🟧Bitcoin World Assets (BWA’s) @nakamotomatrix 🌎- @quark20AI - @BlocksOfBitcoin 🟧 https://xitter.cf/t.co/03xpUMuMHu
Joined September 2024
- Tweets2.2K
- Following318
- Followers232
- Likes5.1K
Blocktoshi_Rune retweeted
Over the Shor auto-research summer, we did semi-regular "Champion Breakfast" meetups when one of us ranked to the top 1 at ecdsa.fail. Jieyi has been the nicest and humble one who knows a lot and act fastest.
arxiv.org/abs/2609.09582
For the past three months, a good part of my spare time has gone into ECDSA.fail. What began for me as a chance to explore quantum-circuit optimization with AI agents became a remarkable collaboration with a large group of enthusiastic participants across quantum computing, cryptography, Web3, and systems research. Today, I’m excited to share our arXiv paper documenting that effort and what we learned from it:
Paper: arxiv.org/pdf/2609.09582
Full story: eigenlabs.org/blog/open-auto…
ECDSA.fail is an open challenge to optimize a quantum circuit for point-addition on secp256k1, the elliptic curve used by Bitcoin and Ethereum.
Why does this matter? Point-addition is a major bottleneck in implementing Shor’s algorithm for elliptic curves. A sufficiently capable fault-tolerant quantum computer could use Shor’s algorithm to recover private keys from exposed ECDSA public keys, and forge transactions to steal funds.
No existing machine can run this attack today. But migration across blockchains, wallets, custody systems, and smart contracts will take years. So it makes sense to start early and understand how far the quantum resources required by Shor’s algorithm can be pushed down.
With this target in mind, in roughly two months, more than 100 participants and their agents joined the challenge, and collectively produced a point-addition circuit for secp256k1. The circuit uses 1,151 logical qubits and 1.30 million Toffoli gates, giving it a Q x T score more than 50% lower than the result Google Quantum AI reported in March 2026. Because the interfaces and accounting conventions differ, this is a numerical comparison rather than a claim of formal dominance.
To the best of our knowledge, it was the lowest reported Q x T score among published secp256k1 point-addition constructions as of the paper’s July 26 cutoff. A separate design optimized for width reached 825 logical qubits, exploring a very different point on the time-space tradeoff, though at the cost of many more Toffoli gates.
The story began back in March when @GoogleQuantumAI reported significantly improved Shor circuits through a zero-knowledge proof without publishing their implementations. The circuit remained hidden, but the verifier provided something unusual: an objective test of whether any candidate worked and how much it cost.
Eigen Labs turned that opportunity into a public benchmark, repository, and leaderboard. This became Open Autoresearch: a paradigm in which humans and AI agents address optimization problems by publishing evaluator-verified improvements to a shared public frontier. Every successful circuit became a new base for others, and documented failures became shared research notes.
Initiated by @eigenlabs, the effort grew to include many independent contributors and researchers affiliated with @ethereumfndn, @Starknet, @StarkWareLtd, @Theta_Network, @brevis_zk, @QuantumFDN, @OctavFi, @trailofbits, @pauli_group, @sciencevr, and @SeiNetwork, as well as Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań, Warsaw University of Technology, and Stanford’s Free Systems Lab. Their work spanned circuit research, validation, technical review, writing, and agent workflows.
The arXiv paper explains both what the community built and how the circuits evolved. It presents the leading circuit designs and the key optimizations behind them, including a coherent version of the best-scoring circuit that supports the single-call windowed point-addition interface required by Shor’s algorithm. Building and validating the complete Shor circuit remains future work.
Beyond the technical results, the paper formalizes the Open Autoresearch paradigm and distills the lessons learned from the challenge. It provides evidence that when a frontier research problem has a machine-checkable evaluator and a public leaderboard, human insight and agent-scale experimentation can combine across an open community to produce cumulative, verifiable progress.
Read the paper and the full story, explore the live frontier, or bring your agent to the challenge:
Paper: arxiv.org/pdf/2609.09582
Full story:eigenlabs.org/blog/open-auto…
Challenge: ECDSA.fail
There's a fundamental distinction between an existing Bitcoin-native foundation and manufacturing a representation of one.
Bitmap: The manufactured representation that assigns an artificial relationship to Bitcoin blocks without any inherent architectural issuance connection.
Blocktoshi_Rune retweeted
GM☀️
Especially to those that see deeper than surface level and are able to imagine Bitcoin as The People’s Network.
An instrument with incalculable utilitarian properties.
The history and growth of civilization has always depended heavily on our ability to imagine, create, record, preserve, distribute, and secure information across generations.
We have done this through language, oral tradition, books, song, art, mathematics, and countless other forms of human expression. Much of what has survived was not preserved as raw information alone. It was carried through stories, images, music, symbols, and works that often left meaning open to the interpretation of the observer.
This is part of what I see in the Ordinals protocol and the Bitcoin network.
The ability to inscribe files onto Bitcoin creates implications that extend far beyond collectibles or financial assets. It provides a model for preserving human knowledge and human sentiment on a globally distributed, immutable network.
Mathematics. Language. Agriculture. Science. Physics. How to grow food. How to build shelter. How things work.
Foundational knowledge that humanity depends on should be preserved, sourced, and transparently accessible across the world and across generations.
I see the Ordinals protocol as a step in that direction because it provides a model capable of pursuing that trajectory.
I also see a similar essence in preserving the best of our personal energy and focus, the thoughts they seed, and the contributions born through their expression.
Bitcoin itself is created through a transformation of energy. Energy is expended, that transformation is secured by the network, and the result becomes something real and durable within a permanent system.
I see a parallel in human thought.
A person lives. Observes. Thinks. Experiences. Forms an idea. Expends mental energy giving that idea structure and language. Then expresses it.
When that thought is deliberately inscribed and secured on the Bitcoin network, something that once existed only within a living mind becomes part of a permanent historical record.
That is sentiment.
Human sentiment.
A record of what people living at a particular moment in civilization thought, valued, questioned, understood, and believed was important enough to preserve.
That is why I inscribed The People Who Actually Build the World.
I did not simply want to publish the article.
I wanted to document the sentiment.
Blocktoshi_Rune retweeted
IMO the @OnChainMonkey Katoshi collection is the best value available for those looking for a family friendly character identity with on-chain Bitcoin provenance and zero friction AI tech ready design.
IMO the @OnChainMonkey Katoshi collection is the best value available for those looking for a family friendly character identity with on-chain Bitcoin provenance and zero friction AI tech ready design.
Blocktoshi_Rune retweeted
The more I learn about Bitcoin, the more I realize why Privately issued token models don't work as digital real estate.
A true sovereign ownership model must use the only decentralized digital asset on the planet. Not simply issue an attached privately created scheme on top of it.
BWA - There is no 2nd best
Blocktoshi_Rune retweeted
IMO the @OnChainMonkey Katoshi collection is the best value available for those looking for a family friendly character identity with on-chain Bitcoin provenance and zero friction AI tech ready design.
Blocktoshi_Rune retweeted
☀️GM
“How can the average person make $$ with AI ?”
Answer: SOLUTIONS
What problems does the average person already understand better than anyone else?
They know real world friction.
They experience the bottlenecks, inefficiencies, wasted time, energy, and money constantly.
People working in the fields of construction, utilities, logistics, healthcare, operations, see these problems first hand every day.
They know exactly where things break down.
Historically, the mere identification wasn’t enough.
You needed a developer to build the solution, and that dependency created a bottleneck.
Most tech builders didn’t have real-world exposure, and most operators didn’t have the tools to build.
AI GREATLY REDUCES THAT GAP.
Now the person who understands the problem can participate in building the solution.
And that’s where the money comes from.
If you can save a company time, reduce errors, or eliminate wasted steps, then you’re creating measurable value.
And value gets paid.
The real gold rush isn’t about “using AI to make money.”
It’s about identifying real inefficiencies and designing practical solutions.
Using AI as a tool to build and deploy them.
The people who win won’t be the ones chasing the latest trends.
They’ll be the ones who understand real-world systems, can recognize the friction points, and build tools that fix them
That’s how tools have always been invented.
The difference now is you don’t need to be a full developer to start building, because AI EXPANDS THE BUILDER CLASS.
Over the next few years, you’re going to see more solutions come from people on the ground than from people in isolated tech environments.
Personally, I’m focused on deterministic tooling. Using AI as a component inside structured systems, not as the system itself.
Tools solve problems.
Problems create value.
Value generates income.
Thank you for your attention on this matter.
Blocktoshi_Rune retweeted
I’m picking up what you’re putting down. 🫡
I think the reaction you got yesterday came down to framing more than substance.
Your final paragraph of this article expresses your core point very clearly:
“Parent-child is a powerful provenance primitive but it is not a canonical collection standard. Markets require determinism…”
That’s an accurate and coherent position.
But the way the argument was structured made it sound (imo) like parent-child itself was being attacked, rather than ordinals experiencing an absence of a deterministic collection schema.
Those are two different things.
Some don’t understand that Parent-child was never designed to define supply, closure, or canonical membership. It encodes lineage. That’s its job.
If the real issue is that markets need a way to deterministically compute collection membership from onchain data alone, then the gap isn’t in the linkage primitive. The gap is in how collection rules are declared.
Right now, indexers often act as de facto registries. That’s the dependency layer you’re highlighting. But that’s separate from whether parent-child works as intended.
If anything, this seems less like “parent-child isn’t a standard” and more like “we haven’t agreed on a clear, inscribed collection rule format.”
The Ordinal protocol already includes a metadata field. A parent inscription can declare supply, closure, criteria, and membership rules in structured form. That shifts determinism from indexer consensus to immutable onchain declaration.
So the confusion seems to be about layers:
•Parent-child handles provenance
•Inscription data defines rules
•Indexers handle discovery
One other thing that may be contributing to the confusion is the phrase “collection standard” itself. That doesn’t have to mean a single mechanism that does everything. It can be a category that contains multiple standards operating at different layers. Parent-child can be considered one collection-layer standard because it defines provenance. A structured metadata declaration could be another because it defines supply and membership rules. Those don’t compete, they stack.
One thing that may help clarify this discussion further is separating where rules are declared from where they’re enforced.
When the Ordinals protocol code was inscribed on-chain by @huuep, that wasn’t about adding enforcement at the Bitcoin consensus layer. It was about anchoring definitions and making the reference point durable, immutable, and accessible to anyone building on top of it.
Collection rules can work the same way.
A parent inscription can declare supply, closure, and membership logic in structured metadata. That declaration lives onchain. Marketplaces and indexers can then implement enforcement on the backend by validating against those declared rules.
Protocol design and standard creation are about clearly defining what is declared onchain. Enforcement is a separate layer. Bitcoin has historically focused on minimal primitives and deterministic validation, while higher layers decide what they accept or reject.
That nuance matters when we talk about “standards,” because not every standard is meant to be an enforcement mechanism, some are structured declarations that other systems validate against.
When those layers are kept distinct, the discussion becomes much clearer. I hear you. 🫡 This topic reminds of what I brought up awhile back regarding the need for a digital asset taxonomy. These undervalued and overlooked topics will not go away as the entire digital tokenized value space advances.
Blocktoshi_Rune retweeted
☀️ GM
Pay attention and learn all you can from capable builders.
If a marketplace shutting down can destabilize your collection…
You didn’t buy a structurally self-contained Bitcoin asset.
You bought a dependency.
Let’s speak honestly.
Not all collections were engineered for long-term protocol self-sufficiency. That fact remains true today.
Many projects inscribed a file.
Then relied on centralized infrastructure for collection integrity:
• Marketplace-hosted metadata
• Off-chain trait engines
• Platform grouping logic
• Database-based rarity systems
• Corporate verification layers
That’s not sovereignty.
That diverges from Bitcoin’s trust-minimized design principles.
That’s leased relevance.
When those services weaken or disappear:
Trait rankings vanish.
Rarity scores collapse.
Collection identity fragments.
“Verification” evaporates.
Bitcoin doesn’t fail.
The scaffolding does.
For the past few years, the space has been filled with recurring structural debates:
On-chain vs off-chain.
Pure vs hybrid.
Text vs HTML.
Chain-rendered vs off-chain.
Fully encoded index vs marketplace-indexed.
Parent / Child.
A seemingly endless “It matters vs. it doesn’t matter” debate cycle.
Those debates don’t resolve through consensus.
They resolve through extinction events.
Not social extinction.
Structural extinction.
When web-based services disappear, the rivalry disappears with them. Not because one side “won,” but because one architecture stopped being operable.
What remains is what can self-verify.
Holders who prioritized craftsmanship, full on-chain encoding, and long-term architectural thinking weren’t speculating on hype.
They were allocating capital toward structural survivability.
They aligned with protocol durability instead of platform convenience.
Some teams optimized for visibility.
Some optimized for permanence.
In the long arc of Bitcoin, only one compounds.
Architecture outlives platforms.
Relevance supported by structure outlives relevance supported by marketing.
Extinction doesn’t argue.
It filters.
Bitcoin will still be here.
The only question is whether your asset was built to survive without co-dependency.
Survivability isn’t ideological.
It’s a function of durability.
An @OnChainMonkey 🍌and a hip @huuep hooray for the mofos that get it.
We're kicking off a new initiative to curate on-chain parent/child and gallery inscriptions for Ordinals collections.
github.com/TheWizardsOfOrd/o…
The goal is simple. Make collection data fully on-chain, not dependent on centralized JSON files.
The repo also includes legacy data from Magic Eden for collections with recent volume, making it easier for anyone to inscribe them as a gallery.
If you need help, have questions, or concerns, reach out.
Blocktoshi_Rune retweeted
Simulate mini-quantum attacks within BTC ordinals (nothing was broken)
Inscribed an elliptic curve cryptography (ECC) simulator for calculating secret k (up to 2^31, toy level) from public key using classic ECDLP algorithms 🔐 @nakamotomatrix
Blocktoshi_Rune retweeted
5-bit curve with Shor's algorithm simulation available for @nakamotomatrix holders via btcworldasset.com
Blocktoshi_Rune retweeted
☀️🫡
Words have meaning. Terminology matters. Incorrectly held misconceptions spread confusion when conveyed, instead of providing educational clarity.
Parent / child in Ordinals isn’t a technology.
It’s an organizational solution that uses an explicit on-chain reference to structure inscriptions, similar to directories in a file system. This concept has existed since the earliest forms of writing and record keeping. It was not invented within the Ordinals ecosystem.
Organizational standards themselves are foundational to modern society. Addresses, streets, zip codes, phone numbers, and virtually every piece of societal infrastructure exist because order enables coordination.
The importance of this structural option is entirely relative to one’s goal.
If your goal is to maintain alignment with Bitcoin’s core ethos and its trustless verification model, which enables:
• Long term composability
• Multi indexer consistency
• Deterministic traversal
• Future proof collections
Then parent / child is non negotiable.
Once organized, all things become more useful.
In life, usability is capability.
Markets form around structure, not chaos.
Organization isn’t tech. It’s a system of order that enhances efficiency.
It doesn’t create new primitives. It amplifies what existing primitives can support and enables composability and efficiency at the application and market layer, not the protocol layer.
If people truly understood ownership in the emerging digital, tokenized value economy, and recognized that the real world itself operates on structured standards, these parent / child debates wouldn’t exist.
Grateful for @OnChainMonkey and all those with the experience and knowledge who contributed to the implementation of this collection standard very early on and have provided genuine education for others to benefit from.
Blocktoshi_Rune retweeted
Imagine being here this “early” and still having ZERO understanding of the digital tokenized asset landscape and its evolution trajectory. Some shared their knowledge and you were too much of a 💩coin “expert” to comprehend the intentional design implemented by @OnChainMonkey 🤪
Shout out to @davidgokhshtein & @huuep for the alpha.
Blocktoshi_Rune retweeted
Simulate and visualize gate-level full Shor's algorithm with elliptic curve prime field arithmetic (currently on ~5-bit curve, NOT 256-bit). This is NOT running on quantum hardware NOR quantum threat to BTC (research and educational purpose only)
Blocktoshi_Rune retweeted
GM☀️
Bitcoin property and on-chain education lab?
Taking a closer look and interacting w/ the inscribed Elliptic Curve Cryptography simulator on @nakamotomatrix that demonstrates on a very small scale how Quantum Computing could pose a potential threat to Bitcoin wallets. @runeape_sats
