Father. Vet. Engineer. Bitcoiner. Building software and hardware for Bitcoiners

XBT is Bitcoin
3
9
56
5,609
Looking much better
8
8
85
1,165
👀
17
9
122
2,664
Some of that hashrate may have moved to their DATUM pool
2
17
353
SpectrGen // XBT retweeted
Every day closer to 51% DATUM. Every day closer to paradise. Keep it going, boys. All the way to 100%. 🫡 45-day Coinbase maturity is already making pools and miners think further ahead. Skin in the game changes incentives.
3
14
63
868
We node runners did not fire the miners to change the logo or swap one mining algorithm for another. We fired them to preserve Bitcoin as sovereign money. Money that no state, corporation, miner, pool operator, or other powerful interest gets to rule through capital or coercion. Bitcoin’s rules are chosen by the people willing to run them, and we are free to change those rules when the incentives begin working against Bitcoin’s monetary purpose. And we just proved it again. When opportunistic SV1 hashrate concentrated behind one pool, we extended coinbase maturity rather than accept hashrate dominance as sovereignty. Hashrate may leave. Capital may leave. Miners may leave. But the money stays. So bring the hashrate. Bring the capital. Bring whatever economic leverage you think gives you control on our network. It does not. If your behavior threatens the purpose of the money, the rules will change beneath you. Your hashrate is temporary. The money is not.
Replying to @CTRLpool
The sha256 miners forked themselves off, so yes, in that sense they quit >Bitcoin miners didn't show up for BIP-110, they swatted it away like it was a gnat. 5 mining pools decided in a backroom deal to hardfork themselves off by ignoring consensus, yes. That's why we fired them >XBT had a chance at something Yes, money for the world. We're going to have a much better chance at that once it's harder for hostile SV1 pools to 51% attack us >they are allowing loudmouthed bullies to drive it nose first into the ground. No, we just don't think miners are in charge, which is actually how bitcoin works, though bcashers and spamcoiners may disagree Sorry you didn't do just a tiny bit of research on the coin you were mining 😂
10
48
187
3,702
SpectrGen // XBT retweeted
Please do not fall for this scam.
12
48
765
SpectrGen // XBT retweeted
Bitcoin on Blake2B Soft Fork (Happening Now)
13
54
200
16,891
BEWARE‼️⚠️ this user site @XBThomemining advertising XBT miner ... Likely a SCAM ⚠️fishing ad until proven otherwise‼️👇 They DM'd me after I "liked" this AI created picture and asked if I wanted to pre-order - ie: send them money in advance 🧐😡 Why a scam? The site was created in September 2026 and only has 100 followers and is not verified account. Link leads to a Telegram account 🧐😡😒
Something is cooking 💀
6
7
21
1,209
SpectrGen // XBT retweeted
Our new miner arrived from @SpectrGen! (And has been Kitty approved 😆)
6
4
36
608
The long coinbase maturity soft fork is much cleverer than it looks at first glance. It doesn’t try to identify or ban mercenary BLAKE2b hash. Instead, it attacks the economic machinery that allows immature SV1 pools to rapidly aggregate opportunistic hash and turn it into liquid payouts. At block 973,440, newly mined coinbases become subject to a 6,480-block maturity until block 979,920. But because the enforcement window itself is exactly 6,480 blocks long, none of those rewards actually mature while the rule is active. They all hit the same cliff: effectively, every new mining reward is frozen until 979,920, when consensus returns to the normal 100-block maturity. That is brutal for an immature SV1 pool. If its business model relies on spending coinbases around the normal 100-block maturity to pay transient hashers, that flow simply stops working. Spend one of those covered coinbases too early and upgraded nodes reject it; mine a block containing that spend and those nodes reject the entire block. The alternative is for the pool to keep paying miners out of its own already-mature reserves while 45 days of newly earned block rewards accumulate frozen behind it. For a thinly capitalized pool, that can be existential. And the more opportunistic hash it attracts, the larger the liquidity hole becomes. The mechanism turns the very thing that makes SV1 dangerous (being able to rapidly aggregate huge amounts of mercenary hash) into a massive capital requirement. DATUM with direct generated payouts, such as TIDES, fits the model much more naturally. The miners' shares are placed directly into the coinbase when the block is created. Those individual outputs still have to mature, but there is no centralized pool treasury that first receives the subsidy and then needs to spend it later to distribute rewards. The maturity burden follows the actual miners rather than forcing a pool to finance an army of transient hashers. Another clever part: there is no miner or node signaling threshold. This is a height-based flag-day soft fork. Nodes running the new version begin enforcing it automatically at 973,440 regardless of how many other nodes signal support. Nodes that refuse to upgrade are not given veto power over activation. As long as miners follow the stricter rule, they can continue following the same chain. But if an old-rule SV1 pool or miner tries to spend one of these coinbases after only ~100 blocks and mines that spend, the enforcing network rejects the block outright. Any non-upgraded nodes that accept and build on it have followed that miner onto an incompatible fork. That is another benefit of the design: unaligned miners do not get to drag enforcing nodes back to the old rules. If they insist on monetizing rewards before the new maturity permits it, they effectively fork themselves, and any old nodes willing to follow them, off the enforcing network. That's the elegance of it: the network doesn't need to know which ASICs are “mercenary.” It changes the incentives underneath them. Opportunistic hash can still point at XBT, but the thinly capitalized SV1 pools that make that hash liquid, convenient and scalable suddenly need enough reserves to finance weeks of payouts, or make their miners wait.
11
28
130
7,861
It goes deeper... Read on 👇
There’s another part of the long coinbase maturity change that makes it even more effective against the current SV1 pools. The BLAKE2b network only came online around the start of September. Knots 29.4.2 now applies a 6,480-block wallet and mempool maturity policy to all coinbases, which as of September 21 reaches back to roughly September 3. That means a Stratum pool that has been holding its block rewards as coinbase UTXOs for hasher payouts could suddenly find that almost its entire XBT mining treasury is considered immature by the upgraded wallet and won’t relay through upgraded mempools. These pools haven’t been around long enough to build up months of old XBT reserves. Aside from the first few days of mining, or rewards they already spent into ordinary UTXOs, most of what they have earned can still fall inside that window. Before activation, this is still policy rather than consensus. A coinbase older than 100 blocks can technically be spent using infrastructure that ignores the new policy. That changes in a few hours at height 973,440. So the pools get squeezed in both directions. Most of their existing mining history will be pushed out of the normal payout path before flag height, while every new reward they earn starts accumulating behind a hard consensus lock. That’s quite nasty for SV1 pools trying to pull in large amounts of opportunistic hash. The more hash they attracted, the more hashers that need to paid, while much of the unspent revenue backing those payouts is stuck in the mud. It turns the thing that made these pools dangerous in the first place, the ability to quickly aggregate mercenary hash, into a massive and immediate liquidity problem. nitter.net/SpectrGen/status/21017…
2
76
There’s another part of the long coinbase maturity change that makes it even more effective against the current SV1 pools. The BLAKE2b network only came online around the start of September. Knots 29.4.2 now applies a 6,480-block wallet and mempool maturity policy to all coinbases, which as of September 21 reaches back to roughly September 3. That means a Stratum pool that has been holding its block rewards as coinbase UTXOs for hasher payouts could suddenly find that almost its entire XBT mining treasury is considered immature by the upgraded wallet and won’t relay through upgraded mempools. These pools haven’t been around long enough to build up months of old XBT reserves. Aside from the first few days of mining, or rewards they already spent into ordinary UTXOs, most of what they have earned can still fall inside that window. Before activation, this is still policy rather than consensus. A coinbase older than 100 blocks can technically be spent using infrastructure that ignores the new policy. That changes in a few hours at height 973,440. So the pools get squeezed in both directions. Most of their existing mining history will be pushed out of the normal payout path before flag height, while every new reward they earn starts accumulating behind a hard consensus lock. That’s quite nasty for SV1 pools trying to pull in large amounts of opportunistic hash. The more hash they attracted, the more hashers that need to paid, while much of the unspent revenue backing those payouts is stuck in the mud. It turns the thing that made these pools dangerous in the first place, the ability to quickly aggregate mercenary hash, into a massive and immediate liquidity problem. nitter.net/SpectrGen/status/21017…
The long coinbase maturity soft fork is much cleverer than it looks at first glance. It doesn’t try to identify or ban mercenary BLAKE2b hash. Instead, it attacks the economic machinery that allows immature SV1 pools to rapidly aggregate opportunistic hash and turn it into liquid payouts. At block 973,440, newly mined coinbases become subject to a 6,480-block maturity until block 979,920. But because the enforcement window itself is exactly 6,480 blocks long, none of those rewards actually mature while the rule is active. They all hit the same cliff: effectively, every new mining reward is frozen until 979,920, when consensus returns to the normal 100-block maturity. That is brutal for an immature SV1 pool. If its business model relies on spending coinbases around the normal 100-block maturity to pay transient hashers, that flow simply stops working. Spend one of those covered coinbases too early and upgraded nodes reject it; mine a block containing that spend and those nodes reject the entire block. The alternative is for the pool to keep paying miners out of its own already-mature reserves while 45 days of newly earned block rewards accumulate frozen behind it. For a thinly capitalized pool, that can be existential. And the more opportunistic hash it attracts, the larger the liquidity hole becomes. The mechanism turns the very thing that makes SV1 dangerous (being able to rapidly aggregate huge amounts of mercenary hash) into a massive capital requirement. DATUM with direct generated payouts, such as TIDES, fits the model much more naturally. The miners' shares are placed directly into the coinbase when the block is created. Those individual outputs still have to mature, but there is no centralized pool treasury that first receives the subsidy and then needs to spend it later to distribute rewards. The maturity burden follows the actual miners rather than forcing a pool to finance an army of transient hashers. Another clever part: there is no miner or node signaling threshold. This is a height-based flag-day soft fork. Nodes running the new version begin enforcing it automatically at 973,440 regardless of how many other nodes signal support. Nodes that refuse to upgrade are not given veto power over activation. As long as miners follow the stricter rule, they can continue following the same chain. But if an old-rule SV1 pool or miner tries to spend one of these coinbases after only ~100 blocks and mines that spend, the enforcing network rejects the block outright. Any non-upgraded nodes that accept and build on it have followed that miner onto an incompatible fork. That is another benefit of the design: unaligned miners do not get to drag enforcing nodes back to the old rules. If they insist on monetizing rewards before the new maturity permits it, they effectively fork themselves, and any old nodes willing to follow them, off the enforcing network. That's the elegance of it: the network doesn't need to know which ASICs are “mercenary.” It changes the incentives underneath them. Opportunistic hash can still point at XBT, but the thinly capitalized SV1 pools that make that hash liquid, convenient and scalable suddenly need enough reserves to finance weeks of payouts, or make their miners wait.
6
17
71
2,199
SpectrGen // XBT retweeted
Rule #1 in Bitcoin: Never take Bitcoin advice from shitcoiners.
1
2
33
436
SpectrGen // XBT retweeted
Looks like the Bitcoin softfork activation will be earlier than anticipated (this afternoon instead of tomorrow), upgrade ASAP!
Bitcoin Knots 29.4.2.knots20260508 released, further mitigating the ongoing attack! 🎉 Be sure to read the release notes and verify your download(s)! bitcoinknots.org/?29.4.2.202…
21
79
305
25,024
It’s time we taught these crypto retards that node runners control the XBT network. Miners just put the fries in the decentralized bag or they don’t get paid.
Replying to @CTRLpool
We are calling on other pools that have invested time, energy, and money in building out XBT mining to come to the side of reason, and not participate in this nonsense. @TwhitNub101 @PaperclipPool @MiningRabid @Awoken_Lazarus @dxpoolofficial @BitcoinXor
3
20
102
3,758
SpectrGen // XBT retweeted
There’s another benefit to the 45-day maturity mechanism that I think is even more important than the SV1 liquidity penalty. It gives miners actual skin in the game. Today, a miner can point hash at whatever pool offers the best immediate economics, help that pool accumulate a huge amount of hashpower, find a block, and relatively quickly turn the reward into liquid XBT. If that behavior contributes to mining centralization or otherwise damages the network’s long-term value, the miner can effectively walk away with the consequences left behind. With 45-day maturity, the miner remains economically exposed to the network after finding the block. Their reward is locked while the consequences of the mining ecosystem they helped create continue to unfold. That changes the incentive from: “Where can I make the most money today?” to: “What mining environment am I helping create, and what happens to the value of my reward while I’m still holding it?” So the benefit isn’t only that 45-day maturity makes SV1 pools harder to finance. It aligns miners’ incentives with the long-term health of XBT itself. For example, a miner now has a direct economic reason to prefer a pool like DATUM that strengthens decentralization and makes XBT more attractive to sound-money seekers. If better decentralization increases long-term demand for XBT, the miner’s own locked rewards benefit from that increased demand. The miner isn’t just selling a service and walking away. They remain exposed to the value of the monetary network they’re securing. The protocol doesn’t need to identify bad miners, blacklist pools, or police intentions. It simply makes miners keep skin in the game.
The long coinbase maturity soft fork is much cleverer than it looks at first glance. It doesn’t try to identify or ban mercenary BLAKE2b hash. Instead, it attacks the economic machinery that allows immature SV1 pools to rapidly aggregate opportunistic hash and turn it into liquid payouts. At block 973,440, newly mined coinbases become subject to a 6,480-block maturity until block 979,920. But because the enforcement window itself is exactly 6,480 blocks long, none of those rewards actually mature while the rule is active. They all hit the same cliff: effectively, every new mining reward is frozen until 979,920, when consensus returns to the normal 100-block maturity. That is brutal for an immature SV1 pool. If its business model relies on spending coinbases around the normal 100-block maturity to pay transient hashers, that flow simply stops working. Spend one of those covered coinbases too early and upgraded nodes reject it; mine a block containing that spend and those nodes reject the entire block. The alternative is for the pool to keep paying miners out of its own already-mature reserves while 45 days of newly earned block rewards accumulate frozen behind it. For a thinly capitalized pool, that can be existential. And the more opportunistic hash it attracts, the larger the liquidity hole becomes. The mechanism turns the very thing that makes SV1 dangerous (being able to rapidly aggregate huge amounts of mercenary hash) into a massive capital requirement. DATUM with direct generated payouts, such as TIDES, fits the model much more naturally. The miners' shares are placed directly into the coinbase when the block is created. Those individual outputs still have to mature, but there is no centralized pool treasury that first receives the subsidy and then needs to spend it later to distribute rewards. The maturity burden follows the actual miners rather than forcing a pool to finance an army of transient hashers. Another clever part: there is no miner or node signaling threshold. This is a height-based flag-day soft fork. Nodes running the new version begin enforcing it automatically at 973,440 regardless of how many other nodes signal support. Nodes that refuse to upgrade are not given veto power over activation. As long as miners follow the stricter rule, they can continue following the same chain. But if an old-rule SV1 pool or miner tries to spend one of these coinbases after only ~100 blocks and mines that spend, the enforcing network rejects the block outright. Any non-upgraded nodes that accept and build on it have followed that miner onto an incompatible fork. That is another benefit of the design: unaligned miners do not get to drag enforcing nodes back to the old rules. If they insist on monetizing rewards before the new maturity permits it, they effectively fork themselves, and any old nodes willing to follow them, off the enforcing network. That's the elegance of it: the network doesn't need to know which ASICs are “mercenary.” It changes the incentives underneath them. Opportunistic hash can still point at XBT, but the thinly capitalized SV1 pools that make that hash liquid, convenient and scalable suddenly need enough reserves to finance weeks of payouts, or make their miners wait.
2
7
20
784
SpectrGen // XBT retweeted
>confiscating coins goes against Bitcoin No one has proposed that Only not paying service providers if they attack the network Money that was never received in the first place cannot be confiscated >Are we also going to freeze the north korean hacker's Bitcoin too? No, of course not. That money belongs to them, unless they acquired the coins in a way that attacks the network, such as exploiting an inflation bug You understand that coinbase outputs are a fee that *all bitcoin holders pay to miners for providing a valuable service*, correct? The service, in case you missed it, is *making the network more secure by keeping it decentralized* If miners do the opposite of their job and make the network less secure by centralizing it, they are defrauding the network and should not be paid There is nothing about the above that "goes against bitcoin's principles" >We are not ethereum. Of course not. Bitcoin is money, and eschews mining centralization, spam, and bad actors. That's what separates us from ethereum, not some kind of suicidal empathy where we pay people to attack us
2
10
60
915
PLEASE NOTE: If you're planning to upgrade early, this release made changes to the `difficulty` RPC call, requiring updates to many consuming services like electrs, mempool-backend, etc, which may or may not have companion updates yet. DYOR
12
293