethink your entire perspective ca98am79 You are doing a great disservice to whatever persona you believe you are filling.

10 sats \ 3 replies \ @ca98am79 OP 9 Jan

it is a completely decentralized naming layer for bitcoin. It is not only useful, but urgently needed

0 sats \ 2 replies \ @ZezzebbulTheMysterious 10 Jan

Whats a single urgent need that is solvable by Decentralized Identity or DNS? There is no good answer to this.

This solution is not completely decentralized, its completely centralized! bitcoind is decentralized and running on ~50k+ hosts. What incentive is there for folks to run another proprietary daemon that returns the incorrect DNS results for names? Sounds like nonsense.

You don't get to spam junk to the Bitcoin blockchain and say that you are decentralized. Doing so is no more decentralized than any of the out-of-protocol spam we have seen since bitcoin began (Mastercoin/Omni, Counterparty, etc). It just isn't!

Just because you spam bitcoin tx with junk doesnt make this a solution FOR bitcoin, or USING bitcoin. Its just putting shit where it doesn't belong at great expense.

10 sats \ 1 reply \ @ca98am79 OP 10 Jan

“If you don't believe me or don't get it, I don't have time to try to convince you, sorry.”

400 sats \ 0 replies \ @ZezzebbulTheMysterious 10 Jan

Don’t you dare quote Satoshi to me.

No. You are a scammer. Your last project, park.io was a domain squatting and extortion scheme. It scooped up expired domains and then extorted the owners who had let them lapse. Like a million other scammers on the internet for the last 30 year.

You are a rent seeker and extractor. You add nothing to the world with your ideas.

Then You sold it. It was a net negative on the world but fuck it! Made you rich eh?

You, what; what then found Bitcoin?

And now you are here to save us with your stupid name spam scam? Because we need it why?

So you can squat and extort another namespace?

Give me a single use case for your solution. I’m waiting.

I’m tired of you Johnny come latelys. You won’t even learn history and why this is brain dead.

You can’t even tell me what your stupid solution offers over say, handshake, which at least made accommodations for day, the Alexa top 1000.

Pathetic scammer.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @nym 9 Jan

what are the letter like ca, guru, ok. are they buying like top level domains?

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @nitter 9 Jan bot

https://xcancel.com/spacesprotocol/status/1877366258703675448

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Steveking 9 Jan freebie

wow even at the price it is at now i think that should have been prevented somehow