Bitcoin Maximalists vs. BRC20 Tokens: The Battle for Blockchain Supremacy

Normally, when supporters of a blockchain discover a new application, they rejoice because the use (and thus the value) of their assets will likely increase. Normally... However, for the past few weeks, BTC maximalists have been relentlessly attacking a new standard that appeared on their own blockchain: BRC20.

To understand this rejection, we need to go back a little. As we know, Bitcoin maximalists have been continuously enraged since the emergence of Ethereum and its layers, smart contracts, and DeFi. Why? Because, according to them, the proliferation of altcoins and protocols not only hinders the adoption of the one and only revolutionary currency (BTC) but also confuses the public opinion with so many offerings - leading to disgust caused by numerous scams.

But the worst was yet to come: today, the enemy is challenging them on their own territory, as some have managed to add "information" to tiny fractions of Bitcoin (the satoshis), effectively turning them into "NFTs" and "ERC20 tokens." The process is simple: on each of these satoshis (1/100 millionth of BTC), now identifiable since they are numbered, metadata ("inscription") is added, and they become "unique": these tattooed satoshis become collectible items or new currencies (BRC20 tokens). Thus, the store of value on the Bitcoin blockchain is no longer limited to BTC but also to its dust, transformed into jewels by the ingenuity of a passionate avant-garde. Brilliant, right?

Not at all.

The hostility of the maximalists was immediate: some showed disdain ("BRC20 won't last...") while others, like Luke Dashjr or Ali Sherief, outright demand the prohibition of BRC20 tokens in a... centralized and authoritative manner.

The official reason for this rejection, let's repeat it, is the necessity to fight against any form of pollution that would delay the advent of Bitcoin as the sole form of money, creating distractions and malfunctions (for example, on May 5th, the activity related to BRC20 tokens caused an explosion of transaction fees and a temporary network outage). Furthermore, the very concept of BRC20 tokens is considered a deception: there were never any BRC1, BRC2, or BRC19, for the simple reason that on Bitcoin, they use Bitcoin Improvement Proposals (BIPs). Pure marketing! Sacrilege...

But one can suspect another reason for this hostility, a much less honorable one. BTC holders are often just lucky individuals: they entered the game at the right time. They became millionaires not through their talent, not through their social usefulness, but purely by chance. And suddenly seeing commoners deploying and trading BRC20 tokens, then celebrating the return of Bitcoin's popularity, infuriates them.

Their aristocracy takes a hit. The gates of their Olympus crack open to the common people. Imagine this: BRC20 token enthusiasts turn small coins into substantial sums, pennies into hundreds of euros... Do they think it's 2009 again? Intolerable. The BRC20 movement must be killed. Discredited.

Thus, the war has begun.

Will the early adopters of BRC20 tokens submit?

To be continued...