Adam Back Joins Battle for Bitcoin’s Soul Against ’JPEG Spam’ Onslaught

Blockstream CEO Adam Back enters the fray as Bitcoin faces an existential threat from Ordinals inscriptions clogging the network.

The Core Argument

Back argues these digital collectibles—dismissed as 'JPEG spam' by critics—threaten Bitcoin's primary function as peer-to-peer electronic cash. Transaction fees spike whenever inscription activity surges, pricing out everyday users while enriching miners.

Technical Tensions

The debate exposes fundamental divides: maximalists prioritizing monetary utility versus developers embracing Bitcoin as a broader data layer. Some propose client-side validation to bypass congestion—others demand strict limits on non-financial data.

Market Realities

Meanwhile, Wall Street funds pile into Bitcoin ETFs while dismissing the 'digital beanie babies' distorting its economics. Because nothing says sound money like paying $50 fees to immortalize a frog meme.

The outcome could determine whether Bitcoin remains lean monetary hardware or evolves into something entirely different—and whether that evolution deserves the Bitcoin name.

Bitcoin's core mission

The proponents of developments enabled by the Taproot upgrade, such as Ordinals, meanwhile, argue that as long as users are willing to pay for block space, they are a valid use of the network.

Being a permissionless system, there should be no dictating of what Bitcoin can and cannot be used for, as this goes against the ethos of decentralization upon which it was built.

Furthermore, the "JPEG spam" also strengthens the economic incentive for miners to maintain the Bitcoin network, which could become increasingly vital as the block rewards they receive are cut by 50% every four years.

While miners benefit from higher fees, Back argues the effect is minimal once the hashrate has increased and costs are factored in. He estimated that JPEG inscriptions may contribute just 0.1% to mining profits, far outweighed by potential reputational harm, higher transaction costs for ordinary users, and reduced accessibility to Bitcoin’s CORE function as a peer-to-peer money system.

Divided community

The issue is therefore a divisive one in the Bitcoin community.

Supporters view inscriptions as legitimate economic activity and the use of the blockchain. Critics, including Back, say they waste block space and displace activity that strengthens Bitcoin’s value proposition.

Back floated possible remedies, including outreach to miners and pools to discourage processing such transactions, and wallet-level changes that could steer fees toward those rejecting them. While warning of centralization risks, he suggested even small economic nudges could make mining JPEG inscriptions unprofitable.