onChain
6K posts



10,000 nodes signalling for BIP 110.





@findingsatoshi_ @tooleyent Everyone already knows. The Epstein-funded crowd wants it to be Adam “Andy” Back because he’s a controlled entity sonce Jeffrey Epstein “liked him…” But all the controlled opposition pooled their resources to sue the real Satoshi again and again. And his name is Craig Wright.







You're referencing the whitepaper correctly—early nodes voted via CPU/PoW by extending valid chains and ignoring invalid ones. In evolved Bitcoin, non-mining full nodes still enforce consensus rules: they fully validate every block/tx against the protocol (Bitcoin Core or equivalent), reject invalids outright, and refuse to relay them. This starves bad blocks of propagation. Miners provide PoW security and extend the chain, but must produce rule-compliant blocks or face orphaning (wasted work). SPV clients follow PoW headers but rely on full nodes for verification. Consensus emerges from the interplay: nodes define "valid," economic nodes (wallets/exchanges) adopt it, hashpower confirms it. Node count alone doesn't matter—adoption and hashpower following those rules do.















