Tauri
Tauri | Bitcoin-BLAKE2b

https://www.goldgraphy.org

Not a Founder or a CEO of anything.

Public Key

npub1x9q89st049pnuym57ch9kqkgzcu5dmff32wduwc4g9gnc2w3nlls8hcsg7

NIP-05 Address

Profile Code

nprofile1qqsrzsrjc9h6jse7zd60vtjmqtypvw2xa55c48x78v25z5fu98gellcpz3mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfduqs6amnwvaz7tmwdaejumr0dsxklmcd

Publishing to

relay.damus.io

nos.lol

Author Public Key

npub1x9q89st049pnuym57ch9kqkgzcu5dmff32wduwc4g9gnc2w3nlls8hcsg7

Show more details

Last Notes

2026-08-25 13:46:05 UTC

Rebel kids don’t follow trends
Not when I was coming up, we questioned everything
Seems that’s coming to an end
Everything is so bottom up, it’s so easy to offend
I’m not playing by those rules (your rules)
I know who stacks the deck, I’m not a damn fool
I play by my own rules (my rules)
Let live and show respect, I guess I’m old school
You wear rebellion like it’s fashion
And life is just a stage
I live my words, I’m no attraction
I’m full of passion and rage
Let me hear your voices say
“I’ve been led astray, I’ve been led astray”
https://music.apple.com/bg/album/rebel-kids/1893702981

2026-08-25 09:49:21 UTC

- reply

My take is: I’d take whatever she’s taking 😂

2026-08-25 09:33:49 UTC

- reply

I’d answer it this way: a good money needs to satisfy two distinct forms of demand: it must be able to hold value well, thereby satisfying reserve demand, and it must be practical to spend casually on goods and services, thereby satisfying exchange demand. What value it holds in fiat terms is largely irrelevant to that distinction.
Take Monero, for example. In recent years, it has held its value significantly better than Bitcoin and has appreciated more, even during a bear market. Despite its relatively small market cap, it is also far more commonly used as a medium of exchange, whereas Bitcoin has increasingly been used primarily as a vehicle for speculation.
The fact that Monero has been delisted from most major exchanges, yet continues to thrive through its circular economy, demonstrates that NGU is not a winner-takes-all game. Its privacy, reduced dependence on captured perimeter rails, and more sovereign way of use - with way fewer paper claims and more genuine peer-to-peer exchange - arguably make Monero more likely to separate money from the state than whatever Bitcoin-SHA256 has become.
I still believe Bitcoin has superior qualities from a sound-money perspective: a fixed supply whose scarcity can be credibly verified, a much smaller hardware footprint that is better for node decentralisation, stronger finality guarantees, and, because of its transparency, potentially better prospects for acceptance by large economies.
Yet Bitcoin’s base-layer governance and mining have become so centralised, the chain is filled with spam, while its economy has become so heavily papered, that these technical advantages risk becoming practically meaningless.
I still hope we can change that with Bitcoin-BLAKE2b.

2026-08-24 14:40:24 UTC

Love the honesty here.
#nevent1q…r4s0

2026-08-24 08:20:45 UTC

- reply

Knots node + forked Datum = bootstrapping a monetary protocol from zero

2026-08-24 07:16:31 UTC

- reply

I’m not convinced about Bitcoin too. And I also expect some sort of a crash in early October.

2026-08-24 04:59:24 UTC

Someone already forked Sparrow to work with Bitcoin-BLAKE2b. 👀
https://github.com/AcesHigh70/sparrow/

2026-08-24 04:55:21 UTC

This is why we Bitcoin-BLAKE2b
https://github.com/rdouma/hashrate-autopilot/discussions/377

2026-08-23 07:19:40 UTC

https://mempool.guide
110 chain tip still getting extended. 7 blocks now.

2026-08-21 11:56:03 UTC

The only real market signal in the whole crypto space is now Monero. 🙄
This pump is fake af. Make the most of it and don’t forget to thank your fiat overlords and their derivative instruments. See you back below $60k in early October.
https://blossom.primal.net/8be2a8dffb3c0698b411c5eab205190f2dcda59f257bc72c9deabb4bcc103674.jpg

2026-08-21 10:55:21 UTC

- reply

The $15M “security consortium” money was a backroom bail-out for miners in case some rogue pool decided to break ranks and invalidate a bunch of the cartel blocks. I call it an insurance policy for the oligarchs. Change my mind.

2026-08-21 10:45:10 UTC

- reply

They won’t go with a blatantly obvious attack vector like simply cancelling the halving. The attack, whatever shape or form it takes, will be subversive and designed to split the community. The groundwork is already being laid.
OP_RETURN opens the door to Simplicity. Simplicity opens the door to smart contracts and “programmable money.” Programmable money creates a natural path for stablecoins to become a major use case on Bitcoin. Each step may look reasonable in isolation, but collectively they dilute Bitcoin’s monetary premium and put downward pressure on its fiat price.
That only needs to persist through one prolonged bear market to create serious pain for miners. Once miners are under pressure, they start negotiating for changes to the security budget. Security-budget FUD becomes normalised, and that’s where demurrage enters the Overton window.
First it’s a “small enough” demurrage or tail emission. Then it’s framed as a pragmatic measure to protect Bitcoin’s security. Eventually, the argument becomes: “The free market has spoken.” A MASF is drafted, the community tears itself apart over it, and after enough infighting, the so-called “economic majority” is declared to have spoken in favour of doing what is supposedly best for Bitcoin.
That’s how these attacks work - through a sequence of seemingly reasonable concessions that gradually move the Overton window. It’s a slippery slope, and the uncomfortable question is whether you actually have a credible defence against that progression. TL;DR: you didn’t.

2026-08-21 09:29:17 UTC

- reply

Nodes didn’t reject 110. It was a few well connected guys with the money printer behind them.

2026-08-21 09:27:34 UTC

- reply

> Bitcoin nodes have great power when it comes to resisting protocol changes
Delusional. You will find that when the next change gets pushed down your throat from miners/devs/suitbros.

2026-08-21 07:19:21 UTC

- reply

Kinda brings things into perspective.

2026-08-21 06:51:38 UTC

I don’t know if you guys realise this, but the idea that an “economic” node should have greater influence over a protocol change is fundamentally the same concept behind Proof of Stake.

2026-08-20 20:19:48 UTC

- reply

@npub19zz…z0pm have you read The Gods Themselves by Isaac Asimov?

2026-08-20 16:54:02 UTC

- reply

Haven’t touched anything.

2026-08-20 15:27:12 UTC

- reply

Good to hear, now how do I recover my access?

2026-08-20 13:44:17 UTC

- reply

No need to, friend. Take care 🫂

2026-08-20 13:08:04 UTC

- reply

Oh wow 👀
#nevent1q…zhrw

2026-08-20 09:58:21 UTC

- reply

It’s a challenge

2026-08-20 09:19:42 UTC

- reply

Meanwhile:
Luke Dashjr - Christian
Mechanic - Christian
Matt Kratter - Christian
This isn’t so hard guys…
#nevent1q…3ge9

2026-08-20 07:09:54 UTC

@nprofile…4yzq did you just rug me?
https://blossom.primal.net/d7be41c0dd048d8babfa84905ddbc9501b6d462df791bab2402443b3a390d2f4.png
https://blossom.primal.net/f8c495f4782661734d4477b4c9f3c77a556b23bf91ddb70aba190322ba70712e.jpg

2026-08-20 07:03:41 UTC

- reply

These alts equally appealing to me as Poolcoin right now.

2026-08-20 06:37:58 UTC

- reply

That’s literally how bitcoin started 17 years ago.

2026-08-20 06:32:21 UTC

- reply

I also like @npub1uqv…gcwa 🤙

2026-08-20 06:31:24 UTC

- reply

Haha good one ☝🏻

2026-08-19 15:57:06 UTC

- reply

Awesome. 🙌

2026-08-19 11:50:16 UTC

- reply

Where was @npub1hk0…20pf when the plebs were fighting the jpeg scammers? Oh right, he wasn’t there.

2026-08-19 09:27:55 UTC

- reply

You will own the both sides of the split, so you can either sell one side for fiat or for the other side, or you can keep both. The UTXO set will be shared.
Issues related to privacy can also be addressed, especially if no major exchange lists the new fork (currently I assume it won’t). This takes care of the third party and mandatory KYC problem because it pushes us towards p2p exchanges.

2026-08-19 08:34:38 UTC

- reply

Depends on your metrics. If your metric is fiat price, yeah, ours could be 1% of what SHA256 currently has.
But technically, our side will work toward improving Bitcoin’s monetary usefulness: less spam, greater decentralisation, and better guardrails against mining centralisation.
On the social side, our community will be pulling in a single direction: Bitcoin as money. That culture will be reflected in the code we build.
Whether the market eventually prices those differences accordingly remains to be seen. Time will tell.

2026-08-19 08:23:33 UTC

- reply

We change the PoW algo and fork. Miners’ hardware becomes useless on our side. We essentially bootstrap Bitcoin almost from zero, with just the nodes, making many of the nodes miners themselves.

2026-08-19 07:38:24 UTC

- reply

Idk, nSTR sounds kinda like something Saylor would think of but I get what you mean. If you want to build it for normies, simpler name will work best. If you want to build it for cypherpunk sovereign individuals who don’t care about large adoption, it might be something more vanilla. If you opt out for a name that’s sounds like a stock ticker, idk. But it’s your project, so ultimately the decision is yours.

2026-08-19 07:30:38 UTC

- reply

We had the solution for years. It’s just not a pretty one. We fire the miners, hire new ones with much lower difficulty, equip them with Datum from the start, keep the best of pooled mining without the centralising tradeoffs of the flawed Stratum V1.

2026-08-19 07:11:25 UTC

- reply

Hm, tbh sounds like a working dev title, not as an actual name. I can try and think about a few candidates if you want.

2026-08-19 06:50:35 UTC

- reply

The reason BIP110 failed is that we naively believed consensus was supposed to be gathered out in the open, at the network level: nodes signal support or rejection, and miners follow based on the broader agreement.
The broader agreement at the NETWORK LEVEL was 20% in favour, 80% abstaining, and 0% against. Then a bunch of suits lobbied behind closed doors and convinced a few large, regulated entities to ignore something that should have been accepted in the absence of any NETWORK-level objection.
If that’s how consensus is going to be formed from now on, Bitcoin is a failed project.
This has nothing to do with some tactical errors on our side, or with whatever arbitrary percentage of support someone decides is required before they can dismiss it as a Sybil attack. The rest of your post reads like you’re mildly offended by something I’ve said, and I’m not going to apologise for my opinion. You can keep calling us brainwashed by Luke or Monero-level retarded. We don’t care.
To us, it’s obvious that Bitcoin-SHA256 is heading straight towards a cliff, and the brakes aren’t working anymore. So we’re doing the only sensible thing left: jumping out of the vehicle before it goes over the edge.
Yeah, we’ll suffer serious injuries in the process. We didn’t want to do this. It sets us back years and puts us way behind. But we see no other choice.
I respect that you’re willing to do something about spam. But simply talking about it isn’t changing anything. We acted, we got beaten, but we’re not abandoning the fight.
What exactly are you going to fight for in this Poolcoin? And with whom at your side?
The direction of development is clear now. The attackers are emboldened, and you have no technical means to beat them at their rigged fiat game. They can commit essentially unlimited amounts of money to bail out a few pools and shield them from any NETWORK-level attempt to bring them into line.
If you have the numbers, they’ll call it a Sybil attack. If you have the support of businesses, they’ll call it a social attack.
I take that lesson with humility. You still haven’t accepted how bad things actually are.
I hope you do before it’s too late.

2026-08-18 14:52:51 UTC

- reply

lol, ok

2026-08-18 14:38:56 UTC

Now that we, the pesky monetary maxis, are finally leaving, you could invite Vitalik to come back and build on Bitcoin-SHA256, no? That rich ecosystem of NFTs, smart contracts, DeFi swaps, stablecoins and shiny tokens might even increase adoption to the point Bitcoin becomes a threat to the state, right? Right?

2026-08-18 13:32:48 UTC

- reply

Cope about what? That you were stripped of the only reasonable defence against bad protocol changes (ie the UASF)? We coped for a week and now we’re acting on the final (nuclear) option to preserve the Bitcoin idea from being completely corrupted and taken over. Join us or stay on the poolchain, makes no difference to us. We only need committed people, not simply numbers. It’s not fiat price that drives us.

2026-08-18 09:05:09 UTC

By the way, I really hope no major exchanges list Bitcoin-BLAKE2b. This will largely take care of the third party problem plaguing Bitcoin-SHA256. I bet most #Monero bros would agree with this sentiment. They are the real life example that exchanges killing support is very bullish in the long run.
#nevent1q…ukgd

2026-08-18 07:15:01 UTC

- reply

The next MASF. Or the one after that. Or the next that includes tail emissions. You guys have a big problem in Bitcoin-SHA256 and still don’t realise it. It’s much worse than spam. I believe you don’t fully grasp the gravity of what happened on 8/8/26.

2026-08-18 07:12:04 UTC

- reply

October’s gonna be wild 🤪

2026-08-18 06:49:13 UTC

Cannot emphasise @npub1wnl…n3wr's point enough, consensus is supposed to be made ON THE NETWORK. Nodes and miners coordinating through running software in the open, visible to all other sovereign network participants.
110 demonstrated consensus can be made in the dark by a few, and that a lot of “bitcoiners” don’t know what “being sovereign” means. - @npub18zs…lyv6 👏

2026-08-17 11:47:09 UTC

- reply

You’re gonna need it more than us soon enough. But thanks anyway.

2026-08-17 11:29:05 UTC

- reply

I think it should be reverse engineered to do that, but people have already stepped up and are ready to do it.

2026-08-17 11:27:45 UTC

- reply

At least BIP110 failing made this painfully obvious. The only defence Bitcoin has against malicious miners is a UASF or a POW change. The former got ignored by all pools, so in a centralised mining future the outcome won’t be any different. The only thing left is the nuclear option: a hard fork for a POW change, and we’re doing that. See the year below:
https://image.nostr.build/c5f7fa29d9c72b29c681bb854185dd911f8b8213d2010ee73cc94550022dc664.jpg

2026-08-17 11:18:59 UTC

Just go and watch this. Stop fooling yourself Bitcoin-SHA256 is a salvageable project. We’re doing the Bitcoin-BLAKE2b thingy and we just don’t care. You can stay and play politics, hoping for a win next time, or you can join us and help bootstrap a new network. Your call.
https://youtu.be/PB6ue-h-3V8

2026-08-17 08:34:29 UTC

Some OGs get it 🤙
#nevent1q…742v

2026-08-16 15:30:51 UTC

- reply

XBT is the only one that makes sense imo.

2026-08-16 15:27:40 UTC

The good and the bad about Bitcoin-BLAKE2b
The bad:
1. You lose a large part of the network effect.
2. The price probably takes a massive hit initially — potentially 80–99%.
3. You lose access to the existing ecosystem of software and hardware wallets until they add support (if at all).
4. You won’t be able to run Lightning nodes initially, until someone forks/adapts an existing implementation or builds a new one.
5. Trading it initially might be pretty cumbersome. It all depends on exchanges adopting it.
6. You get to be called a shitcoiner by literal shitcoiners and retarded Bitcoiners.
The good:
1. All users who want to participate initially have to run their own nodes — a huge boom for decentralisation.
2. The low price gives you the chance to buy a bunch of coins for non-life-changing amounts or pick up a few mining rigs.
3. The low price gives you the opportunity/confidence to learn, experiment and build your own tools.
4. Someone might build an actually good wallet (basically all current ones except Sparrow are trash).
5. Someone might actually build a non-retarded Lightning node client.
6. We get to build an ecosystem around widely available, general-purpose hardware rather than relying exclusively on the existing third-party infrastructure.
7. We get a changed PoW algorithm and a redesigned block header intended to make mining more efficient, harder to centralize at the hardware level, and easier to evolve in the future.
8. We get rid of the scammers, spammers and suits for at least a few years while we get to build our defences and robust mitigations.
9. If no exchanges list the fork, we get to work on our P2P exchange network, with the added benefit of better privacy and no mandatory KYC.
10. We get to use Bitcoin as intended — as internet money — while we work with laser focus on improving its quality as rivalrous digital commodity and an open monetary system.
https://image.nostr.build/2859165e5603a495c3a7123ed45bc58ae9002255fe1f24f690eb5829d94e2bfe.jpg

2026-08-16 07:11:20 UTC

https://image.nostr.build/f806b4d72301710cf42f365c75cb9adc5b96cad45c03f3ec69ea88aa0495f00a.jpg

2026-08-15 17:47:47 UTC

Save this tweet. We might have to revisit it in 5 years or so.
Giacomo Spooko has a diplomatic passport btw. Probably nothing.
https://image.nostr.build/f68874e12701006b347598743d0f2fb3b7ff91e16b4ba8fbfd465ecc4ba1f0f3.jpg

2026-08-15 11:29:42 UTC

- reply

Cycle deniers keep saying that over and over again and yet the cycle keeps playing out exactly the same - only the duration and volatility changes. But what do I know, maybe I’m wrong. I keep being corrected by my own biases, but for the time being with the information available, I’m quite convinced cycle is here to stay (the human cycle).

2026-08-15 08:28:55 UTC

- reply

Bitcoin hasn’t repeated Gold’s history, not even a little. Gold was the dominant monetary standard of the world for millennia. Bitcoin hasn’t even managed that on a local level. It certainly had the potential to do it eventually, I’m not so confident it can still. Not Bitcoin-SHA256d at least. Bitcoin can’t compete with Gold over its physics. It can only compete on the merits of removing the need for trusted third parties. And how is this going so far? Not great. You introduce third parties in the equation, Bitcoin becomes rather useless. It’s right there, second sentence of the white paper.
https://image.nostr.build/61d8f7ee840d809fd216ca58fa76aff2a002f8423e0c40bb66c76e238e1cdf42.jpg

2026-08-15 08:17:50 UTC

- reply

You’re free to hold wrong opinions. Humans in aggregate act remarkably similarly across time when faced with certain choices. It’s a downstream effect of our design (hundreds of thousands to millions of years of evolution). There are exceptions to every rule of course. That’s why large groups of people are easier to model, but not the individuals. Isaac Asimov demonstrates this concept brilliantly in his Foundation books. The idea of the Psychohistory is precisely that: based on the past you can model the behaviour of people thousands of years into the future as an aggregate, but the weakness of the model are certain contrarian individuals that the model cannot account for. These individuals drive most of the changes throughout human history. Jesus comes to mind as an obvious example, but you can dismiss him for being the son of God. There are other humans tho, who made considerable changes to society, although on a smaller scale. What you fail to realise is that you cannot break the cycle without breaking humanity, but you can make it shorter or longer and the highs and lows deeper or higher. But you definitely cannot quantify it with physics, at least not any physics humans actually know of yet.

2026-08-15 08:01:03 UTC

- reply

BIP110 didn’t blunder anything. It exposed the truth how far gone Bitcoin is. To me that is a win.
I’d caution against listening to anything Scamson Mao says this day. It’s obvious he either has an agenda or he’s among the compromised actors.
There was nothing rushed about this soft fork. Spam is a big problem and if that’s not urgent enough (took 3.5 years) for the community to fix, nothing “more” urgent will be as well.

2026-08-15 07:01:26 UTC

Couldn’t say it better.
https://image.nostr.build/744d2ed25fd0b75f71c309fc1417e4e92d7a4b3a1f0be6257a91e9069d2927f7.jpg

2026-08-15 06:22:01 UTC

- reply

There’s no point doing that, nodes are powerless when 99% of the hash and devs are malicious. We got the confirmation on 8/8/26. We fire those guys and start anew, even if the price gets a -99% immediate hit.

2026-08-14 12:15:32 UTC

I’ve been fighting the spam war longer than most. I’m genuinely tired and disappointed by the outcome. The healthy thing to do is to just drop it, enjoy life and hope for a miracle to happen and fix bitcoin somehow.
Nah, I don’t think I will. 😂
LFG

2026-08-14 11:51:52 UTC

- reply

I think I explained my strategy simply enough.

2026-08-14 11:34:29 UTC

- reply

Fiat actually looks semi-appealing to me compared BitCohen. But no, this is the plan for me next:
#nevent1q…9zay

2026-08-14 10:43:51 UTC

- reply

Nope, still a tall order. Bitcoin is a coordination mechanism, not physics set in stone. It helps out to filter the signal from the noise and allow for humans to better organise their economic decisions, but it doesn’t set any hard boundaries for how they might act if all the underlying assumptions (like “is the protocol decentralised enough” vs “it’s completely centralised” and “nobody calls the shots” vs “who’s calling the shots”) get undermined. That’s how the Gold Standard was perverted until it was eventually put to the death. You’re now at the FDR stage of development (1933). Big Bitcoin just pull a 6102. There will be some concessions eventually to ease the pain (a pump here and there, Red team iMpRovInG sECuRity etc.) but the writing is on the wall here. The sooner you act accordingly, the better you will be positioned for the next big attack.

2026-08-14 10:13:36 UTC

- reply

Because people operate in cycles. There’s a time when you need money for spending (exchange demand) and a time when you need money for saving (reserve demand). You see this in the Bitcoin cycle every 4 years: 3 years of exchange demand, after liquidity accumulates, and one year of reserve demand, when liquidity dries up. That’s why you stack sats mostly during bear markets and sell during bull markets.
Humanity has always operated like that under a sound money standard because it only makes sense to spend when you have the money and save when you don’t. Under fiat, it’s all spend and no save, because your money constantly leaks value. That’s why the business cycles are so messed up, especially since 2000, but even before that.
Do you think it’s a coincidence that we had the worst bull market in Bitcoin’s history exactly after fiat came into Bitcoin in full swing?
That’s why I think the cycle is inevitable, but it will look quite unimpressive from now on. People might just forget about it at some point.

2026-08-14 09:11:37 UTC

- reply

Nah, offloading these bags in about two years from now. Cycle dynamics are mostly detached from short term fluctuations.

2026-08-14 07:08:06 UTC

- reply

I own zero gold, MSTR or Monero. I own 100% BitCohen but I’ll start existing this position soon eventually. Will keep about 5% as opsec in a decoy wallet as an insurance against wrench attacks. Will hold onto my Bitcoin-BLAKE2b as an investment and will experiment with it p2p. Will probably put some of the proceeds from BitCohen to my house, guns and will increase my ammo stock.

2026-08-14 06:58:59 UTC

Market seems to value the monetary use case above almost every other technical aspect of a protocol. Attached some receipts:
1. Monero vs BitCohen, 1Y chart (during a bear market — no other shitcoin is in the green). Probable culprit: Monero banned Ordinals right away and retained its monetary premium against BitCohen. It used to have mostly exchange demand (MoE); now it’s starting to form something that looks like reserve demand (SoV) too.
Technical flaws: possibility of hidden inflation bugs (supply isn’t trivial to verify), large chain bloat due to privacy, a history of 51% attacks and some reorgs — all irrelevant to the market.
2. Gold vs BitCohen — same timeframe. Although when extended back to February 2023 (when spam started), gold breaks out of an 11-year consolidation against BitCohen. Up ever since, except when BIP110 was launched.
Flaws: hard to verify, has only reserve demand, can’t be moved globally, isn’t natively divisible — all irrelevant because its monetary use case as a SoV is stable and hard to dilute.
3. Ethereum vs BitCohen — same timeframe. Down because nobody uses it as money, despite sloppy attempts to change the marketing around that (“ultra sound money” nonsense).
Technically superior to BitCohen, has all the use cases, complex smart contracts, generates yield, etc. Again, irrelevant to the market. It prices ETH at a discount to BitCohen, although I’m not sure for how long given the recently changed direction of protocol development.
My hunch is that ETH/BTC will reverse direction before the bear market is over. My reasoning: BitCohen’s monetary use case will only keep getting worse.
P.S. This is NOT an endorsement of Monero, gold or (lol) Ethereum. Just some observations and something I’ll keep looking into over the following months and years.
cc: @npub1x9h…6rta
https://image.nostr.build/28846fff125199a5045a659bd4b96c2d3cbaf227e85df1879d4cab1bcfa8202d.jpg
https://image.nostr.build/6f28fb451ce7a8ac16b36c859271b4aa92b14611003d29a4723b749e1d140fde.jpg
https://image.nostr.build/040df7f307f4f67bd7edc4ca2ab7cd54038920693a13360ca9fb010815c3dc15.jpg
https://image.nostr.build/fe965707e4163e7f56591860248f83c348d5e48b9a5303bacea4cf79c79f8cad.jpg

2026-08-14 05:30:14 UTC

- reply

You can’t explain economics with physics. It’s not an exact science. It’s human action, and human action is difficult to model. That’s why “all models are wrong, some are useful” meme. But devs and engineers love their math and think everything is governed by math, and that leaves a lot of blind spots in their thinking.

2026-08-14 05:20:35 UTC

- reply

It’s Keynesian nonsense.

2026-08-13 15:18:55 UTC

- reply

Bitcoin is lost. It’s now become BitCohen.

2026-08-13 11:19:38 UTC

- reply

Now in Bitcoin too

2026-08-13 09:07:09 UTC

- reply

You mean Scamson MAO

2026-08-13 07:02:13 UTC

- reply

Scamson Mao disagrees.

2026-08-13 04:53:24 UTC

https://image.nostr.build/82d0d7267ab7a92d5c948ed421d62e77f9909c17dde4a9c8d7d070ecd70f0ddd.jpg

2026-08-12 20:36:04 UTC

Default zaps update ⚡️
https://blossom.primal.net/4fa3caa1d19cfc0f63676a7e8069aaba7695f2d0bca2bf5864a5a9d5cdab1de6.jpg

2026-08-12 20:32:42 UTC

- reply

Some will. We only need some to start. Let’s try to make Bitcoin into a cryptocurrency again.

2026-08-12 20:19:05 UTC

- reply

Looks like Jimmy was on to something with this prediction.
See for yourself: https://mempool.guide
~270,000 txs in the backlog with massive fees piling up by the hour. Fee rate estimate for the next block is between 7 and 115,000 sats/vB lol. Meanwhile the fees on the Poolcoin chain are below 1 sat/vB.
#nevent1q…em2j

2026-08-12 13:07:03 UTC

- reply

The longest wait will be the first 2016 blocks. After that DA kicks in, blocks start coming again at 10 minutes on average, so we clear the next 50k blocks in about a year, all other things being equal.

2026-08-12 13:02:43 UTC

- reply

It doesn’t deactivate in a year. It deactivates in a year *worth of blocks*. About 52 000 blocks. Normally they would come in a year, assuming average speed of 10 minutes per block. But if the chain gets to crawl a year or two until the next difficulty adjustment, it will expire way slower than 1 year.

2026-08-12 12:59:03 UTC

“SHA256coin: a nobody-to-nobody nothing transfer network.”
Soon to be listed on NYSE. With blocks looking like this. I see a bright future for this project. 😉
https://blossom.primal.net/606a562e0bb345a170563281169f6dd88ebd672435cf21cfc0356744d6a9e20d.jpg

2026-08-12 12:34:55 UTC

- reply

What do you mean by deactivation?

2026-08-12 11:27:49 UTC

- reply

Too bad. We could have been natural allies. I have a small farm myself.

2026-08-12 09:53:58 UTC

A beautiful spam-free block by @npub1ehr…qsdz that got over half a Bitcoin in fees alone. To match the same fee revenue, a cartel mining pool will need to mine at least 25 spam filled blocks.
There’s now over 240,000 txs in the backlog of the BIP-110 chain tip. Fees and txs keep piling up, waiting for an opportunistic miner with large enough hash to come and take them. The next few days may become interesting. 🧐
https://image.nostr.build/99766fce28987ea7af9939291935139ace23b303db5e82382370a01d027d3e5d.jpg
https://image.nostr.build/324615e77dc2684e5dc15c2669df2c12c8b94ce29fed11c607f70752860357f2.jpg

2026-08-12 09:40:28 UTC

- reply

We might need something like this for Bitcoin-BLAKE2b.

2026-08-12 09:17:01 UTC

Every bitcoiner with a few years under the belt knows about this famous Satoshi quote, yet suddenly in 2026 it’s considered a controversial or a puritan take to hold. 🤷‍♂️
#nevent1q…v63a

2026-08-12 08:18:01 UTC

- reply

His “crusade” started in 2017, 6 years before he lost any coins. I wonder how would you react if you lose your life savings one day. I hope you never have to know that.
https://image.nostr.build/c5f7fa29d9c72b29c681bb854185dd911f8b8213d2010ee73cc94550022dc664.jpg

2026-08-12 08:07:13 UTC

The most committed users of Bitcoin weren’t the guys who stayed on Core v29.
They weren’t the guys sliding into your comments calling you a retard, a mask enjoyer, or a “knotzi.”
They weren’t the podcasters with affiliate codes and sponsored ads.
They weren’t the devs who “fixed” bugs by updating the documentation.
They weren’t the failed exchange managers lobbying miners through back channels.
They weren’t the suits, the affinity scammers, the backdoored-wallet shills, the media outlets, or the spooks.
The most committed Bitcoiners were the ones who ran an alternative Bitcoin node for the very first time because they smelled the rot.
They were the users who started mining for the very first time, committing real money and accepting the loss in sats.
They were the guys who spent hundreds of hours educating plebs about what makes Bitcoin valuable in the first place.
They were the guys who disregarded their own reputations and risked complete social ostracization because they believed this was the right thing to do.
Now some of these guys are forking off to try to salvage what remains of the idea called Bitcoin.
I will join them.
They will call us shitcoiners. They will call us brainwashed. They will call us every derogatory name they can think of. Soon, they will forget about us.
Meanwhile, their Bitcoin holdings will be slowly diluted until fiat starts looking appealing to them again.
Maybe then they will understand what gives Bitcoin its value: the people who made it actually decentralised.
By then, it may be too late for them to exit the system. It will have become a prison with invisible bars, and the prisoners themselves will be the jailers.
We see the bars.
We also see a crack in the wall that’s still loosely guarded. Because nobody has seriously thought someone might attempt to use it as an exit.
So we’re attempting a prison break while we still can. Not everyone will make it. Maybe none of us will.
The odds are stacked against us.
But who would have thought in 2009 that Bitcoin had any chance at all?
We’re forking off because we see no other path forward for true freedom money.
This isn’t virtue signalling. It’s self-defense.
There is an opportunity cost to everything. And for us, the opportunity cost of remaining on a captured chain has become too great to pay.
This is not an appeal to join us. Nor is it a waving of the white flag.
Everyone buys Bitcoin at the price they deserve.
We’re buying it at zero.

2026-08-11 14:09:25 UTC

- reply

You can call it Bitcoin, I call it bCore.

2026-08-11 13:56:41 UTC

- reply

You can add large op return on the bCore UTXO. Serves like a de facto replay protection, no?

2026-08-11 13:26:54 UTC

- reply

I like this approach. Seems fair.

2026-08-11 13:20:48 UTC

- reply

You can keep both for years and decide eventually when things unfold.

2026-08-11 11:59:09 UTC

- reply

I wonder if this was the hash bounty offered to pools to stand down on mandatory signalling day.
Saylor said the money was “committed,” not given. Was this their co-insurance policy in case some larger pool broke ranks and started wiping out a significant number of blocks? Probably.
They even disclosed it publicly, which would make the commitment look more credible.
That could even explain why no one ran a URSF. Why waste energy fighting a social war when you can simply bribe a few large entities with a big enough pile of money to guarantee their cooperation? If things got according to plan, no money would have been lost anyway.
#nevent1q…00pw

2026-08-11 11:46:45 UTC

https://blossom.primal.net/641d167ac97de98d1b654fdd389b0f514a34fd1af6915714e8b9314988ba58ee.jpg

2026-08-11 11:44:00 UTC

- reply

I don’t trust this site. Owner’s probably a spook. It’s not 22EH, still at 6 as of now.

2026-08-11 11:42:15 UTC

Fully agree with this. Every one who ran BIP-110 I consider a friend, no matter where he lands next. Beware of spooks tho. Many of these among our midsts.
https://image.nostr.build/bc71c174fbe62df0b9d5c1fe2473fefe72164a1788dad93f32bc3708c7facbba.jpg

2026-08-11 11:21:56 UTC

Hash is again picking up on the BIP-110 chain tip after falling off a cliff in the first hours after the split. Fees are mounting too. 👀 Over 170k transactions in the backlog.
https://image.nostr.build/33770c0e75c7114145b65fd47c6e36c054adb4d0a3569a3670be84e610a896ff.jpg
https://image.nostr.build/f5b0af73bd5cef2ff0190c4ddeb23d70e6d15daffd6b0cf4159b0deab3335842.jpg

2026-08-11 07:50:44 UTC

- reply

Yeah, 5 nodes in particular.

2026-08-11 06:22:22 UTC

If I had a physical copy of the “Blocksize War” book, I’d be throwing it away.
https://image.nostr.build/7089f654b4a6eb2b5f0ebab44c461a1ab3d65d3b5bed7e40b00feaeeec4c9f7b.jpg
https://image.nostr.build/43e8f6f877b6c2f11f7693adc5867b5121aad5830c4d717bb78bd11fd922b366.jpg

2026-08-10 18:08:52 UTC

- reply

What could be worse than 5 entities controlling the future of the protocol?

2026-08-10 15:13:18 UTC

- reply

See the date
https://image.nostr.build/51d233954dbe70db640d7e361014c96c650d524f2612b76f5fafccbc34450035.jpg