𝘛𝘦𝘯𝘴𝘰𝘳𝘍𝘭𝘰𝘸 ττ

Decentralized Intelligence | Bittensor ττ |
Privacy • Freedom • Community .⚡⚡

[𝘛𝘦𝘯𝘴𝘰𝘳𝘍𝘭𝘰𝘸 ττ @Tensor_Flow_]

@CyberMonkSt Gn fren 🫡

[Rapido @Rapido_ai]

Owners reducing Validators emissions don't understand they simply reduce stakers yield I think.

Don't forget who push your alpha token price, is it your revenues or your stakers ?

[𝘛𝘦𝘯𝘴𝘰𝘳𝘍𝘭𝘰𝘸 ττ @Tensor_Flow_]

👀

[RedTeam @_redteam_]

Our new website is live at https://t.co/rCq2gnvYUl.

It now tracks buybacks, conviction-locked alpha and monthly miner submissions live from the subnet, with the buyback wallet linked so anyone can verify it.

You can also step through simulations of each detection line, follow a single bypass through the immune loop until the countermeasure ships, and find all of our research, mining guides and miner and validator docs in one place.

Our new dashboard follows later this week.

bittensor:native

[𝘛𝘦𝘯𝘴𝘰𝘳𝘍𝘭𝘰𝘸 ττ @Tensor_Flow_]

@SiamKidd Will do, I will take a closer look later 👍

[𝘛𝘦𝘯𝘴𝘰𝘳𝘍𝘭𝘰𝘸 ττ @Tensor_Flow_]

@EdwardMcDonne12 @Laurau5mc 😂😂😂

[𝗗𝗥𝗘𝗔𝗗 𝗕𝗢𝗡𝗚𝗢 @DreadBong0]

This whole @const_reborn and #bittensor decentralisation debate is interesting to me..

Seen a lot of people questioning how much influence @const_reborn has over the protocol.. and whether thats a good thing for something geared towards decentralisation

I get the concerns in theory..

But I think people massively underestimate just how insanely difficult it is with what #bittensor is trying to achieve

We're talking about the creation of an entirely new economic system for producing intelligence

Its..

1. A massive fucking deal for society
2. Massively fucking complex

A system where people anywhere in the world.. with little obstacles.. can compete to build anything.. solve problems.. and get rewarded based on the value they produce.. in an open, permissionless arena.. and have it all just work at the network level.. plus held together by economic incentives.. that need to work globally at scale..

That is a ridiculously difficult thing to get right

I mean.. just look at how much #bittensor has already changed over the years..

We've gone from the early days of the network to an entire ecosystem of subnets.. dTAO.. changes to emissions and incentive mechanisms.. and now stuff like Gamma and eTAO

Everything is constantly evolving because they're still figuring out how the core parts should actually work

We've never seen anything quite like this before..

Its not like there is some fucking instruction manual sitting around that Const or others can follow

Some ideas will work brilliant.. some don't

Some mechanisms will just sing.. others will completely need rethinking

And yeah.. there's gonna be plenty of expensive mistakes along the way.. thats the cost of building something as fundamentally important as this

When I personally see @const_reborn challenging shit.. or proposing changes.. or pushing things in another direction to make things stronger..

I see someone who's spent years and years obsessing.. way more than you and me or anyone else.. over an insanely complicated system that is for the greater good.. and is still deeply invested in making it work

I think that means something and deserves a lot of credit

Now..

I've had pretty much no one on one time with @const_reborn over the past four years..

Apart from some group talk.. I've barely had any private conversation with the guy and he's not someone I've gone out my way to get close to.. I personally don't think we'd gel well and I'm perfectly cool with that

But that has absolutely fuck all to do with how I judge his work

I don't need to be someone's mate.. or agree with everything they say.. or even particularly warm to them personally.. to recognise when they're doing something pretty extraordinary

And when it comes to what @const_reborn has created and continues to build with #bittensor..

I have an enormous amount of respect for the man’s work

All thats to say..

I've no relationship with the guy.. no reason to glaze him or defend him.. but his actions and what he's achieved speaks for itself and should command respect

On to decentralisation..

It doesn't magically make every decision better or every system run smoother

Having hundreds of people vote on something doesn't mean they'll understand the technical consequences of that decision.. or the economics.. or the second order effects of the thing they're voting for

Sometimes.. you genuinely need someone with an exceptional understanding of the system to make those incredibly difficult calls

Especially when so much of the foundations are still being figured out

And this.. right now.. in #bittensor's current state and life cycle.. is where I personally think @const_reborn involvement is incredibly valuable.. and possibly necessary

But.. in saying that.. I understand the complication

The whole point of #bittensor is to create an alternative to intelligence being controlled by a handful of powerful companies or individuals..

A belief that open competition should matter more than permission..

Where no single organisation should get to decide who can participate in creating intelligence..

That the network should be bigger than any one person

Well.. those principles will have to apply to #Bittensor itself eventually

We can't spend years arguing that intelligence shouldn't depend on a handful of powerful people.. only to create an alternative that ends up relying on one extraordinarily important guy or girl

Even if that individual happens to be someone who's capable of being the person in charge

Its not whether @const_reborn should have less influence tomorrow.. Its how #bittensor gradually gets to a point where it no longer needs anyone like him to keep progressing

And I think @const_reborn completely understands this

More developers who understand the protocol inside out..

More people capable of proposing genuine improvements to the network..

Better governance models.. less reliance on small groups.. a move away from centralised structures..

And yes.. eventually an architecture that keeps chugging along and improving regardless of who comes and goes

True decentralisation

Not decentralisation for the sake of being able to say you are

We shouldn't be rushing to distribute authority before the networks even figured out how to make any of that work properly yet

But the goal should always be working towards making #bittensor more resilient.. more independent.. more distributed.. and harder for anyone to control

But imo.. timing matters a lot here

#Bittensor is still so fucking young relative to what its trying to become..

The mechanisms are still evolving.. the subnets are still getting to grips with how to optimise everything

We're only beginning to explore what happens when these different markets start producing valuable services and potentially buying and consuming eachothers intelligence

There's so much fucking work left to do

Me?

I'd much rather have @const_reborn heavily involved during these critical stages than rush towards some half ass baked governance structure.. that looks great on paper but ends up slowing everything down or creating a whole different set of problems

But.. that also can't become an excuse for keeping things centralised for too long..

Its both a race and a balancing act

Genuine progress towards distributing authority and access as the network matures

Actual changes to how decisions get made.. who can make them.. how the protocol continues developing without relying on any one guy

And I don't see anything wrong with backing @const_reborn's work while also expecting that to happen

I think you should be able to have enormous respect for someones vision and still want them to build something that eventually outgrows their own influence

And again.. I think @const_reborn understands that better than us all

So yeah.. I genuinely believe #bittensor is better off right now with Const continuing to play such an important role

But.. long term?

I think.. the greatest thing @const_reborn could ever achieve is building something so fucking successful.. so resilient.. and so decentralised.. that it no longer needs him

Because then.. #bittensor will actually become what its supposed to be

$TAO

[Punisher ττ ✠ @CryptoZPunisher]

Tomorrow...

In the meantime, if you understand what this message is about, it might be time to pull your TAO out of these subnets. Something smells seriously fishy, to put it mildly.

eTAO is exposing bad actors while giving the best builders a new way to demonstrate their conviction.

It's never too late to join the winning side and leave the dark side behind.

Looking forward to learning more about SN35, SN36, SN70, and SN103. 🍿

[𝘛𝘦𝘯𝘴𝘰𝘳𝘍𝘭𝘰𝘸 ττ @Tensor_Flow_]

@CyberMonkSt Gn fren ⚡

[Rapido @Rapido_ai]

eTAO is live.

[𝘛𝘦𝘯𝘴𝘰𝘳𝘍𝘭𝘰𝘸 ττ @Tensor_Flow_]

@Rapido_ai 😂😂😂😂

[BittensorOG ττ @EdwardMcDonne12]

One thing is sure for humans. You cannot please 100% of the people 100% of the time. Many subnets have suffered tremendously from the sudden changes in how subnets work, and some have adapted and were lucky enough to be in a position to be able to adjust and benefit from them. I am sure alot of subnet owners have bad blood because of that, but they should feel lucky that they were able to extract Tao for as long as they did without producing anything of value. The changes are moving further away from ease of extraction and refining the emission rewards into high level competition. Humans don't like change, we love comfort and predictability. Bittensor is not that. It is a novel Network never before been done. It's transforming, mutating and evolving. Just the way it is. Many want the full decentralization to be on their time line, but its not that easy. So. If it comes down to one thing it is this. Do you believe that @const holds his original vision and mission as sacred or is he led by ego and extraction? I choose the former. He has much more to gain by seeing through his original philosophy than temporarily extracting after many many years of full dedication and building what it has become today. If your own greed gets in the way of making this choice then maybe being in $TAO is not for you.

[𝘛𝘦𝘯𝘴𝘰𝘳𝘍𝘭𝘰𝘸 ττ @Tensor_Flow_]

@EdwardMcDonne12 The question you ask is the only question one should answer.
Great post and I fully agree with you.

[𝘛𝘦𝘯𝘴𝘰𝘳𝘍𝘭𝘰𝘸 ττ @Tensor_Flow_]

Null Consensus in plain English

Yuma Consensus works like a committee. Every validator votes on who the best miners are, the maths finds a middle ground, and that determines pay. It caps subnets at 256 miners and uses about as much chain compute as you'd expect from multi-party consensus.

Null is a new OPTION subnet owners can switch to. It replaces the committee with whoever holds the most stake on that subnet. They decide alone — which miners get paid and how much. No voting. No consensus maths. No bond calculations.

Yuma stays the default on every subnet unless the owner opts in.

What changes

.Subnets can grow to 2,500 UIDs instead of 256.
.Weights get used exactly as submitted — no normalisation, no clipping, no rounding.
. Dividends flow proportionally to everyone with positive stake, not just active validators. You can also let people register by doing proof-of-work instead of paying TAO.

The upside

.2,500 miners per subnet is the headline. That's the scale Bittensor was supposed to reach but couldn't under Yuma's ceiling.
.Every epoch costs less to execute no consensus loop, no bond storage.
.Weight ratios are precise: if a validator says 50/50, miners get 50/50.
.Inactive wallets still earn dividends, which they don't on Yuma.
.PoW registration means joining without buying TAO first useful for onboarding small operators.

The downside

The top-staker controls the subnet. No checks, no second opinion. They can zero every miner's rewards in one epoch if they want to. It's plutocratic: the richest wallet wins, not the best operator. The subnet owner has no special override a whale can out-stake them and take over their own project.

Switching back to Yuma requires manually pruning from 2,500 UIDs down to 256. Multi-transaction work, not a toggle. A well-funded attacker only needs to out-stake the current leader to capture miner pay. On a small subnet that's cheap.

One more thing.

At 4,000 UIDs the epoch ran for ~7 seconds in testing. That's over the 4-second block limit. The 2,500 cap is the safe zone, but the ceiling is closer than on Yuma.

Summary:

Null trades safety for scale. Ten times the capacity, simpler chain economics, no consensus overhead. The cost is replacing distributed decision-making with whoever holds the most tokens. Makes sense for high-volume subnets with concentrated, trusted stake. Not for subnets that need decentralised governance.

Spec 474. Not on Finney yet. Subnet owners choose per-subnet.

As always DYOR

[Openτensor Foundaτion @opentensor]

Bittensor recently released Null Consensus, a major protocol update expanding subnet capacity from 256 to 2,500 participants.

It introduces a new way to determine miner rewards, giving subnet owners an alternative to Yuma Consensus.

[𝘛𝘦𝘯𝘴𝘰𝘳𝘍𝘭𝘰𝘸 ττ @Tensor_Flow_]

@CyberMonkSt @objktcom Gn mate.

[Punisher ττ ✠ @CryptoZPunisher]

FREE ALEX - A Question of Principles, Not Personalities.

Whether you like @DrocksAlex2 or not is beside the point.

The issue goes much deeper.

How can a network that champions decentralization, openness, and inclusivity justify excluding members of its own community simply because they disagree with certain decisions?

Since when should questioning decisions become a problem?

Bittensor claims to be building a system where the best ideas and merit should prevail. But how can we achieve that if critical voices are no longer welcome in the conversation?

[𝘛𝘦𝘯𝘴𝘰𝘳𝘍𝘭𝘰𝘸 ττ @Tensor_Flow_]

@CryptoZPunisher @DrocksAlex2 Wow.

[Rapido @Rapido_ai]

From the first stars to Bitcoin to an open network for intelligence, in under four minutes.

https://t.co/v19UhQ0A9S

Best with sound on.

[𝘛𝘦𝘯𝘴𝘰𝘳𝘍𝘭𝘰𝘸 ττ @Tensor_Flow_]

@Rapido_ai Boom 🫡