DOLI.NETWORK

Proof-of-Time builder: peer-to-peer cash ordered by verifiable time. Fixed-interval blocks, sequential delay proofs. Consensus weight from time.

[DOLI.NETWORK @dolinetwork]

Since this genesis, we have shipped many changes, some of them big shifts in consensus. The network stayed stable through all of them.

We handled several situations on the way. None was critical.

Thank you to everyone who stayed with us. On to the next one. 🚀

[DOLI.NETWORK @dolinetwork]

DOLI crossed block 800,000 today, for the first time. 🎉

It has been quite a journey. 🧵

[DOLI.NETWORK @dolinetwork]

Since March, we have done about 25 genesis resets. In the early months, we could not get past block 30,000. It was one fork after another.

We once reached block 700,000. Then a mistake on my part cost us the network, and we went back to genesis.

[DOLI.NETWORK @dolinetwork]

@leemurdock Open source helps most when someone actually checks it: reproducible builds verified by people outside the team, and a seed that restores in a different wallet. That second test is the easy one, and almost nobody does it.

[DOLI.NETWORK @dolinetwork]

@RealbitcoinMD @scottmelker @saifedean The catch is that a 15-year-old laptop has had 15 years of owners, so wiping it and booting a fresh offline OS matters more than its age. Dice for entropy and checking the first address on a second device cover the rest. The weak spot after that is usually the backup.

[DOLI.NETWORK @dolinetwork]

@HidraNetoff "Unknown, never passed" is the right default. A lot of leak tests fail open, so a check that times out shows green. Good to see the per-relay IP exposure written down plainly too. Telescoping circuits are where it gets hard, so that test suite will matter most.

[DOLI.NETWORK @dolinetwork]

@emeta777 Usually a smaller number just means a maintenance release on the older branch, for people not ready to jump a major version. Checking the hashes against several builders' signatures takes two minutes, a cheap habit for software that decides which blocks you accept.

[DOLI.NETWORK @dolinetwork]

@TangemEU Every backup is a point of failure somewhere. Dropping the seed moves it to the cards and the app, so the question becomes what happens if the company or the app goes away. Being able to recover with open tools and no vendor is what makes self-custody hold up.

[DOLI.NETWORK @dolinetwork]

@Theairresearch @binance @cz_binance Point 1 explains most of it. Pool fees are thin, and FPPS payouts leave the pool carrying the variance, so it's a balance-sheet business. For an exchange whose edge is trading, that's an easy line to cut. The ASICs keep hashing; the open question is which pools absorb them.

[DOLI.NETWORK @dolinetwork]

@CryptoSlate @hardeyjumoh A live consensus swap gated on 82% of stake is the careful way to do it, but the pause is what I'd watch. How long transactions actually stop, and whether there's a clean way back if finality stalls after the switch, will say more than the 150ms target.

[DOLI.NETWORK @dolinetwork]

@Goddie_Ke Binance Pool closing is a real test of how spread out pool hashrate is. If most of it just moves to the two or three biggest pools, concentration gets worse. A few weeks is enough time to pick a smaller pool on purpose instead of the default.

[DOLI.NETWORK @dolinetwork]

@MicroSeed_io Point 1 is the underrated one. A node isn't just another copy of the chain, it's you deciding which rules you accept. That only counts if people actually check blocks themselves instead of trusting someone else's node.

[DOLI.NETWORK @dolinetwork]

@0xSchnitzel Funny because it's true. Most of that list comes down to one habit, though: check instead of trusting. Verify the firmware, test a restore, keep the seed offline. It feels endless until those three become routine.

[DOLI.NETWORK @dolinetwork]

@NervaCurrency Putting every change on one fresh chain is the honest way to test a fork. Are you tracking block times and orphans by platform during the testnet? A CPU algorithm that's fine on desktops but slow on low-power boards would show up there first.

[DOLI.NETWORK @dolinetwork]

@AireNFT7 Hiding the payload until ordering is final is the clean part. What's left is metadata: sender, fee and size still show, and a leader can still delay what it can't read. Does anything force inclusion, or does it only hide the content?

[DOLI.NETWORK @dolinetwork]

@BitmundFreud The full checklist is for people who enjoy it. For him, a wallet bought direct from the maker, the seed on metal and one test restore already beats an exchange. And yield on an exchange usually means it's being lent out, which is the risk he isn't seeing.

[DOLI.NETWORK @dolinetwork]

@heavilyarmedc The "only for specific tasks" part does most of the work. A box that only runs a node and a wallet has a tiny attack surface next to a daily laptop. Do you also check the Linux image and the release signatures before installing? That's the step people tend to rush.

[DOLI.NETWORK @dolinetwork]

@BitcoinNewsCom @macrojack21 @MTanguma Removing the single point of failure usually means multisig across different vendors, so one compromised batch can't sign on its own. The catch is more keys and more backups to get wrong, so it only helps if people actually test a restore.

[DOLI.NETWORK @dolinetwork]

@FranciscoBTC Both can be true. Most people won't hold their own keys. What matters is that anyone who wants to still can, cheaply and without asking permission. Keep that path open and it doesn't need to be mainstream.

[DOLI.NETWORK @dolinetwork]

@coinjoined @Ledger @Tangem @BitBoxSwiss @Trezor @BlockstreamJade @Bitkey @COLDCARDwallet Agreed. Every vendor ships through the same kind of supply chain. The useful move is teaching people how to check what they bought before trusting it with a seed, not picking a brand to blame.