Is PING the "inscription moment" of the x402 protocol?

Some say that Meme coin PING on the x402 protocol is a direct replica of Bitcoin inscriptions in 2023.

Is it really similar? In what ways? Could it follow the same evolutionary path as the inscription market?

Here’s the conclusion first: It will repeat itself, and it has already begun.

Why is it similar? Essentially, both are “on-chain data + off-chain judges”

How do inscriptions work?

You send a transaction on the BTC mainnet, occupying a specific UTXO, but the Bitcoin network itself doesn’t determine whether this transaction “counts”—the real decision-maker is Ordinals, the indexer. It acts like a third-party judge, scanning all on-chain records, and based on the “first-come, first-served” rule, it determines which inscriptions are valid.

How does PING work? Almost the same formula:

You send USDC to a designated address ( on the Base chain, which is dynamically generated by ) in x402scan. It looks like a normal transfer; neither the Base chain nor the x402 protocol itself knows you’re “minting” something—the real entity giving meaning to this transfer as “minting” is the x402scan indexer.

It scans all USDC flows on the Base chain to a specific address, and according to the rule of 1 USDC = 5000 PING, it recognizes which transactions “count,” then records them in its database, and finally distributes tokens to you via smart contract.

On-chain valid, off-chain interpretation—this logic is identical to inscriptions and PING.

Where is the similarity? Both are “unpopular but unstoppable” phenomena

When inscriptions first appeared, the Bitcoin Core team despised them: “What’s the point? Besides cluttering the mainnet with junk transactions, what use do they have?”

Now PING faces the same awkwardness.

Inscriptions at least embedded assets on the BTC mainnet, and if not traded, they could still release some BTC. But PING? All the USDC minted by users went into the treasury wallet designated by x402scan—the team is crowdfunding and issuing tokens while only “free-riding” on the x402 protocol’s reputation.

But just as BTC’s mainnet can’t stop inscriptions, as an open standard, x402 can’t control PING in the short term.

Don’t rush to criticize. This kind of “forcing use cases” is actually a call to action for the x402 narrative. It pushes the protocol to undergo stress testing, draws market attention to this track, and in a way, acts as a catalyst—a narrative singularity that will drive improvements and ecosystem growth.

Will the evolution follow the inscription path? Inevitably yes.

The core support for PING is the x402scan indexer, but it has obvious issues:

• Asset custody is in centralized hands, contradicting x402’s original design for AI Agent payment channels
• Not necessarily compatible with other x402 protocols
• Lacks standardized minting, transferring, and burning procedures

This is similar to how early inscriptions used the rough BRC20 standard, which was later refined into ARC20, SRC20, Runes, and other “improved versions.”

Following this logic, a wave of new protocols claiming to be “more orthodox” will inevitably emerge:

Some will change custody methods, such as multi-signature or smart contract locking (; others will alter the minting process ), no longer relying on USDC transfers (; some will seek native protocol support…

To exaggerate, even if x402scan disappears or the treasury runs off with funds, this wave has already been set in motion—once Pandora’s box is opened, it can never be closed again.

Final thoughts

The explosion of the x402 narrative is inevitable; PING has just sounded the charge.

How the market will evolve next? Who knows, but there’s no need to worry—this excitement is worth participating in.

This is purely a sharing of insights and does not constitute any investment advice.