Interested in decentralizing Bitcoin mining?
Run p2pool-go: choose your own block templates, contribute to the sharechain.
If p2pool-go finds a block, get paid right out of the coinbase. A 0.5% bonus goes to the lucky miner.
p2pool-go maintains a sharechain — a parallel blockchain of lower-difficulty "shares" that tracks each miner's contributions. When a share also meets Bitcoin's full network difficulty, it becomes a real Bitcoin block whose coinbase pays all recent contributors proportionally via PPLNS (Pay Per Last N Shares).
- Decentralized — No pool operator. Every miner runs their own node.
- Trustless — Payouts are enforced by sharechain consensus.
- Fair — PPLNS rewards discourage pool-hopping and reward consistent miners.
vibed, so this needs full review.
from now on, by default everything is vibed...
Yes. Good luck reviewing software you install. Threat profile: ∞ risk.
In Battlestar Galactica, the humans have this practice of never networking their computers. But my fuzzy memory has it also that they preferred older devices as being harder to compromise (which may be a conflation with a different scifi story).
Perhaps there will be a trend toward older software, because it's known to be not vibecoded. (In writing this, I realize it probably wouldn't work out so well)
It's all fixable, it's just that now that anyone can vibe together software, the engineering skill pressure shifts from the builder to the operator.
So I think my golden rule becomes whenever anyone posts anything about any software is:
Because honestly... posting a github link without having spent the time to make sure that what you post isn't a trojan now equals being the problem.
As a poster of many github links, I have been feeling this sensation a little lately. I've been trying to steer away from posting throwaway projects into which the creator clearly didn't put much effort. But I'm often tempted by the idea.
For instance, just now I was working on a post about a URSF prototype that supertestnet released (it lets people who don't like BIP 110 call
invalidateblockto prevent their nodes from following the BIP 110 chain -- at least, that's what super says it does). I mostly want to post this link as an excuse to talk about the concept and not because I expect people to run the code. I haven't looked at its code at all, nor, short of asking a chatbot, do I think I'd be able to spot an evil function in such software. (As far as I know, super doesn't post too many code-slop projects).I need to rethink perhaps how I go about posting links.
Super publishes a lot of prototype code, which is definitely not production code, but it is someone who we know does that and we can plan accordingly. So this is actually a perfect example: when you would post a super repo, it wouldn't even come to my mind to ever run that. It's just poc code for maybe an interesting idea that I (or Claude, or GPT, or Gemini) can then take as a starting point for building an actual production grade app or script, if I want it.
It's good to think about "what am I amplifying?". There is so much slop nowadays. None of it tested. So posting about it without having ran it basically puts your name next to something that might very well be completely awful. If you haven't tested it (or you don't have standards and just yolo'd it and have no idea that all your private thoughts are now sitting in a vault somewhere to be used against you in the near future) then what are you recommending?
For example, that picoclaw code that was linked here on SN and that I am looking into? I've changed about half the codebase thus far, and I still have tons of work queued up on it to make it even half acceptable as a poc that I can actually use. It's all slop. I won't publish the result because it won't help anyone that cannot re-code it themselves. In the end, it's just another example code that I really just should have converted into an implementation plan, to then write from scratch, bespoke. But I was hopeful (wrongly.)
If I see what stackers are doing right now, just jumping on things without understanding what they are doing (and not just stackers, the whole world has turned insane from FOMO) I'm getting really worried about the future. Years of very hard to get across privacy education are being wiped by stupid yolobots.
Another example is that zig openclaw rewrite I posted the other day (#1445161). I did not look at the code at all nor did I have much sense of who the creator was or their credibility. I did have a rough idea of the concept (small, zig has a good reputation) and it didn't have glaring signs of slop.
I'm hopeful that there is a useful role posting such stuff can play: flagging projects for people who do want to look into it further. But your point really makes me wonder about the usefulness of amplification from someone like me who does not have the skills to do due diligence.
Perhaps I should just stick to bitcoin stuff where at least I have a rough idea of whether the idea makes sense (even if I haven't evaluated the code).
Right. Good points.
Just as a side note: this github repo is from Kevin Cai (LL dev and Blixt contributor).
Yes, is using claude and other AI crap, but I think he also review that code. He's not a random dude using vibe.
This comment is not to apologize him or something like that.
It's useful information. I would find such reputational context useful on most posts.
HFGR - have fun getting rekt
good thing is that you can nowadays run containers natively-ish on that mac mini cluster you bought for your clanker lol.
"maintains a sharechain — a parallel blockchain" that doesn't sound very good.
It's actually a standard design for p2pool. This old article from Alexei explains it fairly well https://alexeizamyatin.medium.com/p2pool-proof-of-work-reusing-for-trustless-share-validation-8650d0235407
That might be what I jump to once I get my payout from Ocean.
Bookmarked!
The 0.5% bonus for the block finder is a nice incentive. Do you think that’s enough to attract smaller solo miners to try it instead of sticking with big pools?