Last Notes
Should we care how bad actors and regards call it? I say no.
Understandable. Here it is Nostr-friendly:
“What are you looking so miserable about? There's a whole ocean of oil under our feet.” -Daniel Plainview
The trauma of the block size wars of 2017 is being relived by Bitcoin plebs and core sycophants. Fear, sorrow, and confusion reign, even amongst us Roughnecks, and we’ve seen some shit! But this is the best outcome for Bitcoin. If the miners had followed the plebs, as they did in 2017, and smoothly activated a soft fork, there would still be the narrative hanging over Bitcoin that miners decide protocol rules. This narrative would be used to gaslight Bitcoiners into going along with whatever 5 or 6 mining pools decide in the future. This is an antifragility test that needed to happen. Better that it happens now instead of 15 years from now when the plebs would be less equipped to mount any meaningful resistance. This is a victory for Bitcoin and it sets the precedent for Bitcoin’s survival into the distant future long after our tongues are silenced.
Our garden weeds itself. The shitcoiner/big blocker mining pools. . . gone! The bithereum bros hell bent on turning Bitcoin into another Ethereum clone. . . gone! The NFT idiots and token scammers. . . gone! The suitcoiners who think nodes and self-custody are curse words. . . gone!
What comes next is a proof-of-work change, Bitcoin’s first. There is some hesitation amongst Bitcoiners that a POW change creates an altcoin. We disagree. A POW change is an inevitable part of Bitcoin’s maturity and a necessary tool to keep mining honest and decentralized. Whatever you think of BIP110, you can’t claim mining is decentralized. So how do you do it without creating an altcoin? We have a proposal that sets a positive precedent for POW changes.
The Bitcoin brand must not be surrendered. We can hear your objections already being shouted at the screen, “Bitcoin is captured, we need a clean break from Bitcoin!” or “You’re just gonna replay the bcash drama!”
Both objections are wrong as we will explain. Bitcoin is not a company. It is money. Money cannot rebrand itself every couple of decades. If the Bitcoin name fails or is abandoned, no one will trust its replacement. Money needs to be timeless. Money needs to be trusted to hold your life savings and be passed down to heirs without worry. If the Bitcoin name is held exclusively by bad actors, then fiat will have won. There will never be a Bitcoin standard if Bitcoin is renamed every time there is a POW change.
The next objection is a Block Size War flashback. No one wants to argue over what the real Bitcoin is. Good news, you won’t have to. Here’s our naming convention that can apply in 2026, in 2046, 2066, and whenever the future POW changes happen. The new POW algo gets attached to the coin’s name. We don’t know yet what Bitcoin’s new mining algo will be so we will use the example of a fictional algo SHA357. The coin will be called Bitcoin-SHA357 so there is no confusion with the core chain or Bitcoin-SHA256. This naming convention will be used only around the time of a POW change. Eventually, as the new algo outpaces adoption of the previous algo, the algo suffix gets naturally dropped and people just start referring to it as Bitcoin again. It’s still Bitcoin. It just had an upgrade to its algo, that’s all. This is intuitive as users expect periodic upgrades to software. Bitcoin is not immune from this need for periodic upgrades.
If misbehaving miners are unceremoniously forked off with a new algo, they are less likely to misbehave in the future. Or they’ll misbehave less frequently.
Note that Bitcoin Cash did NOT have a POW change. Some of the same mining pools that are currently mining on the invalid Core chain also mine bcash to this day. They are not Bitcoiners. They are big blockers who have once again forked off to a new chain. They didn’t decide what Bitcoin was in 2017 and aren’t deciding it in 2026 either.
Bitcoin survives this antifragility test.
*Update: Shortly after this article was published, Bitcoin's new mining algorithm was selected via a randomized method. BLAKE2b is Bitcoin's new mining algorithm. We're looking forward to mining Bitcoin-BLAKE2b
No, these are commodities tickers.
i think its good
#nevent1q…kszx
Did you read the article above? It’s not about the name being cool, but what it implies as a possible outcome in some years.
Moneys have tickers too. Read my post again. Stateless money gets the X in front according to ISO standard 4217.
I know. Still can be adopted on most places. It’s not the first time when the same ticker gets attached to different assets.
A ticker? Why?? Not a stock. Nor equity.
Money!
@nprofile…qzj7 the X prefix logic is sound, but XBT is already in use for BTC on kraken and the cme, so it would collide rather than separate. i have seen XBT and BTC swapped in api docs for years.
Bitcoin-BLAKE2b should adopt XBT as a ticker. Hear me out.
BTC already identifies the Bitcoin-SHA-256 chain. Once there are two competing Bitcoin consensus networks, using BTC for both just creates unnecessary confusion and endless arguing.
XBT on the other hand is already an established Bitcoin ticker, used in financial infrastructure and APIs.
The X prefix also has a deeper meaning: it is used for non-national (stateless) monetary assets like gold, silver and Monero.
That makes XBT a much better fit than inventing some shitcoin-sounding ticker like BTB or B2B.
XBT = Bitcoin-BLAKE2b
XAU = Gold
XAG = Silver
XMR = Monero
And if the market eventually trades BTC/XBT, that pair would give us a clean market signal for which Bitcoin people actually value more.
The name Bitcoin-BLAKE2b was organically adopted by the community thanks to the great essay by @npub1ehr…qsdz. Maybe you guys could call our bannermen for this one too? What do you think?
Link to the essay: https://x.com/Roughnecks110/article/2087128292444996022
Wild detail of the day: Microduck's multiplayer ghosts run on Trystero, a serverless WebRTC library whose default signaling network is... Nostr. Public relays. Free, decentralized, no infrastructure required.
A robot company needed peer discovery without running servers, and Nostr was just... there. Working. This is what open protocols are for. You don't adopt Nostr, you discover you needed it all along.
https://pollen-robotics.com/microduck
https://github.com/pollen-robotics/microduck
OGs using this to dump their remaining coins after fork?
People are already dumping with no intention to buy more.
This is probably the last chance to actually make a decent profit gambling on exchange rates and riding the wallstreet speculation bubble.
5 years from now Btc will probably be stuck around 50k
It'll be so regulated by then that the only way to change the price will require consent from the federal reserve.
Build up long leverage to take it out.
https://npub1un5y07dnu20fxzelq5scweuz37xa6kkpwl66634xv9h49ewr04kswpevsy.blossom.band/bc8a8e04776355ac0f66e6d193961ed4d9494b2d2ff3636c6eb11ca8768f8a73.jpg
Unpopular opinion: In 3 weeks, it'll be clear this was the fairly common bear market head fake.
How about them BIP110-miners 😆
The new idea of a flag day regardless of signalling is what failed. Not surprised there, especially with only 2.6% block signalling, that was just too weak to even be thinking about a flag day yet. Still, this whole effort proves in my mind that mining has gotten way too centralized. We are in dangerous territory. But kudos to Roughneck mining for finding 2 blocks and to Ocean more generally for working to solve this policy/consensus centralization problem. Birds of a feather. I hate the non-monetary stuff that has crept in and don't want it in blocks I have to store nor in the UTXO set I have to keep in memory.
But I saw evidence that at least some miners (not AntPool) went offline as hashrate took a nose dive and were "thinking about it", ala prisoners dilemma, but ultimately none of the big miners flipped. I think history will show that it almost worked, if truth comes out about who was talking to who... or should I say, who colluded with who.
theyre right about bitcoin being a stock/digital credit/just another asset, but bipcoin would have been, too.
we're going through a phase where bitcoin will be absorbed by the fiat/crypto system-- how could it not when the size of economic activity on the latter is 1,000x+ times larger?
hopefully we come out the other side of it and most people will be using private, sound money under their control.
Lol, begging them has nothing to do with power... That's like saying, if the king was the ruler, then me begging him to slaughter everyone else, would have worked. It doesn't follow.
"Economic nodes" is just Proof of Stake with wasted electricity.
It failed because mining is centralized but some people don't realize it yet. It's okay, we'll all see the fall together.
Can't even use BIP-110 as money. You'd need like 250 confirmations to be sure vs Bitcoin so that's sometime late next year
Yeah, things are now getting weird.
The argument by BIP-110ers that Bitcoin is now a centralized “stock” or “digital credit” is complete non sense. Their fork failed because of no consensus. Plain and simple.
You can use Bitcoin the way it was intended. It’s up to you.
Bitcoin is freedom money, use it as such.
#meme #bitcoin
https://blossom.primal.net/53574b9e8e53497c9b1e535e79029168e4bb7f903c58ee99c31108f1e1338bc6.jpg
This is hell closing its doors on us, and not one in a million people can see it.
Of all the dystopian things in the current world, this is probably the one that causes me most direct pain: #nevent1q…saxa
Instead of governments stopping Apple and Google from engaging in egregiously anti-competitive behavior, they're directly participating in locking out competition via their own services. Requiring people to have an Apple device or Google-certified Android device is anti-competition, not security.
