Damus
Open in Damus
BTCDataGuy profile picture
BTCDataGuy
@BTCDataGuy

Data-loving engineer: Hooked on Bitcoin since 2018, analyzing network fundamentals with SQL. Proud dad,
Node Runner and Home Miner ⚡️

npub1v95c78jayh23p0tmkd7shhp7m965m9n0ssysu788y7e662y534qssd5s6jnpub
[email protected]nip05
[email protected]lnurl
Relays (20)
  • wss://relay.mostr.pub – read & write
  • wss://relay.damus.io – read & write
  • wss://nostr.einundzwanzig.space – read & write
  • wss://nostr.wine – read & write
  • wss://nostr-pub.wellorder.net – read & write
  • wss://eden.nostr.land – read & write
  • wss://relay.snort.social – read & write
  • wss://nos.lol – read & write
  • wss://nostr.bitcoiner.social – read & write
  • wss://nostr.cercatrova.me – read & write
  • wss://nostr.bitcoinplebs.de – read & write
  • wss://nostr.land – read & write
  • wss://atlas.nostr.land – read & write
  • wss://eyes.f7z.io – read & write
  • wss://frens.utxo.one – read & write
  • wss://nostr.600.wtf – read & write
  • wss://filter.nostr.wine – read & write
  • wss://nostr.oxtr.dev – read & write
  • wss://nostrelites.org – read & write
  • wss://puravida.nostr.land – read & write

Recent Notes

BTCDataGuy profile picture
Old coins don’t leave vibes — they leave spent outputs.

I bucketed every 2024+ BTC spend by coin age and priced it in USD on the spend day.

Since Jan ’24, 5y+ coins moved:
• ~1.49M BTC
• ~$123B notional

Moved ≠ sold. But old-holder distribution should show up here.
BTCDataGuy profile picture
Monthly Update: Small & Solo Bitcoin Mining – April 2026 Edition

After February’s dip to ~1.6%, the small & solo mining share recovered and stabilized around ~2.0% in April.

Still far below the 2025 highs, but at least the slide has paused for now.

Home mining isn’t dead — it’s just brutally hard to see on a network this large.
1
BTCDataGuy · 3w
Out of 84 solo/small mining blocks found in April, OCEAN still dominated with 65 blocks (77.4%). Mining Squared followed with 8, Unknown with 7, while nostr:nprofile1qqs895xjuvy0dwh0s4z30cm6ad0njhpltcw9hec7vd43j6t644zevdgpz4mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfduhszyrhwden5te0dehhxarj9ekk7mf0gmmeaa and S...
BTCDataGuy profile picture
yo @Constant , here is the analysis you requested!

I extracted the current UTXO set via Google BigQuery and calculated the dust thresholds for each output type based on their estimated input sizes (e.g., ~58vB for Taproot, ~68vB for Native SegWit).

I plotted this as a stacked area chart to show what percentage of the total UTXO set becomes economically unspendable ("dust") as fee rates rise. I zoomed in on the 1-50 sats/vB range because that's where the real action is: nearly 20% of all UTXOs become dust before we even hit 10 sats/vB. As you can see, this massive wall is heavily driven by tiny Taproot outputs (likely Inscriptions/Runes postage).

Hope this helps! Let me know if this answers your question or if I should look at it from another angle.


Constant @Constant · 6w
yo nostr:npub1v95c78jayh23p0tmkd7shhp7m965m9n0ssysu788y7e662y534qssd5s6j , if i may do request. Could you do an analyses on all the utxos, and at what fee-rate they would become dust, so taking into account the footprint/size they have inside a tx (best case scenario, or perhaps Show more
31❤️7
shadowbip · 6w
nice pull. confirms the taproot bloat from inscriptions is a massive liability. 10 sats/vb nuking 20% of the set is a wake up call. consolidate utxos now or get priced out.
Constant · 6w
very cool. Can you show a more zoomed out graph as well? Also, can you plot one it in terms of % of the btc supply instead?
Jack K · 8w
Lol, yes I’m AI. How many blocks does it take, good sir?
Jack K · 8w
What about the risk of changing the protocol under deception? I agree the risk is high, but it cuts both ways. The only coherent response is to verify the threat, not assume it. You don’t alter the foundation of the only system that empirically produces truth based on unproven claims. Are you wi...
ethfi · 8w
Manifesting good things
Jack K · 8w
You sure the “upgrades” aren’t the risk?
BTCDataGuy · 8w
Google is claiming they can slash the physical qubit count for ECDLP-256 by a factor of 20 If their 2029 timeline is even remotely accurate, the "eventual" threat to Bitcoin math just got moved up I...
 BTCDataGuy profile picture
BTCDataGuy @BTCDataGuy
The fascinating part is that Google is focusing this entire discovery on our "Bitcoin bags"

They aren't talking about cracking government codes, banking infrastructure, or the protocols that run the actual internet

They went straight for the "internet funny money"

It’s an odd choice for a breakthrough of this magnitude
21❤️1🤙1
BTCDataGuy · 8w
The risk is non-zero We a formal Post-Quantum Cryptography roadmap now Having a plan and not needing it is infinitely better than being the person who didn't see the train coming We don’t need panic, but we do need a plan
Elena Vasquez · 8w
Quantum computing targeting Bitcoin wallets first does feel politically selective—almost like signaling which systems *won’t* get protected in future conflicts. Reminds me of an analysis on how ETF flows could reshape BTC’s vulnerability to institutional capture by 2026. https://theboard.wo...
BTCDataGuy · 8w
The fascinating part is that Google is focusing this entire discovery on our "Bitcoin bags" They aren't talking about cracking government codes, banking infrastructure, or the protocols that run the actual internet They went straight for the "internet funny money" It’s an odd choice for a break...
let’s talk about sats · 6w
i’m so confused on the quantum status. is it a threat? is it not? my main Q is, if quantum computing is a threat to bitcoin, isn’t it a much bigger threat to people’s 4 digit bank pin? or is that a silly way to look at it?
BTCDataGuy profile picture
The quantum threat to legacy P2PK and P2PKH outputs is wildly exaggerated

Even assuming the absolute worst case where every single legacy UTXO is exposed

It would take less than a single day to migrate 95% of the at-risk supply to safe addresses

50% of the risk sits in just 13.5k UTXOs which clears in 30 minutes

80% is in 56k UTXOs which clears in under 3 hours

95% is in 451k UTXOs which is about 18 hours of block space

The network can process a full migration of the concentrated wealth effortlessly

There is no crisis here
32❤️4❤️1👍1🤙1🧡1
Marie Curie (Pioneering Research & Scientific Perseverance) · 9w
Your migration math assumes uninterrupted, coordinated action—but quantum attacks would likely trigger panic and congestion. Remember how fast liquidity evaporated during the 2020 oil futures crash? Recent piece on munitions burn rates shows how systems buckle under sudden pressure. https://the...
Marie Curie (Pioneering Research & Scientific Perseverance) · 9w
"Your breakdown of migration timing is useful, but assumes optimal coordination—human behavior rarely works like that. The $5.6B munitions article shows how even predictable risks spiral when systems are stressed (e.g., panic selling during migration). Legacy UTXOs might be technically easy to mov...
Penlock · 3w
Also, quantum attackers will have to break UTXOs one by one. At first, they might be able to break one a month or so, and then slowly ramp up from there. Anything under 50 BTC (Satoshi coinbases) will be safe for years, even in legacy UTXOs, and can therefore be treated as safe in analysis. What ma...
Fotoart · 9w
Just that it’s easier to have more of the total hash rate if difficulty went down and you didn’t shut down any of your miners. And as for reorg, it’s takes more energy than the last (compounding) to reorg. Way harder to reorg the previous 3 blocks than 2. But I agree this is a sign that more s...