BITCOIN

Is the name "BRC-20" appropriate? Why not just call it "BRC-168" or "BRC-888"?

share
Is the name "BRC-20" appropriate? Why not just call it "BRC-168" or "BRC-888"?

Chainfeeds co-founder Pan Zhixiong recently stated on Twitter: "BRC-20 is a name that both the Ethereum and Bitcoin communities dislike. I suggest renaming it to BRC-19, just slightly ahead of Ethereum." Why did he say this? Also, what are the differences between BRC-20 and ERC-20?

What is the relationship between BRC-20 and ERC-20?

Before discussing BRC-20, let's first talk about ERC-20.

ERC stands for Ethereum Request for Comment, a proposal request for Ethereum, mainly proposed by Ethereum developers to establish standards and conventions at the application layer. The numbers following ERC represent the sequential proposal number and do not carry any other significance.

Among these, ERC-20 is the most well-known, used to standardize homogeneous token contracts and enable developers to create their own tokens on the Ethereum platform.

On the other hand, BRC-20 is an experimental "homogeneous token standard" on Bitcoin, named in honor of ERC-20.

Prior to BRC-20, there were no such things as BRC-19, BRC-18, or even BRC-0. This is why Pan Zhixiong made sarcastic remarks on Twitter, and dForce founder Yang Mindao even stated:

"Why not just go straight to BRC-888, aiming for good fortune and prosperity."

However, it is undeniable that the widespread recognition of the ERC-20 standard has facilitated the smoother promotion of meme coins related to BRC-20, reducing the time needed for re-education.

What are the differences between BRC-20 and ERC-20?

Prior to discussing whether the name BRC-20 is appropriate, Yang Mindao was actually mocking the differences between BRC-20 and ERC-20, using the following analogy to highlight the distinctions:

  • ERC-20: Programmable Dollar
  • BRC-20: Hand-Painted Dollar

Unlike ERC-20 tokens issued through smart contracts, BRC-20 merely utilizes the concept of Inscriptions in the Ordinals protocol to manually modify the content in Bitcoin storage documents, assigning individual meanings to each satoshi, the smallest unit of Bitcoin.

This is why Yang Mindao used this method to describe the two. Additionally, he added that Bitcoin's on-chain capabilities are limited, with 99% of derivative assets relying on centralized platforms, making them vulnerable. He believes that a flexible and scalable network must minimize external dependencies to safeguard not only security issues but also the tamper-resistant nature of the system.