Austrian economics pleb, John Deere certified service tech, prior airforce-Aero repair shop. Orange pilling normies one prompt at a time. ⚡️[email protected]
Iowa, USA
Joined July 2009
- Tweets8.8K
- Following1K
- Followers2.2K
- Likes20.7K
I think there are two very different reasons to mine whatever comes next after BIP-110.
If you believe Bitcoin should be money -nothing more-and you believe this fork better preserves that idea, mine it from day one. You're not just chasing profit; you're helping secure something you believe should exist.
But if you're looking at this thinking, “I missed the chance to mine Bitcoin early,” don't FOMO into hardware on day one. Give the new chain ~30 days.
By then we'll have something ideology can't give us: evidence.
Hashrate growth. Miner and pool distribution. Nodes. Development. Liquidity. Whether people actually stayed.
Day 1 is a decision based on conviction.
Day 30 can start becoming a decision based on evidence.
Do your own research, make your own choice, and don't risk money you can't afford to lose.
I have taken some time to think about BIP-110, and what I am going to do moving forward. Note I said what I'm going to do, not what YOU should do.
I wrote a long as$ post about my reflections on BIP-110 (still no RAGRATS) about what happened, but I deleted it, ain't nobody got time to read my sh*t.
You should do your own research and use your own judgment, don't outsource your thinking to any influencer, institution, or group...let alone a retard pleb like me.
I'm going to:
1. Be paying attention to and participating in what the BIP-110'ers got cooking next. I go into this with complete understanding of the nigh insurmountable odds, but I also go in with a clear conscience. Just as with BIP-110, just because the outcome is low/uncertain, doesn't mean you shouldn't endeavor for what's right.
AND
2. Continue to hold my meager stack of corn. It ain't much, but I worked hard for this sh*t and I'm not going to easily throw it away just yet.
3. Continue to participate in Bitcoin and run a Pre-RDTS version of Knots, until such a time it's no longer secure or a better alternative arises. Despite my significant qualms about how captured and centralized Bitcoin (mining, reference client, and simpfluencer culture) is, there's still slim hope of a turn around. I ain't leaving this fight that easily.
TL;DR, I'll do me, and you do you.
HACKZERO #XBT 💵 ✂️🏛️= ₿ retweeted
There’s a sentence engraved on the side of this gun:
Honor and Restore the Lives of Veterans.
Six words.
Cut into steel.
I’ve handled plenty of commemorative guns before.
Special editions.
Anniversary models.
Words on a slide because they photograph well.
But this one hit different.
This is the Kimber 1911 DS Warrior Boot Campaign edition.
And Kimber didn’t put that message on a wall hanger.
They put it on a double stack 1911 that actually begs to be shot.
Right around $1,000.
Seventeen rounds in the mag.
A twenty-round mag in the box.
Old-school 1911 silhouette with a modern grip module.
But the gun is not the real reason this matters.
Boot Campaign started in 2009 with five women in Texas who read Lone Survivor and decided they couldn’t just close the book and go back to their lives.
Now they help veterans dealing with PTSD, traumatic brain injury, insomnia, chronic pain, and the things that follow people home from war.
And this is the number I can’t shake:
In 2025, 97 percent of veterans who went through their Health and Wellness program no longer qualified for a PTSD diagnosis.
Ninety-seven percent.
That’s not awareness.
That’s not a ribbon on a bumper.
That’s a man getting his life back.
So yeah, you were probably going to buy another gun this year anyway.
The question is whether that money does anything on its way out the door.
Would you buy a gun knowing part of it helps fund veteran recovery?
Drop your answer below.
This is the first time I mostly hold BTC as an investment. For the NGU.
Before, it was the biggest no-brainer far beyond that.
It was the exit. The rock solid, unfuckable-with store of value. Separation of money from state. No third parties. Sovereignty. Digital truth in the form of a lean monetary ledger.
Those qualities have, in my opinion, eroded a lot. Slow capture. More centralization. More relativizing and fiatizing of what Bitcoin is for. And there are seemingly no brakes. Just cheering when the people who still wanted Bitcoin to be money, not data storage, lost.
Nodes decide, not miners. That used to be shared ground. Now it will get you ridiculed.
I do not see the current trajectory, governance capture, or mining concentration reversing, not with the current attitude and behavior from the suits, the influencers and the social layer in general. That is why my faith in the project today is much weaker than it used to be.
I am not calling the Blake2b chain Bitcoin.
I am glad the fork happened. It is a live attempt to reassert principles a lot of us thought were settled: monetary protocol, hostile to spam, nodes enforcing rules, miners do not get to veto by selling block space for JPEGs and other non-monetary use.
Whether it works at any meaningful scale is unknown. The energy around it is real. That resonates more with me than victory laps from people who treated BIP-110 as a joke and then celebrated when centralized hashpower blocked it.
My position:
I am not selling my BTC.
I am not telling anyone else to sell.
I intend to hold both sides for now.
Nobody should be buying or selling either side of this split yet. The dust has not settled, liquidity is a joke, and rushed claim tools are how you lose funds.
I urge everyone to make their own, well researched and responsible decisions.
Most of my attention and interest now goes to the chain that still treats spam as spam, instead of inviting more of it and saying the debate is settled.
I think there are two very different reasons to mine whatever comes next after BIP-110.
If you believe Bitcoin should be money -nothing more-and you believe this fork better preserves that idea, mine it from day one. You're not just chasing profit; you're helping secure something you believe should exist.
But if you're looking at this thinking, “I missed the chance to mine Bitcoin early,” don't FOMO into hardware on day one. Give the new chain ~30 days.
By then we'll have something ideology can't give us: evidence.
Hashrate growth. Miner and pool distribution. Nodes. Development. Liquidity. Whether people actually stayed.
Day 1 is a decision based on conviction.
Day 30 can start becoming a decision based on evidence.
Do your own research, make your own choice, and don't risk money you can't afford to lose.
For the non-technical: Open this in YouTube, find Show transcript, copy the entire transcript, and paste it into ChatGPT. Then tell it:
I want to follow this StartOS tutorial to set up Bitcoin Knots RC4 + DATUM for BLAKE2b mining. Walk me through it one step at a time using the StartOS GUI. Tell me exactly what to click and what to enter. Give me only ONE step at a time and wait for me to tell you what happened or send you a screenshot before continuing. If something doesn't match the tutorial, troubleshoot it with me before moving on. Do not guess if you're unsure.
To anyone interested in mining the #blake2b mainnet, here’s my tutorial for getting DATUM going with StartOS:
youtu.be/mcmY-UBDGB8
HACKZERO #XBT 💵 ✂️🏛️= ₿ retweeted
Bitcoin is not constrained to SHA-256 for Proof-of-work algorithm. Blake2b is live today and replaced SHA-256 as the PoW algorithm.
Comparison between Blake2b and SHA-256: mojoauth.com/compare-hashing…
In Atlas Shrugged, one by one the productive people realize that the parasitic system can survive for a very long time on the efforts of the people still trying to save it.
Eventually they stop arguing. Stop repairing it. And leave.
They don’t protest harder. They withdraw their labor and let the system reveal what it is without them.
Exiting a system that became beyond-repair is something every Bitcoiner has already done once.
If SHA-256 became completely broken, I think we could come to some agreement about what the honest block chain was before the trouble started, lock that in and continue from there with a new hash function. ~ Satoshi June 14, 2010 at 20:39:50 UTC
If the SHA-256 hash alone is what makes Bitcoin Bitcoin, then how can you replace SHA-256 with BLAKE2b while keeping Bitcoin’s entire transaction history and everyone’s balances?
"There is only one Bitcoin"
Yep. And it’s centralized and captured with pure fiat governance and culture.
I have no interest in the narratives about what constitutes "real" Bitcoin. I’ve lost faith in BTC’s potential to serve as a technology for freedom in the long run. Because the core idea is gone.
If THE IDEA lives on in a new chain, with the core motivated social layer that carried the BIP-110 fire, node runners, and the people who were there for the idea rather than just blind "number go up" gains and clique clout.. then that’s where I’ll focus my energy.
I’ll never debate or argue what "real" Bitcoin is. I don’t care about tickers. That discourse is extremely tainted by years of bad actors, and will lead to nothing good.
It’s about the IDEA, not the name.
The name of the chain carrying the IDEA onwards is not important to me. I put my energy and attention where I have faith and conviction.
Changing the hash is a feature, not a bug. If a SHA-256-specific vulnerability were discovered tomorrow, would you change the hash and still call it Bitcoin?
If the answer is yes, then Bitcoin cannot be defined by its hash.
You can take the cypherpunk out of SHA-256, but you can’t take the cypherpunk out of Bitcoin.
Bitcoin wasn’t created to make bank reserves better.
It was created because we shouldn’t need to trust them.
