Ordinals.com Under Siege: DDoS Attack Sparks Ironic ‘Spam’ Debate in Bitcoin Community

The world of Bitcoin Ordinals, known for inscribing data onto the Bitcoin blockchain, found itself ironically targeted by a different kind of digital deluge. Ordinals.com, the central website for this burgeoning ecosystem, was recently hit by a distributed denial of service (DDoS) attack, causing significant connection issues and website downtime. For critics who’ve long decried Ordinals as ‘spam’ on the Bitcoin network, the attack felt like a twisted form of digital justice. But what exactly happened, and what does it mean for the ongoing Ordinals debate?

What Went Down? Ordinals.com Knocked Offline by DDoS Attack

On December 27th, Casey Rodarmor, the creator of Ordinals, took to X (formerly Twitter) to announce the unwelcome event: Ordinals.com was under a DDoS attack. This marked the first such incident since the website’s launch in January, raising questions about the motivation and implications behind it.

For those unfamiliar, a DDoS attack is essentially a digital flood. It’s a malicious attempt to disrupt the normal flow of traffic to a server or network by overwhelming it with a massive surge of internet traffic. Think of it like a digital traffic jam, intentionally created to shut down access.

Throughout the day of the attack, Ordinals.com experienced instability, ultimately succumbing to downtime, leaving users unable to access the site. This outage wasn’t just a minor inconvenience; it highlighted the vulnerabilities of even prominent websites in the crypto space.

The Ironic Twist: Is This ‘Spam’ Justice for Ordinals?

Here’s where the situation gets particularly interesting, and, some might say, ironic. A segment of the Bitcoin community has been vocal in their criticism of Ordinals, labeling inscriptions as ‘spam’ that clogs the Bitcoin network and drives up transaction fees. For these critics, the DDoS attack on Ordinals.com felt like a fitting, albeit controversial, form of retribution. The website dedicated to what they consider ‘spam’ was itself being ‘spammed’ into oblivion.

One of the most prominent voices in this critical camp is Luke Dashjr, founder of Bitcoin mining firm OCEAN. Dashjr didn’t mince words, pointing out what he saw as hypocrisy in calling the attack a DDoS. His comment:

“How dare you call it a DDoS. Pretty sure everyone involved is paying their internet bills.”

Dashjr followed up with a disclaimer, “Disclaimer: I do not endorse DDoS, just pointing out the hypocrisy,” attempting to clarify his stance, but the message was clear. He saw a parallel between the DDoS attack and the Ordinals inscriptions themselves, both perceived as unwanted network congestion.

Other critics echoed this sentiment, with one user, “MeanHash,” cautioning Rodarmor against labeling the attack as spam, and another, “Southern hands,” questioning whether Rodarmor would want to “censor valid TCP/IP packets.” These comments underscored the contentious debate around what constitutes legitimate use of the Bitcoin network and what crosses the line into ‘spam’.

Escalating Rhetoric: Comparing Ordinals to ‘Rape’

The intensity of the anti-Ordinals sentiment was further amplified by a now-deleted X post from Luke Dashjr, where he reportedly compared Ordinals-inflicted spam to the deeply offensive term “rape.” While deleted, this inflammatory language reflects the strong emotions and divisions the Ordinals debate has ignited within the Bitcoin community.

Timing is Everything: Taproot Wizards’ ‘Censorship’ Script

Adding another layer to this complex situation is the timing of the DDoS attack. It occurred just a day after Rijndael, the CTO of Taproot Wizards (a group heavily involved in Ordinals), launched a code script. This script, seemingly launched somewhat tongue-in-cheek, was designed to allow Ordinals-criticizing node operators to censor Ordinals blocks on the Bitcoin network.

This move was widely interpreted as a challenge to Ordinals’ detractors to either actively take steps to block Ordinals or cease their complaints. Whether the DDoS attack is directly related to this script or the broader tensions surrounding Ordinals remains unconfirmed, but the proximity in time is certainly noteworthy.

Ordinals: Spam or Just a ‘Passing Fad’?

Despite the heated rhetoric and the DDoS incident, not everyone believes Ordinals are detrimental to Bitcoin. Andrew Poelstra, Director of Research at Blockstream, a Bitcoin infrastructure firm, argues that while Ordinals do impact the Bitcoin fee market, their overall effect is minimal.

“Ordinals, while disproportionately affecting the fee market, are a tiny part of the overall Bitcoin economy and pose no threat of meaningfully displacing Bitcoin on its own network.”

Poelstra acknowledges that technically, there’s no easy way to eliminate Ordinals from Bitcoin. However, he views these nonfungible token-like inscriptions as a “passing fad,” suggesting a more passive approach:

“All we can do is wait them out.”

The Bigger Picture: Navigating the Bitcoin Ordinals Debate

The DDoS attack on Ordinals.com serves as a stark reminder of the deep divisions within the Bitcoin community regarding Ordinals. While some see them as innovative use cases expanding Bitcoin’s functionality, others view them as network-clogging spam that undermines Bitcoin’s core principles. The incident has amplified the debate, highlighting the complex questions surrounding network usage, censorship, and the very definition of what constitutes ‘legitimate’ activity on the Bitcoin blockchain.

Whether this DDoS attack was a form of protest, a malicious act, or simply an unfortunate event, it has undoubtedly added fuel to the fire in the ongoing Bitcoin Ordinals saga. As the Ordinals ecosystem continues to evolve, the community will need to grapple with these fundamental questions and find a way to navigate these differing perspectives to ensure the long-term health and evolution of Bitcoin.

See Also: Why Some Traders Are Not Yet Bullish On Bitcoin?