Controversy between true and false punks: Recursive punks on the pure chain are actually stored on Github?

As one of the most classic NFT characters on Ethereum, the cypherpunk image represents a kind of spirit, owning it is a status symbol, and becomes an always attractive narrative. It seems that with the rise of every new chain, the image of cypherpunk has become the first object to be transplanted. From this, we have seen various punks on the chain, and many punk derivatives and synthetic characters.

With the rise of the Bitcoin ecological NFT narrative, various cypherpunks have also begun to appear in the BTC network, and are popular among crypto collectors. As the first 10 K set of Bitcoin Punks minted for free using Ordinals, it was sold out in less than a day, and its floor price once exceeded 4 BTC.

After Ordinals, the NFT infrastructure of the BTC ecosystem continues to grow, among which the recursive inscription "Recursive Inions" is worth mentioning.

As a new thing in the BTC ecosystem, Recursive Inions ushered in the launch of the first recursive punks (Recursive Punks) after its launch. With the enthusiasm of the community, 10,000 recursive punks were quickly burned, and then quickly launched on the MagicEden market. And the total daily transaction volume on the platform reached 8.15 bitcoins, becoming the series with the highest transaction volume on the platform. Its highest price once rose to 0.002 bitcoins, and the relative burning cost increased by up to 30 times. In addition, a number of punks with rare attributes were traded at a price of 0.05 bitcoin, and the number of their holders also increased by more than 2,000 overnight.

Dramatically, the user found that the recursive punk they burned was displayed as blank. After checking the code, it was found that this was because the official recursive punk developer used the wrong recursive inscription syntax and wrote "/content/" as "/-/ content/:", which resulted in the inscriptions that users who used the official SVG file to burn earlier had no picture board. So the community launched a correct repair version, which is to replace "/-/content/:" in the original SVG file with "/content/", which triggered the dispute between true and false recursive punk.

The battle between true and false punk

On June 13, Recursive Punks on Bitcoin was officially launched and was enthusiastically received by the community. A total of 10K Recursive Punks were burnt quickly in a short period of time. However, when the burning is complete, some users claim that the recursive punks they own are blank. After checking, it is found that this is because the officially released Recursive Punks uses the deprecated old version syntax "/-/content/:", according to the development For the code update released by the author Casey Rodarmor, the correct writing method should be "/-/content/:", which results in the non-picture version of the inscription generated by the user based on the official SVG file.

Syntax update from Recursive Inions developer

Subsequently, the community organization launched the v2 version of recursive punk, which corrected the grammatical errors of the previous official version, that is, to replace "/-/content/:" in the original SVG file with the correct "/content/", and burn the corrected version Relatively slow to display recursive punk images correctly and clearly. This version was also burnt after 24 hours. The community believes that the data source of the official release version is hosted on github, which does not conform to the spirit of decentralization, which will mislead the community, so the real recursive punks were created, which is the v2 version of Recursive Punks.

As a result, Recursive Punks has two versions, the official version v1 released by the official and the v2 version initiated by the community, and the v2 version has also been officially recognized by Recursive Punks. Authors and the community are able to endorse both the unmapped version and the illustrated version.

However, Recursive Punks deleted the tweet shortly afterwards, and immediately launched a collection of non-picture versions on MagicEden.

The official tweet has now been deleted

Surprisingly, Recursive Punks, which cannot display pictures originally, shows high-definition large pictures on MagicEden. After code research, it turns out that Recursive Punks is officially implemented using front-end rendering instead of using recursive inscriptions.

However, as the first project on the new protocol Recursive Inions, the official version still has a stronger and broader consensus, and the following data shows everything.

MagicEden data shows that the total transaction volume of the Recursive Punks without pictures series based on incorrect grammar reached 8.15 bitcoins within the first day of launch, making it the series with the highest transaction volume on the platform. Up to 30 times. In addition, several punks with rare attributes were sold at a price of 0.05 BTC. Its number of holders also increased by more than 2,000 overnight.

In contrast, after the community-initiated Youtuban was launched on the NFT platform Ordyssey, although the number of holding addresses continued to increase, the total transaction volume was 1.3 BTC, ranking third in intraday transaction volume.

Although it was denounced by some members of the community as a fake recursive punk, stored on github, and even strictly speaking, this collection is not a recursive inscription, but it was officially released on the protocol earlier, and it was listed on the MagicEden market earlier, In the early stage of the immature and complete NFT infrastructure in the Bitcoin ecosystem, whether it can be listed in the secondary market and whether it can be indexed determines the development speed of the series and even becomes a key factor for its survival.

This makes us ask further, what is the standard for judging real punk, is it on v1 that is first is first or on v2 that uses the correct recursive inscription code?

Pure on-chain recursive punk is actually stored on Github?

Interestingly, this recursive punk, which is called the first project on "Recursive Inscription", has nothing to do with "Recursive Inscription".

So, what is "recursive inscription"?

In fact, "Recursive Inscription" was created based on the Ordinals protocol of Bitcoin ecology. The Ordinals protocol was initiated by software engineer Casey Rodarmor in January 2023. Engrave data to generate Ordinals inscriptions similar to NFT.

The rise of Ordinals has brought new possibilities to the Bitcoin network. Compared with Ethereum, the pictures in the Bitcoin network are completely stored on the chain and are permanent. The narrative of "permanently stored on the chain" is not only full of romance , It also makes the Bitcoin ecology full of unlimited imagination.

And Recursive Inions (recursive inscriptions), also initiated by the founder of Ordinals, is further developed based on Ordinals.

Subject to objective conditions, the inscription on Ordinals has an upper limit - it can only accommodate a capacity of up to 4 MB, while recursive inscriptions can achieve higher storage efficiency and achieve interoperability, allowing the size of the inscription to break through the previous Bitcoin area The block size limit of 4 MB means that it is possible to host large files such as video games, movies or complex software directly on the Bitcoin blockchain. All of these can be implemented directly on the Bitcoin chain without relying on off-chain analysis. This innovation brings unlimited creativity to the Ordinals ecosystem and stimulates people's imagination.

However, as the first recursive project "Recursive Punks" launched on Recursive Inions, the Recursive Punks burned by the user is displayed as blank due to negligent use of the wrong grammatical format, which means that this version of Punks is not a real recursive inscription Naturally, the project has nothing to do with the permanent on-chain storage of Bitcoin represented by the recursive inscription.

After the launch of Magic Eden, the front-end code was modified to display pictures normally. The code was not stored on the Bitcoin network, nor even in ipfs, but was stored on the centralized hosting warehouse github. This is full of irony for a project that focuses on the narrative of "bitcoin permanent chain storage".

Even so, as the first recursive project on Recursive Inions, "Recursive Punks v1 version" was quite successful when it was launched. Not only was the casting completed in a short period of time, its popularity even caused the website to go down for a while. It reached 8.15 bitcoins, becoming the series with the largest transaction volume on the platform. Its highest price once rose to 0.002 bitcoins, and the relative burning cost increased by up to 30 times. In addition, a number of punks with rare attributes were traded at a price of 0.05 bitcoin, and the number of their holders also increased by more than 2,000 overnight. As of today, the transaction volume is 13 bitcoins. The V2 version of MagicEden, which is also launched, has much less transaction volume.

New things breed potential opportunities, but also mean huge risks, especially in the early stages of imperfect infrastructure. For the Bitcoin ecology, although the NFT narrative has injected new vitality into its ecology, its immature infrastructure and disputes that have not yet reached a consensus may instantly clear the encrypted assets minted on it.

Especially new projects launched on top of this nascent protocol, regardless of the legality of the project itself is still controversial (its value depends on the community's criteria for judging true and false punk and the promotion and development of future community consensus), let alone The underlying protocol "Recursive Inscription" protocol layer on which it relies, and the equally controversial lower-level Ordinals have been resisted by Bitcoin core developers, who believe that the new use cases supported by these protocols will occupy the block space of the Bitcoin network. This excludes more people from the Bitcoin network and is not conducive to driving crypto adoption, which deviates from Satoshi Nakamoto's vision of Bitcoin as a peer-to-peer cash system.

The dependence on the underlying basic protocol may cause developers to modify the original protocol, thereby affecting the function of the software and wrong file storage hash. Cryptocurrency is a very high-risk investment target, especially on the basis that all the underlying infrastructure is not perfect and the community consensus has not been reached. Investing in such assets has huge risks. Block Rhythm reminds everyone, please think independently before investing, DYOR (do your own research).

Source: 05 mnz 61.html