From Mining Bitcoin to Orbiting Earth: The Unbelievable Journey of Chun Wang In a world where Bitcoin is mined deep in data centers, who would’ve guessed one of its pioneers would one day orbit the Earth? Chun Wang, co-founder of legendary Bitcoin mining pool F2Pool, is no stranger to breaking ground—or hash rates. But now, he’s pushing boundaries far beyond blockchain. This April, Wang will blast off as commander of SpaceX’s Fram2 mission, becoming the first Bitcoiner in history to orbit both poles of the Earth. From the icy edges of the North and South Poles to the fire of mining rigs in China, and now to the silence of space, Wang’s journey is nothing short of extraordinary. After leaving China in 2015 and gaining Maltese citizenship, the globe-trotting crypto entrepreneur has set his sights on the ultimate frontier: space exploration. What makes this mission more than just a ride? It’s the first true polar orbit crewed mission in history—a trajectory that will carry Wang and his team directly over Earth’s poles, opening new possibilities for climate research, polar observation, and perhaps, one day, off-world Bitcoin mining. From code to cosmos, Chun Wang is proving that when you follow the decentralization rabbit hole far enough… you might just end up in orbit.

Nostr: "I'm in it for a GM from Matt Odell!"

Less than 1 Mio bitcoin left

“One piece of advice. Research has shown that happiness obtained by buying things is fleeting, because you get used to them. Better to invest in experiences and memories, because they'll be with you always.” - Hal Finney

Weekend

The post shows Hal was more liberal in his view, allowing for a range of banking models to develop on top of Bitcoin. He envisioned a system where both fractional reserve and fully backed banks could operate competitively, with users free to choose the level of risk they accept. This aligns with the principles of a free market, where outcomes are determined by voluntary participation rather than imposed restrictions. Bitcoin was designed to remove the need for trust in third parties, not to dictate how others must use it. If individuals choose to place their coins with a custodian, whether fractional or full reserve, that is their decision. The protocol does not enforce behavior. It simply provides a sound monetary base that cannot be inflated or censored. Ultimately, those who do not trust banks have the ability to hold their own keys and verify every transaction independently. That is the power of Bitcoin.

Self hosted @Public_Pool_BTC has just solved a block That’s absolutely wild! At 1.46 TH/s, the odds of solo-mining a block are about 1 in 7,850 years at current network hashrate. You were more likely to be struck by lightning 7 times in your life and win the Powerball jackpot on the same day than to hit that block in under 24 hours. Bitaxe Gamma with god-tier RNG. Respect. 🫡

The Mempool Open Source Project®

Explore the full Bitcoin ecosystem with The Mempool Open Source Project®. See the real-time status of your transactions, get network info, and more.

Before Bitcoin: The Origins of Halving in Code and Science Before Bitcoin, the idea of halving wasn’t used in money, but it appeared in many areas of computing and technology. Satoshi Nakamoto’s decision to halve Bitcoin’s block rewards every 210,000 blocks created a fixed supply and digital scarcity. While this was new in monetary design, the concept of reducing something by half over time was already well-known in code and science. One early example is in internet protocols. In the 1980s, TCP/IP used a method to control traffic flow called congestion control. When the network detected packet loss, it cut the rate of data transfer in half. This helped avoid overload and kept the system stable. The same principle applies to Bitcoin’s halving, which slows the issuance of new coins. In Bitcoin’s code, Satoshi used a simple bit shift to perform the halving. Instead of dividing with standard arithmetic, the code shifts bits to the right, which divides by powers of two. This was a common technique in older programming languages like C, where performance mattered and bit operations were faster than division. Another place where similar math appeared was in networking retry systems. When a connection failed, the system wouldn’t retry immediately. Instead, it waited, doubling the delay each time. This is known as exponential backoff. The wait time increased as a power of two, using the same mathematical structure as Bitcoin’s halving, just applied in the opposite way. Hardware also used halving. Early CPUs, when faced with overheating, often cut their clock speeds in half to cool down while staying operational. The logic was straightforward: reduce the workload to manage resources better. In video games, especially role-playing games, rewards often decreased over time. As players leveled up, the experience points gained from tasks shrank, often using a halving formula. This created a sense of progression while managing the pace of the game. Hashcash, a pre-Bitcoin proof-of-work system used to fight spam, also followed similar ideas. It didn’t halve rewards but increased the effort required to send repeated messages. The more someone used the system, the harder it became, using powers of two to scale difficulty. Satoshi didn’t invent halving, but he applied it in a new way. By using code to reduce supply predictably, he introduced a form of scarcity that didn’t rely on trust or central control. The halving mechanism came from familiar places in technology, reimagined for a monetary system. Bitcoin’s total supply adds up to 21 million coins because of a mathematical series where each reward is half the previous one. This sum converges to a finite number, creating certainty in supply through a simple rule. Halving, as a concept, had a long history before Bitcoin. Satoshi took a pattern that worked in many systems and gave it new meaning through money.

Good morning Bitcoin echo chamber…

“One must acknowledge with cryptography no amount of violence will ever solve a math problem.” - Jacob Appelbaum

“I am fascinated by Tim May’s crypto-anarchy. Unlike the communities traditionally associated with the word ‘anarchy,’ in a crypto-anarchy the government is not temporarily destroyed but permanently forbidden and permanently unnecessary.” -Wei Dai

Bitcoin = RPOW + consensus + decentralization.

“Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth.” -Albert Einstein

“Everything the State says is a lie, and everything it has it has stolen.” -Nietzsche

“Privacy is necessary for an open society… We cannot expect governments, corporations, or other large faceless organizations to grant us privacy out of their beneficence.” - Eric Hughes

“What is needed is an electronic payment system based on cryptographic proof instead of trust, allowing any two willing parties to transact directly with each other without the need for a trusted third party.” -Satoshi Nakamoto

“Computer technology is on the verge of providing the ability for individuals and groups to communicate and interact with each other in a totally anonymous manner.” -Tim May

Lucifer gave light, Prometeus gave fire, Satoshi gave Bitcoin — and none asked permission.

On Stablecoins and System Integrity There has been increasing discussion around the utility of dollar-backed stablecoins within decentralized systems. While these instruments are marketed as a means to facilitate adoption and bridge to legacy finance, they introduce several structural issues that compromise the foundational principles of peer-to-peer electronic cash. First, stablecoins rely on centralized custodians. This is fundamentally at odds with a trust minimized system. Any asset that can be frozen or reversed by a third party is subject to the same limitations as traditional banking. It inherits the risks of regulatory capture, counterparty failure, and censorship, nullifying the advantages of decentralized networks. Second, pegging value to fiat currencies such as the US dollar effectively ties the system back to inflationary monetary policies. One of the primary motivations for Bitcoin was to create a currency with predictable issuance and resistance to arbitrary monetary expansion. Stablecoins maintain dependency on fiat, and therefore, do not solve the problem. They recreate it on a new platform. Third, widespread reliance on stablecoins introduces systemic risk. If a significant portion of activity is denominated in assets that require off-chain guarantees, any failure of the issuer could result in loss of funds or network disruption. These are single points of failure, which decentralized systems aim to eliminate. Ultimately, stablecoins do not reduce trust! They shift it from governments to corporations. In practice, this can lead to greater surveillance and control over user funds, particularly when used at scale. The goal should not be to replicate the legacy financial system with new tools, but to create an alternative that is inherently resistant to control, self-sovereign, and secure by design. Stability may be desirable, but it should not come at the cost of decentralization. Systems that rely on trust will always be vulnerable. Decentralization only works when trust is minimized through code, not reintroduced through custodians.

All aboard the money train! Let’s ride it straight to Valhalla …no stops, no brakes. Bitcoin moonshot 🚂🚃🚃