Aaron van Wirdum

www.thegenesisbook.com

Author of The Genesis Book.

Former Editor-in-Chief of Bitcoin Magazine.

Public Key

npub1art8cs66ffvnqns5zs5qa9fwlctmusj5lj38j94lv0ulw0j54wjqhpm0w5

Profile Code

nprofile1qqsw34nugddy5kfsfc2pg2qwj5h0u9a7gf20egnez6lk870h8e22hfqpzemhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuurjd9kkzmpwdejhgqgdwaehxw309ahx7uewd3hkcqg5waehxw309aex2mrp0yhxgctdw4eju6t0qy2hwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnddaehgu3wwp6kyedyux2

Publishing to

Author Public Key

npub1art8cs66ffvnqns5zs5qa9fwlctmusj5lj38j94lv0ulw0j54wjqhpm0w5

Show more details

Last Notes

2026-10-20 06:30:25 UTC

- reply

DMed

2026-10-19 13:41:34 UTC

- reply

DMed

2026-10-19 13:40:27 UTC

- reply

DMed

2026-10-19 13:39:08 UTC

- reply

DMed

2026-10-19 13:38:26 UTC

- reply

DMed

2026-10-19 11:24:40 UTC

- reply

Ugh. Let me look into that…

2026-10-19 07:03:08 UTC

- reply

DMed.

2026-10-19 06:58:21 UTC

I’ve got a few Bitcoin Amsterdam GA tickets to give away.
Reply below if you want one, and I’ll DM you a code— Nostr permitting.

2026-10-02 05:53:49 UTC

- reply

Good luck with that.

2026-09-23 00:12:44 UTC

- reply

They claim they're battling mining centralization but yes I think that's the real motivation behind this.

2026-09-22 09:27:50 UTC

- reply

The plan has three stages.
1. Freeze coinbase rewards for 45 days.
2. If no “unintended side effects”, extend coinbase freeze for full year.
3. By the end of that year only allow DATUM-mined block rewards to be spent… somehow.
1 & 2 are to disincentivize “opportunistic shitcoin miners” that just want to mine and sell the coins for profit… or something.

2026-09-22 07:58:46 UTC

- reply

So yeah it looks like the new rules are being enforced by a majority of miners, which means that any blocks that don't enforce these rules keep getting wiped out, and there is no chain split.
Will be interesting to see if the coinbase freeze gets extended in the upcoming 45 days, given that this was pretty explicitely targeted at "bad actor" AlphaPool... who now helped ensure Luke's soft fork is the majority chain.

2026-09-22 06:06:27 UTC

- reply

The chain with the new rules is currently ahead, which means the blocks on the old rules were wiped out. In other words, no split currently.
Interestingly, the new chain is ahead because AlphaPool is mining on it. This is the exact pool they consider a bad actor and is why this soft fork was rolled put in the first place...
...and this pool won't even be able to spend these block rewards, perhaps ever!

2026-09-22 05:25:35 UTC

For anyone still interested in this clown show...
@nprofile…c93l tried to push through a soft fork on Bitcoin-jr with ~one day notice, to freeze newly generated block rewards.
The rules just went into effect, and now that blockchain has split between upgraded and non-upgraded nodes.
Whether the split is temporary or permanent (Bitcoin-jr v. Bitcoin-jr Classic) remains to be seen.
To watch it unfold live, grab some popcorn and tune into this fork observer vibe coded by @nprofile…pp5p: https://lukecoin.zndtoshi.com/

2026-09-18 01:25:18 UTC

- reply

Well Luke is not a Bitcoin dev anymore and Mechanic never was :)

2026-09-16 05:50:15 UTC

- reply

Haha dat was echt een heel slecht moment om het interview af te kappen.

2026-09-15 03:26:52 UTC

- reply

I just read somewhere that affected customers have been contacted by Revolut, so if you haven't been contacted you're probably(?) fine.

2026-09-15 01:56:28 UTC

- reply

Why too late? Is there some cutoff date that's relevant here?
I also closed my account earlier this year, or maybe late last year.

2026-09-10 13:19:15 UTC

- reply

Robot Jetten!

2026-09-10 09:53:39 UTC

- reply

lol

2026-09-09 09:53:33 UTC

Slaps.
https://suno.com/song/caafc4c5-6db9-4a72-8aea-94254d6ffd49?sh=P9JXx7zUA2h3yHMw

2026-09-06 14:09:32 UTC

- reply

Incredible.

2026-09-06 10:01:50 UTC

Successfully sold my first chunk of bitcoin-jr (BJR AKA BTCB2).
First split it from BTC using @npub1v4v…xwu8’ splitting tool: https://github.com/hsjoberg/bcashjr-wallet/releases/tag/v0.0.1
Then sold for BTC on NeoxEX: https://neoxa.exchange/trade/BTCB2_BTC
Use both the wallet and exchange at your own risk (I only did fairly small amounts), but it does work.

2026-09-04 16:23:18 UTC

Ze German translation ist here!
Via @npub1zjm…ytc0: https://aprycot.media/shop/genesis/
https://image.nostr.build/3c62b89fa33688df51cd7f2bea25dfa9f2d56e410b896ed35fae60cf703a6439.jpg

2026-09-02 15:01:36 UTC

- reply

Ugh, beware: https://fixupx.com/BitcoinNewsCom/status/2095138162364325995

2026-09-02 03:28:24 UTC

First exchange to list bitcoin-jr (ticker BTCB2): https://neoxa.exchange/trade/BTCB2_USDC
Currently trading at ~$98 (USDC).

2026-08-31 02:55:15 UTC

Shitcoin Mechanic also.
https://x.com/ocean_mining/status/2094241380075778375
https://image.nostr.build/12e7140b40dba852316d92f86e1423a3bfb147ee19cab570d5796eb7e4faac09.jpg

2026-08-30 04:52:35 UTC

Luke out.
https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/joint-statement-of-ocean-and-luke-dashjr-302864347.html?tc=eml_cleartime

2026-08-27 03:39:13 UTC

Bitcoin, Explained 101: The COLDCARD Hack.
On the bug itself, how it could have happened, and some reflections on having had Coinkite as a sponsor.
With @nprofile…e0g4.
https://bitcoinexplainedpodcast.com/@nado/episodes/bitcoin-explained-101-the-coldcard-hack

2026-08-22 13:57:18 UTC

- reply

¯\_(ツ)_/¯
#nevent1q…laff

2026-08-22 04:58:35 UTC

- reply

Sure.
Still, price isn’t determined only by Normal Street.
Of course if we _really_ wanted to know how the BTC price would be affected by accepting/rejecting BIP110 we should have had futures markets— unfortunately the BIP110 charlatans rejected any attempt to establish these as they said would be “gambling”.

2026-08-21 15:37:44 UTC

- reply

Not only did I read it, I found footage of him working on it!
#nevent1q…w6zh
#nevent1q…w6zh

2026-08-21 14:46:42 UTC

Imma call this the post-110 pump.

2026-08-12 09:16:24 UTC

- reply

I followed it for an hour or so but then had to leave. Apparently they settled on BLAKE2b in the end.

2026-08-11 15:51:52 UTC

The testnet forkwar to determine PoW algo for Bitcoin-jr is more exciting than the BIP110 fork war itself was tbh.

2026-08-11 15:21:42 UTC

- reply

Apparently it was premature to call it for Blake2b-256. See: #nevent1q…x9fc

2026-08-11 15:03:30 UTC

- reply

(They used testnet because they don’t want to use “Bpedo” and BIP110 blocks are coming in too slow— if any more will come in at all.)

2026-08-11 15:01:41 UTC

Bdashers decided to use a testnet block header to randomly determine the proof-of-work algorithm for their forkcoin, but now testnet has been forked and they don’t know what to pick. (lol)

2026-08-10 15:33:36 UTC

- reply

You don't really understand things, do you?

2026-08-10 10:26:09 UTC

Did investigative reporter @npub1cjw…j2rh put out his 10,000 word plebslop report on miner collusion yet?

2026-08-09 09:58:07 UTC

- reply

Tells your node that the first block on the BIP110 chain is invalid. (Which of course means that entire chain is considered invalid.)

2026-08-09 09:51:50 UTC

Just in case the Bdashers’ wipeout argument does stick around: Bitcoin nodes can always reject the BIP110 chain even in the *extremely* unlikely scenario that it would overtake the Bitcoin chain at some point, by running bitcoin-cli invalidateblock 0000000000000000000169eb6f811ddbd0daf343af7b62180cdb13e7c78dbc16.

2026-08-07 14:41:18 UTC

- reply

Bdashers about to hard fork: #nevent1q…87v8

2026-08-07 12:01:20 UTC

- reply

TBH I kind of doubt it. Back in the 2017 fork days several exchanges said they'd only list forkcoins that implemented replay protection.
But idk, maybe after POW hard fork? Trading fees are their revenue stream, so if enough people want to buy or sell BIP110 coin...

2026-08-07 10:09:31 UTC

Dusted off that pen to explain what could happen when Bitcoin Knots starts rejecting blocks that don’t signal support for BIP110 this weekend.
https://bitcoinmagazine.com/technical/bitcoins-bip110-moment-three-possible-scenarios

2026-08-04 15:49:50 UTC

BIP110 proof-of-work hard fork incoming!
https://x.com/cguida6/status/2084653380194955653
https://image.nostr.build/43e65b787595c165503a3a17d527ebd5d3f6eadb74380e307929403029427112.jpg

2026-08-01 10:59:03 UTC

- reply

To add a little bit of nuance...
If 99% miners now start signaling but still accept non-signaling blocks as well, it makes no difference. Knots nodes will stall/fork off.
However if any majority of miners start signaling AND reject non-signaling blocks, that would still suffice for BIP110. (Non-signaling blocks would basically be 51%-attacked so they ultimately don't end up in the longest chain.)
I'm planning to publish a full write-up on this later this week.

2026-08-01 10:37:05 UTC

BIP110 can as of now no longer be activated through hash power signaling.
The "mandatory signaling" window starts next week, which practically speaking means Bitcoin Knots nodes will stall and/or fork off-- unless basically all miners suddenly decide to adopt this nonsense after all.
https://filters.watch/

2026-07-31 18:56:16 UTC

Repost for Nostr.
https://image.nostr.build/f314cc09a991747fa387363070cc11c56a2f80bd2c6a2e6b0892c7351aff0d89.jpg

2026-07-31 12:26:31 UTC

https://bitcoinexplainedpodcast.com/@nado/episodes/emergency-broadcast-coldcard-vulnerability

2026-07-30 23:02:25 UTC

COLDCARD Mk3 vulnerability: https://blog.coinkite.com/coldcard-mk3-seed-generation-warning/

2026-07-30 08:08:58 UTC

Luke's fierce battle visualized on bip110.com.

2026-07-29 21:18:23 UTC

- reply

The Blocksize War tells an important chapter of Bitcoin's history.

2026-07-29 08:40:33 UTC

- reply

Happy to see you post about something completely unrelated to BIP110!

2026-07-28 17:51:51 UTC

"YOU MUST URSF IF YOU'RE AGAINST BIP110!!"
https://blossom.primal.net/f9cd046ce8f26a2c8d3833fafd39f8be88830ed1ca290467fafc38390fa6fb06.jpg

2026-07-26 11:45:11 UTC

Investigative journalist @npub1cjw…j2rh working on his CAPTURE series.
https://youtu.be/bCt4MVKmKAU

2026-07-25 09:44:41 UTC

- reply

The more people dump BIP110 coins the lower the price of BIP110 coins will be and thus less incentive to mine the BIP110 chain.
(This assumes there’s even a way and place to dump them in the first place.)

2026-07-23 07:21:41 UTC

- reply

If there are ~no blocks on your BIP110 chain how long will you wait before deploying a POW change?

2026-07-17 11:24:16 UTC

https://podcastindex.org/podcast/3307835?episode=57600377210
https://blossom.primal.net/4df4b9ba20d43d6c5d504247baf39c6b42036c65c9559c2942891eb9e9034cd1.gif

2026-07-05 20:01:27 UTC

- reply

Nostr doesn't boost controversy and/or Nostr users aren't as addicted to engagement?

2026-06-25 13:17:13 UTC

DMND, the Stratum V2 mining pool, just mined its first block.
https://mempool.space/block/00000000000000000001a5bae00659902a120ea02bed9046aaf56651f673d5f6

2026-06-24 13:50:33 UTC

The failure of BIP110 will reveal that social media drama is just noise and I think that's wonderful.

2026-06-22 03:27:26 UTC

- reply

In his mind (and his cultish followers) the BIP110 rules will be the new Bitcoin protocol. If ~no blocks are mined on this fork chain, he's saying users (him and his followers) should change the POW algorithm to something else, which presumably means people can mine with GPUs again on this chain, at least initially.
It would really just create a forkcoin, not unlike Bitcoin Cash, but like many Bitcoin Cash supporters they'll claim it's "the real Bitcoin".
I'm not sure that answers your question but maybe it helps.
(FWIW this was very predictable yet some of his most ardent supporters I spoke with were denying this would happen until very recently. I fully expect them to adopt the script over the coming weeks and months though.)

2026-06-03 00:53:54 UTC

- reply

The X algorithm optimizes for outrage.

2026-05-28 18:45:32 UTC

- reply

Not gonna sit through more Kratter plebslob but assuming this is about Mechanic's game theory I'll leave this here.
#nevent1q…a5nv

2026-05-28 09:48:47 UTC

In a new episode of What Bitcoin Did with @nprofile…q2rk, @nprofile…566r talks about the game theory behind BIP110, which he believes makes it virtually guaranteed to succeed.
There was a lot of discussion about these dynamics in anticipation of the Segwit UASF (BIP148) in 2017; I for example wrote this article about it at the time: https://bitcoinmagazine.com/technical/op-ed-heres-why-all-rational-miners-will-activate-segwit-though-bip148
Note however that I at the start of that article laid out the assumptions for this game theory to play out. Arguably none of these assumptions hold up for BIP110.
1) The hash power support for BIP110 is incredibly low (significantly lower than for Segwit), and I don’t believe these miners will continue to mine a minority chain long enough for the difficulty to return to normal.
2) IMO BIP110 is a harmful upgrade, therefore I expect the market to value “110BTC” less than “LegacyBTC”. (This is the important one btw.)
3) BIP110 is more niche than BIP148 was, so a smaller percentage of users and miners will be aware of any game theory to act on even if that was rational.
4) In the unlikely event that a wipe-out of the legacy chain becomes a realistic possibility I would expect users and/or miners who oppose BIP110 to deploy some kind of checkpoint in order to prevent this.
TL;DR: BIP110 nodes will probably fork themselves off the network when mandatory signaling starts, and either end up on a dead chain or become a forkcoin (that would likely require further protocol changes to then stay alive).

2026-05-28 09:25:57 UTC

In a new episode of What Bitcoin Did with @npub16le…ffxj, @npub1wnl…n3wr talks about the game theory behind BIP110, which he believes makes it virtually guaranteed to succeed.
There was a lot of discussion about these dynamics in anticipation of the Segwit UASF (BIP148) in 2017; I for example wrote this article about it at the time: https://bitcoinmagazine.com/technical/op-ed-heres-why-all-rational-miners-will-activate-segwit-though-bip148
Note however that I at the start of that article laid out the assumptions for this game theory to play out. Arguably none of these assumptions hold up for BIP110.
1) The hash power support for BIP110 is incredibly low (significantly lower than for Segwit), and I don’t believe these miners will continue to mine a minority chain long enough for the difficulty to return to normal.
2) IMO BIP110 is a harmful upgrade, therefore I expect the market to value “BIP110 coin” less than “LegacyBTC”. (This is the important one btw.)
3) BIP110 is more niche than BIP148 was, so a smaller percentage of users and miners will be aware of any game theory to act on even if that was rational.
4) In the unlikely event that a wipe-out of the legacy chain becomes a realistic possibility I would expect users and/or miners who oppose BIP110 to deploy some kind of checkpoint in order to prevent this.
TL;DR: BIP110 nodes will probably fork themselves off the network when mandatory signaling starts, and either end up on a dead chain or become a forkcoin (that would likely require further protocol changes to then stay alive).

2026-05-28 06:32:05 UTC

The German translation of The Genesis Book is now available for preorder!
Ganz toll.
https://aprycot.media/shop/genesis/

2026-05-12 01:54:10 UTC

In August 2017, users proved that miners can’t block a valuable upgrade.
In August 2026, miners will prove that users can’t push through a harmful upgrade.

2026-05-06 23:15:52 UTC

What's the Plan For a Post-Quantum Soft-Fork: Bitcoin 2026 panel featuring Jonathan Bier, Mike Casey, Christian Papathanasiou and Ian Smith, and moderated by myself.
https://youtu.be/_LiCq8V8LPI

2026-05-05 20:37:10 UTC

Preserving the Historical Record of Bitcoin Knowledge: Bitcoin 2026 panel featuring Jonathan Bier, Michael Goldstein and myself, and moderated by Paul Rosenberg.
https://youtu.be/svXvzYYRbOs

2026-04-26 22:34:17 UTC

https://image.nostr.build/0d772c8d99a7f3750ac47dfb5116e65775ee31607316e3b5d64bc6f783710e21.jpg

2026-04-04 04:49:17 UTC

- reply

https://blossom.primal.net/16ae03bf36cf372b6697272a2569214c26a6c07fb8c3fcff476a7c471d39b85f.jpg

2026-03-21 18:59:06 UTC

- reply

The general idea of adjusting difficulty predates Bitcoin, but (AFAIK) Bitcoin was the first with a difficulty adjustment *algorithm* :)

2026-03-12 13:42:30 UTC

- reply

No offense taken, I think this is exactly right. And both the Iranian and the UAE governments probably know this as well.
To be fair, I have seen some “we’re not fucking leaving” sentiment among expats. But as mentioned daily life is also still pretty normal; I doubt it will persist for very long if things keep getting tougher from here.

2026-03-12 13:03:58 UTC

- reply

It’s a jihadist regime that killed thousands, perhaps tens of thousands, of its own citizens earlier this year.

2026-03-12 11:51:59 UTC

- reply

There is a US airbase in Abu Dhabi, but the UAE government is explicitly not letting the Americans use it to attack Iran. Nevertheless this is the excuse the IRGC is giving: they say they’re “just” attacking US bases and assets. (If true they would appear to have very bad aim.)
It seems more like the Jihadist regime is basically taking the entire region hostage to gain leverage in this war.

2026-03-12 11:29:02 UTC

So I’ve been living in Dubai since last summer. Not because I like the city — I don't — but because my girlfriend lived there when we met and she wasn't quite ready to leave yet. Admittedly the tax benefit is nice too.
Earlier this week we decided to get out however, at least for a couple of weeks, to see how the situation develops without being in the middle of it. The uncertainty of it all and potential for escalation is just not a comfortable situation to be in.
With that said, daily life in Dubai was in fact quite normal still when we left— just a bit more quiet. The Starbucks is open, the sports bar serves cold Guinness, and Domino’s is delivering to your doorstep.
There were missile alerts on our phones maybe once a day, and we could sometimes hear the sound of an explosion, mostly from interceptions I believe. But other than that, if you wouldn't watch the news, you may not even know something was going on.
I’ve seen reports on reputable international news media suggesting that influencers are required to convey a positive image of Dubai in these times— and are being barred from posting anything negative about what’s going on. I don’t know to what extent that’s true — I wouldn’t put it past the local authorities — but I do know that I am myself not some Dubai propagandist or Emir simp, yet I also got the impression that the UAE government is dealing with the attacks quite well, so far at least.
Also on the topic of influencers, I have seen a good amount of schadenfreude on social media etc. with people mocking the "influencer class" that now finds itself in the middle of rocket fire. I get it and part of me even feels the same way. But you know, most people in Dubai aren't influencers.
In fact, most people in Dubai are actually guest workers from places like South and Southeast Asia that work in the UAE to send money back to their family. And if shit really would hit the fan, guess who'll actually be most likely to get stuck there without an easy way home? Yeah probably not the influencer class.
If things in Dubai do take a turn for the worse from here and we don't return, I won't miss the city personally— but I will feel bad for these millions of people that were just living their lives peacefully until the jihadist regime across the sea decided to drag them into a war none of them had anything to do with, and no one wanted to be part of.

2026-03-05 10:39:39 UTC

- reply

You don’t know what you’re talking about.

2026-03-05 05:40:36 UTC

- reply

- No, it’s self-evident (all else equal)
- Libre Relay is not private and that’s the point
- Your hamburger analogy makes no sense whatsoever in this context

2026-03-04 10:21:21 UTC

Dear @npub1lh2…a9nk @npub1lh2…a9nk, would you please be so kind as to define by what process network consent should be formally obtained?
#nevent1q…jd0g

2026-02-27 18:18:45 UTC

https://knotslies.com/

2026-02-27 13:41:35 UTC

- reply

URSF stands for User Rejected Soft Fork.
If miners were to activate BIP110, URSF nodes would reject this so the chain splits between BIP110 nodes that enforce the new soft fork rules and URSF nodes that don't.
It's a way for users and miners to say: we're not going along with your soft fork, and we'll keep using the Bitcoin protocol as it was.

2026-02-27 10:23:11 UTC

For anyone interested, there’s now a Telegram channel to discuss BIP110 URSF specifics: https://t.me/+svDDMRJtO8UzMzNk
(Alternatively there is also still the ##ursf channel on Libera.Chat IRC.)

2026-02-25 06:16:53 UTC

- reply

Bitcoin Core developers have explicitly said users are free to run different software: https://bitcoincore.org/en/2025/06/06/relay-statement/
What people like myself are sick of are the lies and deceptive rhetoric around all of this, and the toxic environment it creates.
https://image.nostr.build/8efdfa24cd99d27503dcc1f4b90d64cf9e15a6d01c8c0ab64ae6efddd155ede1.jpg

2026-02-24 20:01:36 UTC

- reply

You didn't address @nprofile…tqyx's point-- instead you just got triggered by the word "censoring".

2026-02-24 13:48:47 UTC

- reply

Keep digging that hole buddy you're doing great.

2026-02-21 15:39:03 UTC

- reply

Judging by all this recent drama — which they indeed rightfully ignored in favour of sound technical engineering -- it would probably be many of the current Core devs.

2026-02-21 10:31:17 UTC

- reply

The day Bitcoin Core developers bend to the pressure of a misguided Twitter mob riled up by populist social media influencers, instead of merging code based on their best technical judgement, is the day the codebase should be forked to re-establish sound engineering practices.

2026-02-20 20:14:05 UTC

- reply

Liar.

2026-02-20 14:53:35 UTC

- reply

>I don't know of a good way to estimate that.
Fork futures.

2026-02-20 09:46:59 UTC

- reply

What if I think the default is the best option?

2026-02-20 09:36:23 UTC

- reply

Core 30

2026-02-20 09:21:43 UTC

- reply

If 90% of the network runs on defaults that is because 90% of users voluntarily decide to do that.

2026-02-19 08:38:47 UTC

Luke-jr moving through the Bitcoin space.
https://image.nostr.build/5979694561f31f2f302384b34752c998875e531f8e3eb6c65f170f3067d79989.jpg

2026-02-17 18:14:46 UTC

- reply

Yes I agree with your premise.
I would also encourage the development of a URSF for that reason, if you (or anyone else) don't consider it a waste of your time and effort.

2026-02-17 17:34:42 UTC

- reply

I doubt it would represent a significant loss, and in fact I suspect that adopting BIP110 would harm the value of bitcoin more than losing these people would. But without fork futures markets --which I'm very much in favour of!-- it's anyone's guess unless and until there actually is a split.
(That's another argument for a URSF btw, it would enable a very well defined fork futures market.)

2026-02-17 17:28:22 UTC

- reply

(To be precise I think the 1109th signaling block within a difficulty window should be rejected, as that would bring it over the 55%-threshold, and makes for a relatively clean split between the BIP110 chain and the original chain.)

2026-02-17 17:22:11 UTC

- reply

Last I checked BIP110 will have a mandatory signaling window in August, so if miners don’t signal, BIP110 nodes will in fact fork themselves off the network.
Your scenario could still happen if miners do signal (which non-BIP110 won’t care about one way or the other). That’s why IMO it’s still good to pay attention to signaling, and if there is any it’s probably time to start considering a URSF.
The worst case scenario is if miners don’t signal until very shortly before the mandatory signaling period starts. (Or even when it’s already started.) In that case I suppose the rejectblock command can still offer a solution, but it’d be a bit of a last-minute scramble…

2026-02-17 17:00:26 UTC

- reply

No miners are currently signaling support for BIP110, so investing time and effort in developing a URSF client seems like a waste of time and effort at this time (to me, anyways).
Much easier to just use the rejectblock command post-fork if a BIP110 block that forks the chain is ever mined.