ˢʷⁱᵗᶜʰ-₉₀₀🟧

99% of you are missing out on Ørdainls: searching Ørdainls is a game-changer Being able to search ordainls can save you hours every day Imagine having instant access to ordainls at your fingertips Can someone explain why searching ordainls wasn't available sooner? Remember its a Ø > Zero!

@blockamoto @realizingerin I am interested and I think we could do something with Runes. There is somthing with oodl where runes could be run but I dont have the time to execute on this yet. Maybe one day.

@Switch_900 🤣 somebody needs to be the first "inscription streamer" or review video creator. That inscription review episode was great. I think I'll skip the runes one. @realizingerin is right.

Anone got anything interesting to add or will this go down as the most boring episode in history?

Another shot from my talk at @NFCsummit The last two years I did panels, so thanks to @johnkarp for my first keynote ever, and here's to many more! Let's go bigger next year.

Ordinals weren’t killed by the haters. They were strangled by the so called lovers who couldnt organise a piss up in a brewery without trying to own the brewery, the taps, and everyone’s glass.

@_CRFTD_ @itchatoshi There are some things. Thay need working on, it is a large code base. There is an already inscribed version but this one is a bit better. You can use a bitmap to sign up with a social profile.

@Switch_900 @itchatoshi 🔥🤌 will take a look!

Been thinking about starting a Discord for CRFTD holders. Got me thinking... Entire communities gather in one place because they like the same group of photos. Or code. Or scribblings. Or pixels. Then they sell and (often) get kicked out. 🤣 What a strange concept.

@_CRFTD_ @itchatoshi switch-900.github.io/Nexus-Lobby/

@itchatoshi @Switch_900 That’s really cool! Didn’t see it. Where can I check it @Switch_900 ?

@Mauricio_FPD @code @Copilot @NousResearch Is this as powerful as Claude?

@Switch_900 @code @Copilot Just use @NousResearch . Don't need anything more.

What’s next for coding with AI? @code and @Copilot prices keep creeping up, and it feels like every tool is turning into another monthly tax. So what’s the real alternative? What are you using right now? How often do you actually use it? Does it have Claude Opus 4.8 or something close? And most importantly, how much are you spending each month? Trying to work out what’s actually worth paying for.

Thank you from the bottom of my heart for three years of Bitmap. 🧡 And for keeping the spirit alive. ✨ What a journey it has been! 🟧 And here's to many more. 🥂

@3dOrdinalClub @blockamoto @oodinals

@blockamoto @oodinals Switch is amazing!!!

Switch casually building core infrastructure for the future web that lives on Bitcoin as an inscription.

Yeah I get what you are saying. If people cannot afford to touch L1, then they are not really holding Bitcoin. They are holding someone else’s promise. That is a real problem. And I agree, if the only people who can afford UTXOs are BlackRock, exchanges, banks and large funds, then Bitcoin risks becoming something normal people can only access through IOUs. That is not the future I want either. But this is also why I think things like OODL matter. I am not saying OODL fixes world scale Bitcoin. I am saying if blockspace is limited and expensive, then every transaction needs to do more. A normal transaction just moves something. An OODL transaction can move the asset, hold the sale logic, prove the ownership path, carry the listing, and make the future sale discoverable from Bitcoin itself. That means less reliance on marketplaces, less reliance on databases, and more ownership sitting with the actual user. For me, the answer is not everyone using L1 every day. And it is definitely not everyone being trapped in custodial IOUs forever. The answer has to be smarter use of Bitcoin. Better wallets. Better batching. Better protocols. Better exits. Better use of each UTXO. Better ways to make one transaction carry more value. So yes, I agree with your concern. Bitcoin being auditable by everyone but usable by almost no one would be a massive problem. I just think the way forward is not to stop building on Bitcoin. It is to build in a way that makes every onchain action more useful. That is the bit I am trying to explore with OODL.

A somewhat lengthy post replying to previous comment first > BTC remains the final settlement layer. Final settlement layer for whom, Blackrock? If you cannot afford a UTXO then all you have is an IOU from someone who can Consider that at just 10% of daily Swift $volume 𝙚𝙫𝙚𝙧𝙮 Tx is $1M equiv, how is Joe Bloggs going to outbid one of them (in the richest nation on earth >50% cannot put hands on $400 for an emergency) That IOU can and 𝙬𝙞𝙡𝙡 (Saifedean) be manipulated and increasingly surveilled => a CBDC in all but name > BTC remains auditable > BTC remains hard money I would agree that BTC 1. Almost impossible to change => 2. Whole history will always fit on a thumb drive => 3. Fully auditable by almost everybody => 4. The hardest digital money available (4.) + liquidity will attract more and more liquidity in a 'virtuous' circle of NgU (4.) Also throws the baby out with the bathwater (imo) and hardest money 𝙥𝙤𝙨𝙨𝙞𝙗𝙡𝙚 is not needed, You could only audit the last months/years worth of Txs and Know 1. No Debasement - 21M cap is intact 2. No Fraud - coins received are valid on Network Bonus 3. Prove Network wide malfeasance during your uptime 4. Bootstrap other nodes > But the user experience can be built around smarter transactions... This is where we diverge, If you can only ever have an IOU (𝙖𝙨 𝙮𝙤𝙪 𝙘𝙖𝙣𝙣𝙤𝙩 𝙖𝙛𝙛𝙤𝙧𝙙 𝙩𝙤 𝙚𝙭𝙞𝙩) then it's ultimately no different than the $Fiat system people are trying to replace and in fact much worse as those IOUs will be totally surveilled by increasingly draconian states, cash had legacy legistlation protecting it crypto IOU payment legistlation is yet to be written... --------------------------------- reply to to this comment I see that you don't seem to believe in world scale... > I am not one to believe it even needs to get world wide adoption or everyday use. Fair enough, do you imagine we stick with $fiat then? > I also dont think it is a good use as store of value without people like the inscribers generating network fees As above, at just 10% of Swift every Tx is $1M, at just 0.1% fee that's 10x current 𝙛𝙪𝙡𝙡 block reward + fees Can it get there, who knows, but I can see it playing out as it did when friends started to hear about holders outperforming other assets, just on a grander (and hence slower scale) Good job if you waded through all that WATTBA

I cancelled my @hellmoneypod sub today. It says 'Bitcoin & Ordinals podcast, but I expected more focus on Ordinals, tech, recursion, protocols, and actual builders moving the space forward. Instead, it often feels like Ordinals gets reduced to popularity contests and taste making. @rodarmor Casey is now being pushed as one of the suggested crypto accounts on X, which makes this even more important. If you have that level of visibility, why are so few Ordinals builders being amplified? Lifo is great, but there are many builders in this space doing serious work who are being ignored and also alienated. Ordinals is not just static art storage. It is not just 2023 hype. It is a protocol with massive possibilities. So Casey, are you actually interested in exploring what Ordinals can become or are you happy sitting on the beauty pageant soapbox?

@joubalspacker @TheBCHPodcast @hellmoneypod @bitjson Bitcoin is a luxury chain. I am not one to believe it even needs to get world wide adoption or everyday use. I also dont think it is a good use as store of value without people like the inscribers generating network fees.

Clearly I need to read your article on OODL, My thesis is, that at world scale the 99% will be TOTALLY priced out of making EVEN ONE Tx. Tadge Dryja said it best, "In the future, if you have this one-megabyte restricted blocksize and the Lightning Network, it is still the rich people and companies that can use lightning but the average user probably can’t!" I believe in L2s, but they need to be built on a L1 that even the poorest can access once a day/week/month youtu.be/jn_Z72H0SwY

We can inscribe a Hermes Agent capsule into a Bitmap: prompts, skills, docs, config, project manifest, task list, source links, hashes and child inscriptions. The Bitmap becomes the on-chain project root workspace. The Hermes agent itself would still run off-chain on a VPS or local machine, because it needs runtime access, models, tools, memory and execution. But technically it would not be Hermes fully running inside Bitcoin but a Bitmap controlled Hermes build environment where the Bitmap stores the instructions, state and outputs onchain. I think this is the best use case. Whats ya thoughts?

@Switch_900 @NousResearch @blockamoto Would deff be interested on battle testing this and making it happen .

Assisted inscribing, inscribe anywhere, anyway using mobile or pc. Keep it simple or make it advanced. Do it your way, that's the oodl way!

@Mauricio_FPD @NousResearch @blockamoto I did look at this when I heard that it was what you wanted to do. Technical it can not all be onchain but yes lets jump on a call and we can play it out.

@Switch_900 Hey switch , could you add or inscribe @NousResearch Hermes agent to build everything for us inside a Bitmap ? @blockamoto . Is this possibl ?

That is exactly the point I’m trying to solve with OODL. I dont think BTC needs to become a world scale database where every tiny action happens directly onchain. In a high fee environment, base layer Bitcoin becomes settlement, proof, provenance and final ownership. OODL is designed around that idea. The important transaction is the one that defines the asset, the sale logic, the ownership path, or the future spend condition. Not every click, message, offer or interaction needs to be a new L1 transaction. So for me the goal is: BTC remains auditable. BTC remains hard money. BTC remains the final settlement layer. But the user experience can be built around smarter transactions, recursive data, wallets, indexers, caching, batching, Lightning payment rails and protocols like OODL that make each on-chain action do more. So I agree with your fatal flaw. If everyone needs to touch L1 constantly, almost nobody can use it. But if L1 is used for high value final state and everything around it is designed properly, then BTC can still scale in usefulness without sacrificing auditability.

>Have you seen what I done OODL Thanks, I will have a look > Imo BTC has everything needed How will OODL fair in a high fee environment, given world scale BTC usage? For me BTC is almost perfect, with 1 fatal flaw 1. Almost everybody able to audit the 𝒘𝒉𝒐𝒍𝒆 chain => 2. Almost nobody can use it

Yeah i get what you mean. I am greatful to the few who pick up and use the things i build. Have you seen what I done on BTC with OODL. It adds new function to BTC as you can create intent of a sale. For instance you take an inscription send that inscription back to yourself and within the transaction embedded a PSBT that allows anyone to pay and receive the inscriptionif they pay the cost. I am also using this to create a P2P exchange. Imo BTC has everything needed. More details here. switch-900.github.io/OODL-Protocol/

Yep, usage/interest is miniscule (but hopefully growing) you're already #188 :-), we will see. I try not to scream into the void (too much), but post to people who seem like they might be receptive/interested in that sort of thing. I stopped evangelising some time ago (before the split) I do believe that crypto's 'problems' will be solved (assuming that's possible) by rich scripting (permissionlessness) on a world scalable base layer If you want to see why BCH is perhaps where it's at look no further than the unarguably knowledgeable, smart & progressive Jeremy Rubin x.com/joubalspacker/…

You seem to have the same problem. Screaming in to the void. My issue isnt the tech it is that there just isnt the attention it deserves. 187 view on a video that is 1 year old is about the same amount of traction I get. BCH seems like an even bigger curve, atleast most people actually accept bitcoin and not having to explain well it is like bitcoin but different and worth 20x less and has 100x less follong and users. Thank you for the links though I will spend the time to dive in properly and take a good look at the tech.

Here's some highlights of the underlying tech (May 2026 - we just got loops) From @Bitjson 𝘽𝘾𝙃 𝘽𝙪𝙡𝙡 34 𝙤𝙛 𝙉 So that every node can validate every transaction and not use too much of it's CPU youtu.be/xNQK3Ula2Ao?t=… Our safety margin for the Virtual Machine is between 10 and 100 times of what our VM uses youtu.be/xNQK3Ula2Ao?t=… On those typical consumer devices CPU utilization with BCH cranking out max size blocks FILLED with worst case possible transactions they should use between 1% and 10% of available CPU youtu.be/xNQK3Ula2Ao?t=… Even at 32MB blocks they can get 10x larger before they challenge the weakest plausible computers running Bitcoin Cash right now youtu.be/xNQK3Ula2Ao?t=… We are currently giving a contract author 1/100th of what we COULD have given them, and our safety margin above that is another 10x youtu.be/xNQK3Ula2Ao?t=… Satoshi chose a numbering system that makes it particularly easy AND EFFICIENT to work with Big Integer Numbers youtu.be/xNQK3Ula2Ao?t=… Contracts that are written for Bitcoin Cash are going to have BARE METAL performance for these very large calculations youtu.be/xNQK3Ula2Ao?t=… By having native BigInt the complexity of that is super simple Every single BigInt library out there that is used in production does these optimizations youtu.be/xNQK3Ula2Ao?t=… Lots of academics and financial institutions, lots of people are using Big Integers they are all using various libraries, some of the libraries are decades old... and our VM implementations can use those already well tested well optimized libraries youtu.be/xNQK3Ula2Ao?t=… BCHN is using lib GMP which is also being used by other cryptocurrencies which do Big integer stuff, currently being tested in consensus critical places by other cryptocurrencies. It would be crazy to not take advantage of bare metal performance for math youtu.be/xNQK3Ula2Ao?t=… It's amazing that we can get bare metal performance essentially out of contracts that people broadcast in transactions. That's awesome! youtu.be/xNQK3Ula2Ao?t=… We thought that the contract system was going to be slow and high overhead and the only way to get really fast stuff was to do a new special opcode just for the fast thing and that is just not the case, Satoshi's designed it to not be the case youtu.be/xNQK3Ula2Ao?t=… ------------------------- 𝙄𝙣 𝙘𝙤𝙢𝙥𝙖𝙧𝙞𝙨𝙤𝙣 𝙩𝙤 𝙀𝙑𝙈 In practice Ethereum developers can think of Bitcoin Cash as having transaction level sharding youtu.be/xNQK3Ula2Ao?t=… And many of the other tools you would expect with the exception of loops right now... something which I would say is a deficiency with respect to EVM it's only applicable in a subset of contracts it's possible to build a lot of things with hand unrolled loops... youtu.be/xNQK3Ula2Ao?t=… Our only remaining deficiency verses EVM (Without BCH loops) for a subset of of a subset contracts, our contract length can increase in a factorial way... contracts would get really long youtu.be/xNQK3Ula2Ao?t=… We are getting really close to equivalent on the contracting side specifically youtu.be/xNQK3Ula2Ao?t=… The validation side is the place where Bitcoin Cash really excels... (theoretically based ONLY on the architecture) if we are a little less precise we can allow contract authors to use 10s 100s maybe 1000s of times of computation per contract as a Global state architecture can afford to give their contract authors youtu.be/xNQK3Ula2Ao?t=… ------------------- 𝙊𝙣 𝙂𝙖𝙨 (why it is not necessary for BCH contracts - touched on earlier when talking about Global state needing to take notice of every op code no matter how small it's footprint) So given those fundamental realities of the architectures we have no need to carefully measure the actual computation used by each contract all we need to do is make sure none of them use too absurdly much, and most contracts can not even get close to the amount of computation that even with these very conservation limits, the only way to get close is to essentially do very large computations using BigInts. youtu.be/xNQK3Ula2Ao?t=… We simply don't need to make people pay for computation as the amount we can afford to give them is just so much higher, that it is not even worth us dealing with the complexity doing that youtu.be/xNQK3Ula2Ao?t=… emergent reasons: even though there are limits that can be done (in one transaction) that doesn't limit what you can do overall... if you do happen to have a particular use case that requires a lot of computation beyond what is average you can still do that by composing multiple transactions. so it's still possible to do more complex things beyond what the limits allow youtu.be/xNQK3Ula2Ao?t=… We are dealing with things that are really at their very peak optimizability theoretically, in any system that worked anything like a cryptocurrency. The UTXO model is incredibly efficient, you can break contracts systems up in ways that are counter intuitive... youtu.be/xNQK3Ula2Ao?t=… You would be shocked at how many decentralized applications can be broken up into parts that are actually at a byte level more efficient to do in the UTXO model than they would be if you uploaded all the code and everybody looked at the same block of code and referenced it by a hash because the contract is shorter than the length of a hash youtu.be/xNQK3Ula2Ao?t=… One of the other things I wanted to demonstrate with JEDEX there is an entire design space of contracts that are not really possible on a system that does not have access to a UTXO model, if you have to use global state there are some kind of contracts that you have to emulate the UTXO model to get them to work as well as they would on Bitcoin Cash, and no one is going to do that as no one is going to pay for the computation... and in practice everyone is just going to use L2 with multisig admin keys youtu.be/xNQK3Ula2Ao?t=… --------------------- 𝙄𝙣𝙨𝙩𝙖𝙣𝙩 𝙎𝙚𝙩𝙩𝙡𝙚𝙢𝙚𝙣𝙩 𝙫𝙞𝙖 𝙕𝙚𝙧𝙤 𝘾𝙤𝙣𝙛𝙞𝙧𝙢𝙖𝙩𝙞𝙤𝙣 𝙀𝙨𝙘𝙧𝙤𝙬𝙨 - 𝙕𝘾𝙀 They don't require any setup, they can be spent directly from p2pkh outputs with no setup they provide immediate finality as good as 1 confirmation the only trade off, you have to have 2x the amount you are sending (if you are sending $10 you need $20 in your wallet) the escrow can be immediately spent in 0-conf it doesn't get locked up, it doesn't need to be confirmed youtu.be/xNQK3Ula2Ao?t=… There are cases where I think we can prove also it's better than 10 block confirmation and we can prove it's as good as Avalanche would be, there are risk models to consider, but from a lay user perspective there is a very safe path that is as good as 1 confirmation. and you can immediately re spend the money that you just received in a ZCE transaction and you can spend up to to half of it in another ZCE transaction youtu.be/xNQK3Ula2Ao?t=… If someone tries to double spend either of those transactions, a miner has a 𝙜𝙧𝙚𝙖𝙩𝙚𝙧 𝙞𝙣𝙘𝙚𝙣𝙩𝙞𝙫𝙚 to mine the ZCE transaction that pays the merchant, 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙢𝙚𝙧𝙘𝙝𝙖𝙣𝙩 𝙜𝙚𝙩𝙨 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙢𝙤𝙣𝙚𝙮 𝙚𝙫𝙚𝙣 𝙞𝙛 𝙮𝙤𝙪 𝙩𝙧𝙮 𝙩𝙤 𝙙𝙤𝙪𝙗𝙡𝙚 𝙨𝙥𝙚𝙣𝙙 𝙞𝙩 𝙖𝙣𝙙 𝙞𝙩 𝙝𝙖𝙥𝙥𝙚𝙣𝙨 𝙛𝙤𝙧 𝙘𝙝𝙖𝙞𝙣𝙨 𝙤𝙛 𝙯𝙘𝙚 𝙩𝙧𝙖𝙣𝙨𝙖𝙘𝙩𝙞𝙤𝙣𝙨 youtu.be/xNQK3Ula2Ao?t=… I believe definitively that you can get 1 𝙗𝙡𝙤𝙘𝙠 𝙬𝙤𝙧𝙩𝙝 𝙤𝙛 𝙘𝙤𝙣𝙛𝙞𝙧𝙢𝙖𝙩𝙞𝙤𝙣 𝙛𝙞𝙣𝙖𝙡𝙞𝙩𝙮 𝙞𝙣𝙨𝙩𝙖𝙣𝙩𝙡𝙮 actually faster than credit card transactions can possibly happen. youtu.be/xNQK3Ula2Ao?t=… I further claim that it is possible to immediately consider it final without checking the network further if you were already listening to the network when you heard the transaction the period of latency when you would other wise have to wait for that 200ms is no longer required because you know with certainty that every body has incredible incentive worth the value of the payment... youtu.be/xNQK3Ula2Ao?t=… youtu.be/xNQK3Ula2Ao?t=… The moment you pick up that ZCE, you know that with certainty if they do try to double spend, the miners will take money from them and also give you your money! youtu.be/xNQK3Ula2Ao?t=… I want to say it in the most aggressive terms possible if you do not agree with me then I challenge you to disprove it, I don't know how much longer that proposal has to sit out here before people start to believe it youtu.be/xNQK3Ula2Ao?t=…

I just watched a bunch of videos. All the 'problems' BCH solves are not real problems. Some of the 'problems' are are actually the solution to bigger problems. I have no issues with how BTC or ordinals are, i think they work great. The problem is not the tech it is the people. Many people come for the ponzi, the get rich quick however bitcoin, ordinals and OODL don't need to be about a quick flip I believe bitcoin could provide the foundation to true Web3 decentralised Internet. I have built an on-chain social layer that could replace X and discord all decentralised and P2P i guess my real point to make is that we are already building some intresting stuff and the few builders left in this space feel alienated form the even fewer who gain any traction on socials. There is a reason why real builders accounts are suppressed and that's all to do with X who want drama and anything of any substance is pushed behind the soap opera.

@Switch_900 @hellmoneypod @ParyonUSD @CauldronSwap @BCH_Guru @BCH_BULL @SeleneWallet @XO_bitcoincash @bchbliss For gaming, you can try @a5thofgaming. Not going to lie, BCH is quite a small scene relative to Ordinals probably, and obviously to BTC. But you will be astounded by the activity in a scene this size. You might like this to get a flavour: x.com/i/status/20592…

@TheBCHPodcast @hellmoneypod @ParyonUSD @CauldronSwap @BCH_Guru @BCH_BULL @SeleneWallet @XO_bitcoincash @bchbliss Thank you, i will take a look. Is there any gaming happening? Are there users or is it pretty dead?

@Switch_900 @hellmoneypod Yeah some great stuff includes: @ParyonUSD Stablecoin @CauldronSwap DEX @BCH_Guru Prediction markets @BCH_BULL Hedging/speculation @SeleneWallet Wallet Upcoming soon @XO_bitcoincash is looking really cool. And you can find out more watching the @bchbliss streams of the latest.