Category: Crypto

Bitcoin Magazine

SLICE: Making PPLNS Work for Demand Response

Bitcoin mining has come a long way since the days of GPUs and basement set ups. In that time, miners have advanced in countless ways. For example, ASICs are now the standard, not GPUs. Furthermore, enterprise grade players have entered the field, opening new frontiers and bringing with them the size and institutional recognition that opens the doors to otherwise unreachable places for smaller miners. Nowadays, the mining landscape is one where grid services, curtailment strategies, and energy market participation are no longer edge cases but core strategies. As the world around it has moved forward, there’s one question we keep hearing from miners: can PPLNS adapt?

Many miners, particularly those working closely with energy providers or integrating Demand Response mechanisms, have come to view PPLNS with suspicion. They worry that it penalizes downtime and rewards only uninterrupted hashrate—a bad deal for those who routinely curtail machines to support the grid or provide other services.

This fear isn’t baseless. It traces back to a pivotal moment in the mining industry’s recent past, one that apparently sealed the deal for many on PPLNS style payouts: the fallout between RIOT and Braiins Pool.

At the time, Braiins was using the Score payout system. Designed in 2011 by Slush himself, Score was engineered to solve the problem of pool hopping—when miners would jump between pools to exploit reward systems. There’s also been a misconception that Score is a PPLNS style payment system, but as Rosenfeld’s bible on pool payout systems describes, Score and PPLNS are distinctly different payout methods. The main difference is how they account for shares, specifically, Score implemented a rolling window with exponential decay function, this effectively made the lookback window very short. On the other hand, PPLNS is a family of payout systems with various types of fixed length lookback windows.

As shown on this archived website of how Score worked, you can see that after 90 minutes your hashrate had no more presence on the pool. This means that the moment a miner starts mining, their share of rewards fairly quickly reaches the fair value of the hashrate. On the other hand, when a miner stops mining, it drops equally fast, as shown on the gif below.

This might have worked well in the era of cowboys and hackers, but it was never designed with today’s complex mining environments in mind. Certainly not with Demand Response, where miners intentionally and profitably take machines offline to stabilize energy grids or bid into ancillary markets. To Score, that kind of behavior looks no different than a pool hopper—someone attempting to cheat the system.

So when RIOT left Braiins, citing concerns about payout mechanics, it sent a shockwave through the mining world. Due to the aforementioned misconception, Score system’s flaws got unfairly projected onto a broader category of payouts, PPLNS got caught in the fray, catching a stray bullet in the process, and the industry collectively threw the baby out with the bathwater.

But the mining world has changed, and it’s time for the phoenix to rise from his ashes.

SLICE: A Payout Mechanism for the 21st Century Grid

Enter SLICE, a modern, open-source Stratum-V2-ready payout system created by the DMND team. It’s an improvement and evolution of PPLNS, that rethinks how miners get paid, rewards are calculated, and —most importantly— how downtime is treated respect 

to Score. All while preserving miner’s right to build their own block templates with SV2.

At its core, SLICE is about fairness and transparency. It preserves the foundational idea of PPLNS—paying miners in proportion to their actual contribution to solving blocks—while modernizing it for today’s decentralized mining landscape.

The key innovation lies in how SLICE structures reward calculation, and on how the lookback window works. Rather than treating the entire pool as a monolith, SLICE breaks time into smaller, dynamic “slices” of work to properly distribute the fee component. These slices represent batches of shares submitted over a specific period, where we control for the amount of fees in the mempool, and compare and score different job templates for the financial value they represent. When a block is found, SLICE distributes the block subsidy and transaction fees separately. The subsidy is allocated proportionally by hashrate, while the fees are distributed based on hashrate and financial value.

This is particularly relevant in a world where miners can choose their own transaction sets. Some miners may prioritize high-fee MEV-style bundles; others may exclude certain types of transactions for ideological, political or technical reasons. SLICE ensures that, within each slice, miners are rewarded according to both the quantity and quality of their work—without punishing them for downtime or strategic energy decisions. For those curious to learn more, this article can prove helpful.

Demand Response Without Penalty

What makes SLICE especially attractive for miners participating in Demand Response or curtailment programs is that it doesn’t penalize you for being offline.

That’s because SLICE doesn’t decay your payout just because you took a break. Your shares remain in the PPLNS window—the rolling window of recent work that is eligible for payouts—as long as they’re recent enough. In this way, each share is treated independently, and is expected to get 8 payouts, since SLICE uses an 8-block rolling window, each valid share remains eligible for payout across the next 8 blocks on average. This means that regardless of how big or small the pool is, you will never have the abysmal luck of eating up bad luck days without a block, disconnecting, having the pool find a block, and not get paid.

That means miners can power down during peak demand hours, support their regional grid, and still collect their fair cut from blocks found after they resume operations, most importantly, even while they’re offline, if their shares are still in the window. In other words, if the pool has a streak of bad luck, and then the miner is called to perform demand response and shuts off, even if the pool finds a block during their down time, that miner will get paid their fair share for all the time they were online. That’s because each share generated during that time will be active and getting paid for 8 blocks on average.

This is not a workaround. This is the feature. It makes SLICE fully compatible with modern energy strategies that require flexibility, whether you’re participating in frequency regulation markets, ramping down during grid emergencies, or simply optimizing for off-peak pricing.

For example, let’s say that a miner is mining at a pool, and the pool hasn’t found that day’s block yet. This means that the pool hasn’t found the block yet, and thus the miners hasn’t gotten paid for that day yet. Now, the miner shuts off to provide ancillary services during peak summer load for a few hours, during that time, the pool finds the block. In a Score based pool, the miner would not see a single Sat of that after 90 minutes, when the decay has had full effect. But even if the pool found a block 30 minutes later, due to the exponential decay, the miner would barely see anything. On the other hand, the miner would have all of the shares they mined over the day receive a payment, since each share receives on average 8 payments. Thus, the miner would benefit in the good times, and not be penalized in the bad times.

Payment Transparency and Auditability

Furthermore, SLICE doesn’t just modernize payout fairness—it does so in a way that minimizes trust in the pool operator. Every slice is fully auditable. Each share is tracked, indexed, and publicly verifiable by any miner, so miners can independently verify their share of the block reward. There’s no black box, no “trust me bro.”

And if the pool operator attempts to cheat—say, by injecting fake shares to dilute payouts—miners can challenge the integrity of the slice. The Job Declaration extension to Stratum V2, which SLICE relies on, includes mechanisms for publishing share data, verifying Merkle roots, and ensuring that each share corresponds to real computational work.

For miners who care about decentralization, SLICE isn’t just a payment scheme—it’s an accountability tool.

From Defensive to Strategic

The shift from Score to SLICE represents more than a technical upgrade. It’s a mental shift. Mining pools no longer need to defend against bad actors by penalizing everyone. Instead, they can structure payouts in a way that reflects reality: that miners are sophisticated participants working not only in the Bitcoin blockchain, but also the energy ecosystem.

With SLICE, PPLNS stops being a liability and becomes a strategic advantage. It enables better revenue capture, more transparency and auditability, and smoother integration with grid services.

And in a world where uptime is optional, but fairness is non-negotiable, that’s exactly what enterprise-grade miners need, a strategic pool partner that pushes forward and innovates, bringing the future today and enabling miners to make more money with the same hardware.

This is a guest post by General Kenobi. Opinions expressed are entirely their own and do not necessarily reflect those of BTC Inc or Bitcoin Magazine.

This post SLICE: Making PPLNS Work for Demand Response first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by General Kenobi Nakamoto.

Bitcoin Magazine

Is 8% of Bitcoin Owned by Institutions a Threat to Its Future?

Institutional ownership of Bitcoin has surged over the past year, with around 8% of the total supply already in the hands of major entities, and that number is still climbing. ETFs, publicly listed companies, and even nation-states have begun securing substantial positions. This raises important questions for investors. Is this growing institutional presence a good thing for Bitcoin? And as more BTC becomes locked up in cold wallets, treasury holdings, and ETFs, is our on-chain data losing its reliability? In this analysis, we dig into the numbers, trace the capital flows, and explore whether Bitcoin’s decentralized ethos is truly at risk or simply evolving.

The New Whales

Let’s start with the Treasury of Public Listed Companies table. Major companies, including Strategy, MetaPlanet, and others, have collectively accumulated more than 700,000 BTC. Considering that Bitcoin’s total hard-capped supply is 21 million, this represents roughly 3.33% of all BTC that will ever exist. While that supply ceiling won’t be reached in our lifetimes, the implications are clear: the institutions are making long-term bets.

Figure 1:The top BTC treasury holdings of publicly traded companies. View Live Table

In addition to direct corporate holdings, we can see from the EFT Cumulative Flows (BTC) chart that ETFs now control a significant slice of the market as well. At the time of writing, spot Bitcoin ETFs hold approximately 965,000 BTC, just under 5% of the total supply. That figure fluctuates slightly but remains a major force in daily market dynamics. When we combine corporate treasuries and ETF holdings, the number climbs to over 1.67 million BTC, or roughly 8% of the total theoretical supply. But the story doesn’t stop there.

Figure 2: ETFs increasing appetite for BTC accumulation. View Live Chart

Beyond Wall Street and Silicon Valley, some governments are now active players in the Bitcoin space. Through sovereign purchases and reserves under initiatives like the Strategic Bitcoin Reserve, nation-states collectively hold approximately 542,000 BTC. Add that to the previous institutional holdings, and we arrive at over 2.2 million BTC in the hands of institutions, ETFs, and governments. On the surface, that’s about 10.14% of the total 21 million BTC supply.

Forgotten Satoshis and Lost Supply

Not all 21 million BTC are actually accessible. Estimates based on 10+ Years HODL Wave data, a measurement of coins that haven’t moved in a decade, suggest that over 3.4 million BTC are likely lost forever. This includes Satoshi’s wallets, early mining-era coins, forgotten phrases, and yes, even USBs in landfills.

Figure 3: It’s conceivable that there are over 3.4 million lost BTC. View Live Chart

With approximately 19.8 million BTC currently in circulation and roughly 17.15% presumed to be lost, the effective supply is closer to 16.45 million BTC. That radically changes the equation. When measured against this more realistic supply, the percentage of BTC held by institutions rises to roughly 13.44%. This means that approximately one in every 7.4 BTC available to the market is already locked up by institutions, ETFs, or sovereigns.

Are Institutions Controlling Bitcoin?

Does this mean Bitcoin is being controlled by corporations? Not yet. But it does signal a growing influence, especially in price behavior. From the S&P 500 vs Bitcoin Correlation chart, it is evident that the correlation between Bitcoin and traditional equity indexes like the S&P 500 or Nasdaq has tightened significantly. As these large entities enter the market, BTC is increasingly viewed as a “risk-on” asset, meaning its price tends to rise and fall with broader investor sentiment in traditional markets.

Figure 4: Increasing Bitcoin and S&P 500 correlation. View Live Chart

This can be beneficial in bull markets. When global liquidity expands and risk assets perform well, Bitcoin now stands to attract larger inflows than ever before, especially as pensions, hedge funds, and sovereign wealth funds begin allocating even a small percentage of their portfolios. But there’s a trade-off. As institutional adoption deepens, Bitcoin becomes more sensitive to macroeconomic conditions. Central bank policy, bond yields, and equity volatility all start to matter more than they once did.

Despite these shifts, more than 85% of Bitcoin remains outside institutional hands. Retail investors still hold the overwhelming majority of the supply. And while ETFs and company treasuries may hoard large amounts in cold storage, the market remains broadly decentralized. Critics argue that on-chain data is becoming less useful. After all, if so much BTC is locked up in ETFs or dormant wallets, can we still draw accurate conclusions from wallet activity? This concern is valid, but not new.

Need to Adapt

Historically, much of Bitcoin’s trading activity has occurred off-chain, particularly on centralized exchanges like Coinbase, Binance, and (once upon a time) FTX. These trades rarely appeared on-chain in meaningful ways but still influenced price and market structure. Today, we face a similar situation, only with better tools. ETF flows, corporate filings, and even nation-state purchases are subject to disclosure regulations. Unlike opaque exchanges, these institutional players often must disclose their holdings, providing analysts with a wealth of data to track.

Moreover, on-chain analytics isn’t static. Tools like the MVRV-Z score are evolving. By narrowing the focus, say, to an MVRV Z-Score 2YR Rolling average instead of full historical data, we can better capture current market dynamics without the distortion of long-lost coins or inactive supply.

Figure 5: A more focused 2-year rolling MVRV Z-Score better captures market dynamics. View Live Chart

Conclusion

To wrap it up, institutional interest in Bitcoin has never been higher. Between ETFs, corporate treasuries, and sovereign entities, over 2.2 million BTC are already spoken for, and that number is growing. This flood of capital has undoubtedly had a stabilizing effect on price during periods of market weakness. However, with that stability comes entanglement. Bitcoin is becoming more tied to traditional financial systems, increasing its correlation to equities and broader economic sentiment.

Yet this does not spell doom for Bitcoin’s decentralization or the relevance of on-chain analytics. In fact, as more BTC is held by identifiable institutions, the ability to track flows becomes even more precise. The retail footprint remains dominant, and our tools are becoming smarter and more responsive to market evolution. Bitcoin’s ethos of decentralization isn’t at risk; it’s just maturing. And as long as our analytical frameworks evolve alongside the asset, we’ll be well-equipped to navigate whatever comes next.

For more deep-dive research, technical indicators, real-time market alerts, and access to a growing community of analysts, visit BitcoinMagazinePro.com.

Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and should not be considered financial advice. Always do your own research before making any investment decisions.

This post Is 8% of Bitcoin Owned by Institutions a Threat to Its Future? first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Matt Crosby.

Bitcoin Magazine

BlackRock Bitcoin ETF to Become World’s Largest, Bitcoin Price Surges Above $95,000

BlackRock’s iShares Bitcoin Trust (IBIT) will become the world’s largest ETF within 10 years, Strategy Chairman Michael Saylor predicted at the Bitcoin Standard Corporations Investor Day in New York. The bold forecast comes as U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs recorded $442 million in net inflows on Thursday, pushing Bitcoin above $95,000.

IBIT, which currently manages $54.2 billion in assets, would need to surpass the Vanguard S&P 500 ETF (VOO), which holds approximately $573.5 billion. BlackRock’s ETF has demonstrated remarkable momentum, accumulating $1.16 billion in Bitcoin purchases over just three days: $193.5 million on April 22, $643.2 million on April 23, and $327.3 million on April 24.

“IBIT will be the biggest ETF in the world in ten years,” Saylor said during his presentation. The ETF has already shown unprecedented growth, reaching $10 billion in assets within seven weeks of its January launch – the fastest growth rate for any ETF in history.

Bloomberg ETF analyst Eric Balchunas acknowledged the possibility but emphasized the extraordinary circumstances required. it’s poss also if IBIT starts taking in more cash than VOO but as it stands that would mean taking in well north of $1b/day, like $3b or $4b/day if it hopes to gain ground,” Balchunas noted.

The surge in ETF interest coincides with Bitcoin’s break above $95,000, supported by multiple factors including President Trump’s signals on reducing Chinese import tariffs, new SEC Chairman Paul Atkins’ pro-crypto stance, and expectations of Federal Reserve rate cuts in mid-2025.

U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs have now accumulated over $37 billion in total net inflows since their January launch, with combined assets under management exceeding $100 billion. IBIT leads the pack, recently winning “Best New ETF” at the etf.com awards.

At press time, Bitcoin maintains strength above key psychological levels as institutional investment continues through regulated ETF vehicles, with BlackRock’s aggressive accumulation strategy suggesting growing confidence in the asset class.

This post BlackRock Bitcoin ETF to Become World’s Largest, Bitcoin Price Surges Above $95,000 first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Vivek Sen.

Bitcoin Magazine

ARK Invest Raises 2030 Bitcoin Bull Case Price Target to $2.4 Million

ARK Invest has significantly revised its long-term outlook for Bitcoin, now projecting a bull case price target of approximately $2.4 million by 2030. The report lays out a comprehensive modeling framework based on Bitcoin’s total addressable market (TAM) potential, adoption trends, and assumptions around supply dynamics.

The updated target represents a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of ~72% between December 31, 2024 and December 31, 2030. In comparison, ARK’s base and bear case estimates stand at $1.2 million (CAGR ~53%) and $500,000 (CAGR ~32%), respectively.

Image via ARK Invest

“Institutional investment contributes the most to our bull case,” the report notes, emphasizing a projected penetration rate of 6.5% of the $200 trillion global market portfolio ex-gold by 2030. That share, according to ARK, is nearly double the current allocation to gold.

Referred to by some as “digital gold,” Bitcoin is increasingly recognized for its potential as a “nimbler, more transparent store-of-value”, the report states. Digital gold alone is expected to contribute more than a third to the bull case valuation, assuming Bitcoin captures 60% of gold’s $18 trillion market cap.

Emerging market demand is another major factor. “In our view, this bitcoin use case has the greatest potential for capital accrual,” ARK said, citing the asset’s ability to protect wealth from inflation and devaluation in developing economies. This segment could account for 13.5% of the $2.4 million valuation, assuming a 6% TAM penetration rate of emerging market monetary bases.

Further contributions stem from growing adoption by nation-state treasuries, corporate cash reserves, and a burgeoning on-chain financial services ecosystem. Notably, even conservative assumptions for on-chain services reflect a 60% CAGR, building on innovations like Layer 2 networks and WBTC.

In a supplemental analysis, ARK also applied these assumptions to Bitcoin’s “active” supply, a methodology that discounts long-held or lost coins. With a liveliness-adjusted supply basis, the bull case price target jumps from the original $1.5 million to the updated $2.4 million.

ARK concludes, “Bitcoin’s scarcity and lost supply are not reflected in most valuation models today,” suggesting further upside potential beyond the already bold forecast.

You can read the full report here.

This post ARK Invest Raises 2030 Bitcoin Bull Case Price Target to $2.4 Million first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Nik.

Bitcoin Magazine

Bitcoin Without Privacy Is A Surveillance System

Builder: Yuval Kogman (nothingmuch)

Language(s): Rust, C#, Go, Python

Contribute(s/ed) To: rust-payjoin, WabiSabi/Wasabi 2.0, General Privacy Research

Work(s/ed) At: Spiral (currently), zkSNACKS (formerly)

Yuval had an interest in subjects related to Bitcoin far before it was actually birthed into the world. A lifetime software developer and technology enthusiast, as well as a general purpose autist, he first became interested in cryptographic technology around 2002. 

His father attended a talk by Adi Shamir, the famous cryptographer who co-invented the RSA signature scheme, on ecash. A father-son conversation later and Yuval was now aware of linkable ring signatures, the double-spending problem, and the concept of ecash. His journey down the rabbit hole had begun before the Bitcoin branch had even a single shovel of dirt removed. He even ran hashcash on his mailserver in the early 2000s. 

Like many Bitcoiners at the time (including myself), Yuval saw the original Bitcoin article on Slashdot in 2010 and promptly dismissed the entire idea as silly and unworkable. Later in 2013 he realized that Bitcoin was still around, chugging along and producing a block roughly every ten minutes, but still Yuval did not act to get more involved. 

Eventually in 2015 he took advantage of an offer someone made to sell him some, and that did the trick. Actually owning some bitcoin himself was the last nudge he needed to really go down the rabbithole. 

Sifting Through The Noise

Through the beginning of his time in this space Yuval focused very heavily on researching different privacy coins. 

When asked what made privacy such an important area of focus for him, he said this: “Realizing my silly impulse buys or poor choice of wallet software was being recorded on-chain for all to see, and possibly making me an easy target if Bitcoin was going to be outlawed one day.”

Despite all of the different approaches and potential advances of privacy coins at the time, nothing fully convinced him that they were a comprehensive solution despite all the progress they had made in different areas. 

“Even as I realized I only really believe in Bitcoin, impostor syndrome kept me trying to learn about all the things. By that point the rate at which new things to understand were being made up was orders of magnitude more than I could keep up with, but it took me a while to stop trying,” he said about that time period. 

For a while he simply lurked on Reddit and Bitcoin Twitter, soaking in what was going on but not really participating to any degree besides researching and learning. The first community he actively participated in was an open voice chat server called the Dragon’s Den that he heard about on the Bitcoin podcast Block Digest (Disclosure: the author both operated the chat server and co-hosted the podcast in question). 

WabiSabi And Wasabi 2.0

Yuval was one of the designers of the WabiSabi protocol implemented in Wasabi Wallet 2.0. WabiSabi was a protocol designed to facilitate coinjoins of flexible denominations as opposed to every output having to be the exact same amount. He was quick to point out that it was simply combining an aspect of confidential transactions with anonymous credentials, something Jonas Nick prototyped already for an ecash implementation. 

One important thing to make clear is that WabiSabi is simply the mechanism replacing blind signatures for users to interact with the coordinator and accomplish building a coinjoin transaction, it is not a part of how those coinjoin transactions are structured or look on-chain. It was however designed specifically to allow coinjoin transactions to be structured with arbitrary amounts without being a point of failure that could deanonymize users trying to create such transactions to the coordinating server. 

While Wasabi 2.0 did implement the WabiSabi protocol itself, the zkSNACKs team ignored almost the entirety of the research and work Yuval did on the structure of arbitrary amount coinjoin transactions. He did this work in order to ensure that the transactions WabiSabi was coordinating were sufficiently private, and did not implement behaviors or transaction structures that could undo user privacy after the fact. 

“Where it went wrong is death by a thousand cuts, with the primary cause of that being that nopara73 and molnard refused to learn anything about how to avoid the same mistakes that were already made in Wasabi [1.0.]” 

Expanding on that he said, “Everything from coin selection, to when the decisions about what output values to use, to when CoinJoins are done, to how Tor is utilized had corners cut and was implemented based on vibes with no understanding of the underlying mathematics. Even the game theoretical assumptions necessary for the denial of service concept to really work do not hold in any rigorous sense.” 

As a specific example of general incompetence he witnessed at zkSNACKs he said this, “A related ‘fun’ fact, even though for years zkSNACKS claimed they kept no logs, the unnecessary use of mostly default configuration nginx to serve the website using the same host as the coordinator service meant that logs were in fact being kept.”

He ultimately left zkSNACKs due to his disapproval of the corners the company was cutting, and his unwillingness to participate in that. 

Yuval’s current opinion on Wasabi Wallet, especially given the current environment of multiple people running Wasabi 2.0 coordinators, is that no one should use a coordinator server unless they trust that server to not take advantage of implementation and protocol flaws to deanonymize them. 

The State Of Things

“Privacy is a human right, but in Bitcoin it’s also a personal safety issue for more or less anyone on a long enough time horizon.”

Yuval’s view on the current state of Bitcoin privacy is not the rosiest. He has a number of concerns with the general landscape as it stands now. Specifically custodial exchanges being overzealous in their refusal to interact with users who make use of privacy tools. He sees nothing about the use of privacy tools preventing you from selectively disclosing information to an exchange when required. 

“There’s a difference between sharing your information with exchanges you trust and by extension regulators and broadcasting that for the entire world to see,” he said. 

Apathy from users is another thing that concerns him. Many users do not care about their privacy, if they even consider it, and the use of privacy tools among Bitcoin users is realistically a very small thing. In some social circles there is even a stigma around privacy. “…apathy compounds this stigmatization, effectively normalizing the absence of privacy[.] Exchanges don’t lose many customers if they refuse to serve customers that use privacy tech,” he said. 

He isn’t very happy with the current state of privacy tools either. 

“[R]ent seeking “privacy wallets” snake oil peddlers have poisoned the well. Their zero-sum brainworm infestations led them to spend their time shit slinging in twitter feuds instead of god forbid opening a textbook or academic paper. This toxic discourse also alienated users, feeding into the apathy and the stigmatization.”

Ultimately all of these concerns are rooted in social issues, how people or businesses act, how people react to others actions, etc. That is how they must ultimately be solved. 

“Without sufficient user demand for privacy tech and for the normalization of its use Bitcoin is one hell of a surveillance tool.”

Spiral

In September 2023 Yuval was hired full time by Spiral to work full-time on Bitcoin privacy research and development. Given that many of the issues with current coinjoin implementations stem from their dependence on a centralized coordinator server, Yuval has decided to focus his work on decentralized coinjoins. 

As such, at Spiral he is working on decentralizing coinjoin coordination and improving the ability to analyze and optimize multiparty transaction structures for privacy. 

“My long term goals are to see through my now more developed ideas for CoinJoin. Privacy should have close to 0 marginal cost, or high fees will deter its use. It should also not be a “product” that grifters can shill to make a quick buck by deceiving uninformed users. And finally it should be strong and robust, primarily against intersection attacks.” 

[An intersection attack is an attack taking advantage of mixed coins being spent in the same transaction(s) together improperly to deanonymize their history.]

He is currently contributing to the rust-payjoin library maintained by Dan Gould to work towards his ultimate goal of a decentralized coinjoin protocol.

“Payjoin is currently [specified] as a 2 party collaborative transaction construction protocol. Although this only achieves the first of these two goals, generalizing it to multiple parties provides the opportunity to do the third one properly, potentially in any wallet.”

Covenants

Yuval thinks that covenants are a valuable improvement to the Bitcoin protocol, but thinks that the current set of covenant proposals is made out to be more impactful in the long term than they actually would be alone. 

“The current favorites, CTV+CSFS, seem like a significant step forward, but the way I see it wouldn’t suffice for the kind of long term scaling improvements we’d need for global adoption, even if CTV is generalized into TXHASH.”

He is a fan of Varops concept from Rusty Russel’s Great Script Restoration proposal as a general mechanism to constrain more complicated covenants or other opcodes to prevent them from making block validation too expensive for users. 

“I’m sad to say I also find many of the discussions to be disappointingly tribal, with many words spent arguing in circles about why one’s preferred opcode is the best hammer because look how many problems look like a particular kind of nail if you squint hard enough and you’re such an idiot and on top of that clearly dishonest for not sharing my preferences.”

Overall he thinks the conversation around covenants is poorly managed, with too much focus being given to individual covenant proposals rather than considering what kinds of use cases we want to enable, and which use cases we do not want to enable, and working backwards from there to design appropriate proposals to service the desired use cases. 

Use It Or Lose It

Regarding what average Bitcoiners can do to improve their own privacy, or support privacy in general, he had this to say: 

“Accept that there is no magical solution, we’re kind of stuck with the Bitcoin we’ve got as far as the transaction graph. Then critically assess what solutions are available, affordable, and safe to use, and use them. “

Ultimately privacy requires everyone to take action. So what do people do? Lightning offers some improved degree of privacy, there is still Joinmarket and Wasabi (with the disclaimers from above). Do what you can. Investigate the tools, verify what you can, and make sure you appropriately consider who you are trying to stay private from and how much effort it will take to do so. 

“Even if you don’t think you need privacy today, at least figure out what you could afford to use if you might need it tomorrow, so you don’t get caught off guard. Also consider that the people who do really need it today can’t have it without those who can live without it, so if you want to have that option tomorrow, you should exercise it today. Use it or lose it.”

This post Bitcoin Without Privacy Is A Surveillance System first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Shinobi.

Bitcoin Magazine

Jameson Lopp: Bitcoin Is Not A Finished Project

In the beginning of April at the MIT Bitcoin Expo I was able to sit down with Jameson Lopp to discuss the current state of and future of Bitcoin. 

Jameson co-founded Casa, a multisig self-custody service, with Jeremy Welch in 2017 after a long stint as a software engineer at Bitgo, another multisig service based company. He has been involved in the Bitcoin space since 2012 as a software developer and independent researcher. 

Lopp is famously known for a swatting incident in 2017 during the blocksize wars, where someone attempted to have the police storm into his home under the mistaken belief that Jameson was holding hostages. After that incident he went completely off grid, changing his residence and living habits to ensure his name is not available anywhere in public record. 

We discussed, very briefly, address poisoning attacks. After that subject, we had a broad discussion about the current state of Bitcoin development and Bitcoin itself as a protocol and project, including what is needed for its success in the long term. 

Watch the interview here: 

This post Jameson Lopp: Bitcoin Is Not A Finished Project first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Shinobi.

Bitcoin Magazine

ruya Becomes First Islamic Bank to Offer Bitcoin and Virtual Asset Investments

In a landmark development for Islamic finance and digital banking, ruya (رويا), the UAE’s digital-first Islamic bank, has become the first Islamic bank globally to offer customers direct access to virtual asset investments, including Bitcoin, through its mobile app, according to an announcement.

The new service is made possible through a strategic partnership with Fuze, a licensed leader in virtual asset infrastructure. Together, ruya and Fuze aim to provide a secure and ethical entry point into the digital economy, with services that are fully Shari’ah-compliant and aligned with the principles of Islamic finance.

“At ruya, we are committed to transforming the financial landscape in the UAE by offering forward-thinking services while staying true to our mission of ethical Islamic banking,” said Christoph Koster, CEO of ruya. “By integrating virtual assets into our investment platform, we aim to empower our customers to participate in the digital economy sustainably and responsibly. We can also assure our customers that the virtual assets we are offering on our ruya investment platform are Shari’ah-compliant, providing much-needed certainty.”

The launch comes at a time of rapid growth in the UAE’s virtual asset sector. In the year ending June 2024, the country received more than $30 billion in virtual assets, marking a 42% year-on-year increase, significantly outpacing the regional average of 11.7%, according to the announcement. The move underscores the UAE’s emergence as a major hub for digital finance in the MENA region.

“Partnering with ruya is a big step towards making virtual assets a seamless part of everyday banking,” said Mohammed Ali Yusuf (Mo Ali Yusuf), Co-Founder and CEO of Fuze. “Together, we’re combining Fuze’s cutting-edge infrastructure with ruya’s commitment to ethical Islamic banking.”

Unlike other platforms that encourage speculative crypto trading, ruya’s offering is embedded within a curated investment framework designed to support long-term financial growth, the company stated in the announcement. It will focus on transparency, fairness, and ethical investing—core tenets of Islamic finance.

To ensure accessibility and informed decision-making, ruya is also offering support through community centers and hybrid call centers, where customers can receive expert guidance on virtual asset investing.

This post ruya Becomes First Islamic Bank to Offer Bitcoin and Virtual Asset Investments first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Nik.

Bitcoin Magazine

BlackRock’s Bitcoin ETF Sees $643 Million Inflows

BlackRock’s flagship Bitcoin ETF attracted $643.16 million in net inflows on April 23, marking its strongest single-day performance since January 21. The substantial inflow comes as bitcoin continues its upward momentum, trading above $92,000 following positive signals from the Trump administration regarding U.S.-China trade relations.

IBIT’s impressive showing contributed to a broader surge in Bitcoin ETF activity, with total spot Bitcoin ETF inflows reaching $916.91 million on Wednesday. This marks the fourth consecutive day of positive flows for U.S.-listed Bitcoin ETFs, bringing the week’s total inflows to approximately $2.23 billion.

ARK 21Shares Bitcoin ETF (ARKB) and Fidelity’s Wise Origin Bitcoin Fund (FBTC) also saw significant interest, recording inflows of $129.5 million and $124.4 million respectively. The strong performance across multiple funds suggests growing institutional conviction in bitcoin as an investment asset.

The surge in ETF interest coincides with bitcoin’s break above $90,000, fueled by President Trump’s hints at reducing Chinese import tariffs and confirmation that Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell will remain in his position. The new SEC Chairman Paul Atkins’ pro-bitcoin and crypto stance has further bolstered market sentiment.

Since their January launch, U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs have accumulated net inflows of over $37 billion, with total assets under management reaching $106.39 billion. BlackRock’s IBIT leads the pack, managing approximately $53.77 billion in net assets and recently winning “Best New ETF” at the annual etf.com awards.

The recent streak of positive flows marks a significant shift from early April’s outflows, suggesting renewed institutional confidence in bitcoin as both a strategic asset and inflation hedge. The trend appears supported by broader market dynamics, including a weakening U.S. dollar and expectations of Federal Reserve rate cuts in mid-2025.

However, market observers note that ongoing trade policy uncertainties and inflation concerns could still impact bitcoin’s trajectory. Investors continue to monitor ETF flows and macroeconomic developments as indicators of sustained institutional adoption.

At press time, Bitcoin trades at $92,840, maintaining its position above key psychological levels as institutional investment continues through regulated ETF vehicles.

This post BlackRock’s Bitcoin ETF Sees $643 Million Inflows first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Vivek Sen.

Bitcoin Magazine

Metaplanet Buys Additional ¥1.92 Billion Worth Of Bitcoin

Metaplanet Inc. has acquired an additional 145 bitcoin for approximately ¥1.926 billion ($13.6 million), reaching a significant milestone of 5,000 BTC in total holdings. The Tokyo Exchange-listed company executed the purchase at an average price of ¥13,280,472 ($93,327) per bitcoin.

Metaplanet’s bitcoin treasury is acquired for $428.1 million, with an average acquisition cost of $85,621 per coin. “This is a big step forward in our aim to become one of the world’s leading bitcoin holding companies,” Metaplanet CEO Simon Gerovich said in a statement. “We will lead the global bitcoin race from Japan.”

The company’s aggressive accumulation strategy follows its successful capital raise in mid-2024, structured through zero-discount moving strike warrants. The funding was dubbed “Asia’s largest-ever” bitcoin-focused capital raise.

Metaplanet’s proprietary BTC Yield metric, which measures bitcoin-per-share growth, reached 121.1% YTD. The company aims to accumulate 10,000 BTC by the end of 2025 and 21,000 BTC by 2026.

The company’s bitcoin strategy mirrors that of U.S.-based Strategy, with both firms focusing on bitcoin as a treasury reserve asset. Metaplanet now ranks among the top 10 publicly listed bitcoin holders globally.

The acquisition comes as bitcoin trades around $92,800, with institutional interest continuing to grow through various investment vehicles including ETFs and corporate treasury allocations.

This post Metaplanet Buys Additional ¥1.92 Billion Worth Of Bitcoin first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Vivek Sen Bitcoin.

Bitcoin Magazine

Russia’s Finance Ministry and Central Bank to Launch Crypto Exchange for “Super-qualified Investors”

Russia’s Ministry of Finance and the Bank of Russia are set to jointly launch a cryptocurrency exchange designed exclusively for super-qualified investors, as part of a broader effort to bring crypto operations into a formal regulatory framework, according to a RBC report.

“Together with the Central Bank, we will launch a crypto exchange for super-qualified investors. Crypto assets will be legalized, and crypto operations will be brought out of the shadows. Naturally, not within our country, but those operations that have been carried out today within the framework of the experimental legal regime,” said Finance Minister Anton Siluanov during a recent ministry meeting, as reported by RBC.

The move follows a proposal by the Central Bank to introduce an experimental legal regime (ELR) for three years, allowing a select group of investors to legally trade cryptocurrencies. The concept centers around a new investor category—super-qualified investors—defined by strict wealth and income thresholds.

Previously, the Central Bank suggested that this status be granted to individuals with at least ₽100 million in securities or deposits, or annual income exceeding ₽50 million. However, the Finance Ministry has indicated that these requirements are not final.

“Perhaps it will be in this format or these indicators will be somehow adjusted in one direction or another – this is possible. I think there will be a wide range of discussions,” said Osman Kabaloev, Deputy Director of the Ministry’s Financial Policy Department.

The initiative is already gaining traction among financial institutions. In March, Vladimir Krekoten, Managing Director for Sales and Business Development at the Moscow Exchange, confirmed readiness to launch derivatives trading linked to cryptocurrencies, saying the platform is at “maximum level of readiness” and could begin operations in 2025.

The Saint Petersburg Stock Exchange (SPB Exchange) has expressed similar ambitions. “SPB Exchange supports initiatives aimed at expanding the investment opportunities of investors and diversifying their strategies. We plan to start trading products tied to the value of cryptocurrencies,” a representative told RBC Investments.

While some firms see this as a transformative shift, others remain skeptical. Igor Danilenko, head of asset management at Renaissance Capital, dismissed crypto as a viable asset class: “There are many ways to protect yourself from inflation without resorting to tokens without any real collateral, which depend on the influx of new buyers and are very similar to a pyramid scheme in essence.”

This post Russia’s Finance Ministry and Central Bank to Launch Crypto Exchange for “Super-qualified Investors” first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Nik.