Bitcoin Testnet is the first ever altcoin & only alt Satoshi is 100% linked to.

[BayAreaCoins]

This just dawned on me today.  

The first altcoin cryptocurrency created was 100% Bitcoin Testnet, and it is also the only altcoin that Satoshi is linked to directly.

Kind of interesting when you think about it.

[gmaxwell]

The existing testnet today is testnet 4 created only recently.

The testnet you knew before then is testnet3  which was created to replace testnet 2 once people traded testnet 2 for money.  Which was created to replace testnet 1 when people traded that for money.  Testnet 3 was made purposefully defective in a number of ways so it went a long time before anyone was foolish enough to pay much for it, but it just goes to show that if you make something fool proof nature will just create a bigger fool.

TN1 was the only one that existed when Satoshi was still potentially around.  So no, the thing you call testnet wouldn't be linked to Satoshi.

[BayAreaCoins]

Testnet 3 was made purposefully defective in a number of ways so it went a long time before anyone was foolish enough to pay much for it, but it just goes to show that if you make something fool proof nature will just create a bigger fool.

Testnet 4 was done in the same defective ways to an extent, correct?

It seems foolish to me to do something the same way twice and expect different results(?)

TN1 was the only one that existed when Satoshi was still potentially around.  So no, the thing you call testnet wouldn't be linked to Satoshi.

You say "potentially" like you think it may not have been Satoshi posting on his/their account asking people not to trade it?

It's pretty obvious that Satoshi was around for Testnet v1.  v1 has obviously inspired future version as it should.  

Whoever intentionally left bugs or "features" in should probably reconsider that in some fashion.  Bugs are a two way door IMO.

Leaving in bugs or silly features that do not work as intended in a testcoin is not the path to the easiest and smoothest release into Mainnet.

People should have confidence that the stuff they download is solid af IMO.  If you want to release v__ that's fine, but it shouldn't problematic on purpose.

Fools + not fools can both use those doors.


Who is the "creator's intentions" that this goes against?  If it isn't Satoshi.  You?


Also, I don't think Bitcoin Testnet has ever been traded for money.  Bitcoin is not money, which is what makes it great to an extent.

Having two "worthless" imaginary magic internet coins trading shouldn't be a shock.  This "we will reset it when traded" mentality it going to put unnecessary pressure on Core Developers and will help the exchange... It's a silly tactic IRL Greg.


Glad to see https://blockstream.info/testnet/blocks/recent is on v4!!!  

Other parts of the explorer are now broken it seems.  https://blockstream.info/testnet/

Edit: nvm Blockstream is still on V3 lol... sigh.

[gmaxwell]

Testnet 4 was done in the same defective ways to an extent, correct?
It seems foolish to me to do something the same way twice and expect different results(?)

It solved an immediate problem for them-- the fact that it would go the same way isn't the biggest deal since it doesn't cost anything for the developers just switch to another one.  It probably would have been superior to implement a better approach, but I guess they thought it was better to address it immediately than immediately take the extra time for a more generalized solution.

When tn3 was created it was proposed by some to just reset the chain accepted by the software every major version.   I think discussion on that just landed on that the project could switch to doing that later if problems continued.  For a decade the problems didn't continue. Now that they are back I suspect the project will end up doing something like that.

Whoever intentionally left bugs or "features" in should probably reconsider that in some fashion.  Bugs are a two way door IMO.

It's a test harness, the only purpose exists for is the developers testing.  It's often the case that test harnesses have intentional defects to facilitate testing.   It seems to have worked out fine so far.

To be clear, no one cares whatever flavor of shitcoining you're interested in.  If you want to eat peercoins topped with clam sauce or whatever, that's your own business.  But bitcoin devs aren't interested in shitcoining, and aren't interested in maintaining software for shitcoins themselves, and just won't continue to use any testnet thing that has economic trade that makes testing cost money that ought to be free.

[BayAreaCoins]

It solved an immediate problem for them

It got "them" to Citrea.  This is why Jameson Lopp attacked v3 too.  (Lopp is a rathole investor in Citrea)

Surely this is apparent to you at this point as well?  

I've been hooking up people with Testnet publicly with books since 2022, and suddenly it's a problem via a Lopp post?  Then all this shit starts rolling.   lol

To be clear, no one cares whatever flavor of shitcoining you're interested in.  If you want to eat peercoins topped with clam sauce or whatever, that's your own business.  But bitcoin devs aren't interested in shitcoining, and aren't interested in maintaining software for shitcoins themselves, and just won't continue to use any testnet thing that has economic trade that makes testing cost money that ought to be free.

A pretty rich statement from someone spreading propaganda to assist the shitcoinery on Bitcoin. (which I support)

Just to be clear as well, no one cares what you think a coin is made for.  None of this is should be exclusive to what *you think you think* because the facts are showing a very different story.  I'm no dev and many many moons ago, I attempted to start with Testnet, but Bitcoin was easier to get (LOL)... that memory has stuck with me.

Also, Testnet is and always have been free in small quantities.  We support this.  People having the options to spend a few shitcoins to get a few Testnet coins is none of your fucking business.  (They bill, whoever hired them anyway, woohoo.)

Bitcoin Testnet is used by people and devs.  I think to think differently at this point would be rather silly.

Also, Citrea requires 10 TBTC to test their stuff... where in ANY point of Testnets history would have have been achievable through a faucet?  Please, enlighten me.

[gmaxwell]

It solved an immediate problem for them

It got "them" to Citrea.  This is why Jameson Lopp attacked v3 too.  (Lopp is a rathole investor in Citrea)

Surely this is apparent to you at this point as well?  

I can't figure out what you're saying here.

I've been hooking up people with Testnet publicly with books since 2022, and suddenly it's a problem via a Lopp post?  Then all this shit starts rolling.   lol

Huh? You just acknowledged up thread that asking people to not trade testnet coins for value goes all the way back to Satoshi.  It's not new, nor is resetting the chain used in the node software for testnet when people do a new thing-- though it went a long time without being needed.

[BayAreaCoins]

I can't figure out what you're saying here.

That's ok.  No worries.

Huh? You just acknowledged up thread that asking people to not trade testnet coins for value goes all the way back to Satoshi.  It's not new, nor is resetting the chain used in the node software for testnet when people do a new thing-- though it went a long time without being needed.

I acknowledge it and reject it.  I think it was a huge mistake for years.

I think listing a new version "everytime" it is traded or whatever will result in a clusterfuck for the "good users".  Look at https://blockstream.info/testnet/blocks/recent for example... which version is that?  (Even I got confused earlier, and still maybe confused now. lol)  Even https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Testnet is wrong, and it's community-edited.  That's wild tbh.

Imagine doing that weekly... it's not feasible.  It'll piss folks off and also, it will drive up the trading... which seems to be what you don't want.

I wish your goals were more realistic and I could fall in line, but they just aren't presently.  Any wiggle room here(?), or is this just going to be a problem periodically?

It does feel as if the tree is slowly bending.  Which is what I strongly think is best and most natural for Bitcoin.  It shouldn't be anyone's "decision" on what a market demands; that is a market thing.

When tn3 was created it was proposed by some to just reset the chain accepted by the software every major version.   I think discussion on that just landed on that the project could switch to doing that later if problems continued.  For a decade the problems didn't continue. Now that they are back I suspect the project will end up doing something like that.

I don't think this is going to work out like you think, but it is testnet, fuck it, let it ride.

I like this.  Full POW and the hot potatoes pass version to version.  I do worry about how fast people will update, but that will work itself out.

Steady, achievable, "semi-random".  I can see this "working". (bid = None and ask = 0.00000001). I can't see this working if Testnet then became paired with Dogecoin, but at what point does it matter?  It's a deep hole to zero in crypto and the shit people do with it.  I admittedly would rather not fuck around past a Satoshi, unless absolutely pressed.


I've got to ask, have you been toying with my site the past few days?  https://mempool.space/testnet/address/mp6iXwDfTmFLsa16SuapcFCCSm1pTcXfFZ

There aren't to many other 2012 Testnet miners I've been bullshitting with.

Any complaints?

I think it's a pretty beastly faucet.   Might even be qualified as a sprinkler system.  

[gmaxwell]

You might be surprised to learn that I went and promoted your services to several early testnet miners.  Your service looks like a flashback to the glory days of the earliest bitcoin exchanges, which I think were much nicer in practice than the stuff people use today which looks pretty but is full of anti-features.  My favorite exchange ever was doublec's namecoin exchange.

Perhaps we got off on the wrong foot, so to say--  I don't have and I doubt any current developer has any issue with you trading testnet coins generally only that trade in the current testnet screws up some people's ability to use it for testing. Now that TN3 is no longer the default in Bitcoin trade isn't a problem (well it is for some still using it, of course).   Unlike the bulk of the twitter bitcoin maxies most bitcoin developers don't have some blood hate of altcoins, mostly they just consider them irrelevant (and or a source of amusement / moral lessons) or a minor irritation (e.g. when people promoting them make a nuisance of themselves).  I'm very very happy that people have the freedom to create and use altcoins, because that is the same freedom that allows bitcoin to exist and which backstops bitcoin against corruption (e.g. if somehow a hostile force takes over all bitcoin mining or whatever, people will migrate onto an alternative -- which undermines the incentive to try the attack in the first place).

When it comes to testnet developers want a valueless alternative to bitcoin for testing so that doing arbitrary nonsense doesn't have accounting/legal/tax/etc. implications or friction from having to buy stuff, or churn from people hovering up all the coins they can to sell them for a few cents -- and they're just gonna continue to do whatever it takes to get to that for their own use (which is more possible than you might realize because for this purpose there isn't so much a hard requirement for the result to be open/inclusive/etc.) of course no one else is obligated to use their test thing.  I suspect if there weren't needs to test mining across the internet signet+regtest would have just replaced testnet completely in Bitcoin Core by now.

Maybe there is a place in the market for another altcoin which is just "bitcoin but not bitcoin".  I'm kinda dubious in that there are just so many obvious improvements that haven't been done in Bitcoin due to the tremendous conservatism that goes along with being widely used and valuable.  Sure, it's possible to do worse than bitcoin and a great many altcoins do, but it's also possible to do better in many unobjectionable and safe ways.  But if there is demand for just a clone, I don't think testnet (of any version) is the best way to get there.  Particularly because Bitcoin Core has been designed in a way that makes it extremely easy to make a fork that just changes the chain parameters.

As a total aside, I have a totally offtopic forum question for you:  How do you get notified about responses in old threads?  There were good odds that I'd never noticed your reply here since I don't normally read the altcoin subforum.  I only find replies like this by manually checking threads I was recently active in, but clearly there must be some SMF feature I've never noticed.

[BayAreaCoins]

As a total aside, I have a totally offtopic forum question for you:  How do you get notified about responses in old threads?  There were good odds that I'd never noticed your reply here since I don't normally read the altcoin subforum.  I only find replies like this by manually checking threads I was recently active in, but clearly there must be some SMF feature I've never noticed.

I use a button at the top of the page "Show new replies to your posts".  

This is why I sometimes break the Bitcointalk "rules" on purpose.  I want to be sure that new response is seen.  (Generally, it is then merged by a Mod... but they are paid for actions, so I don't feel too bad! )

I asked a former BCT staff member, and he thinks you should have the same button (Great dude, he called you his ex-wife lol... I'm not even going to ask tbh haha.)

Lol Greg, I can't even tell you how thankful I am to go off-topic with you lol.

If that doesn't help, let me know and I'll figure it out for you.


Thanks for the kind words.  It means a considerable amount to X and I.

I'll respond tomorrow, I think that is a pretty good indicator to give myself the night off and enjoy my family.  (I pretty much agree with everything you said, except the current version part and I'll explain that tomorrow... some things I didn't think of like taxes... god, cringe, I'll circle around.  [We will develop a defense for that.  That could not be further from my intent than possible, it's a valid concern though I fear, fml.  Developing should be the hard part for developers, not letting in vampires to make a hard job even harder... that would make me sick to be a part of contributing to.])

[stwenhao]

Testnet 4 was done in the same defective ways to an extent, correct?

Yes. When testnet1 and testnet2 were traded, then testnet3 included minimal difficulty rule, to prevent trading, and to allow messing up with those, who will try to put serious Proof of Work on that. Because, as you can see, in testnet3 and testnet4, you can put a lot of effort to mine 50 coins with ASICs, while CPU miners will put much less effort, and will pay much smaller bills for their electricity, and will achieve much better results, and mine much more coins.

Also, as long as hackish way of mining blocks with CPU difficulty was not that popular yet, developers used such tricks, to get their coins easily, while regular users tried to stick to the rules, and mine blocks with real network difficulty, often because they are unaware, that there are ways to mine more blocks easier with just CPUs.

And now, there are plans to make testnet5, where minimal difficulty rule will be patched (because it no longer works, and ASIC miners know, how to mine a lot of blocks on CPU), but another defect will be introduced, which is called premine.

You say "potentially" like you think it may not have been Satoshi posting on his/their account asking people not to trade it?

Because Satoshi definitely used his own test network (which some people call "prenet"), which existed in 2008, and which used bit-based difficulty, with 20 leading zero bits. For Gavin's testnet, we only know, that Satoshi was aware of test networks, but we don't know, if and how he used them (and I don't have testnet1 original chain, to confirm that, and try to find Satoshi's test transactions).

Also note, that in Satoshi's times, coins were not yet traded in practice, even on mainnet. He gave away 50 BTC to random users, because it was worth literally zero dollars at that time. He sent 10 BTC to Hal as a test transaction. And I didn't find any examples, where someone really traded real goods or services with Satoshi, like selling him a pizza, or renting some hosting from him. Which means, that it is very likely, that all Satoshi's mainnet transactions were denominated only in BTC, and maybe he never got any profits in dollars or other fiat currencies, for using mainnet BTC coins.

Leaving in bugs or silly features that do not work as intended in a testcoin is not the path to the easiest and smoothest release into Mainnet.

They are needed to test edge cases. For example: Jameson Lopp could test timewarp attack on testnet3, because of blockstorms. If not that, then it would be much harder to test that kind of edge cases, and that's why porting his attack to the mainnet is not that easy. And that's why people saying that "BTC wizards could launch the same attacks on mainnet" are wrong. Because testnet has different rules, and attacks cannot be ported 1:1.

If you want to release v__ that's fine, but it shouldn't problematic on purpose.

You know, why testnet3 has minimal difficulty rule? To discourage trading. And you know, why there are plans to add premine to testnet5? To discourage trading. New testnets will have bugs like that, to discourage trading. If you list new test coins, then be prepared, that whoever will trade them, those people can be attacked by developers, by using bugs, which they introduced.

Imagine doing that weekly... it's not feasible.

In case of signet, there is a parameter to switch from one signet challenge to another. Maybe in case of testnet5, the address of the premine will be just another configurable parameter, which would allow to switch from one network to another, as long as coins will keep being traded? Who knows? Signet version has already number "six", so it is not the first attempt.

[BayAreaCoins]

I can't help but think of Bitcoin Testent & why I'm doing what I'm doing while watching Ross Ulbrich's speech:  https://x.com/RealRossU/status/1928496091311518132

You might be surprised to learn that I went and promoted your services to several early testnet miners.  Your service looks like a flashback to the glory days of the earliest bitcoin exchanges, which I think were much nicer in practice than the stuff people use today which looks pretty but is full of anti-features.  My favorite exchange ever was doublec's namecoin exchange.

I've tried to keep it as simple as possible, but for some reason this confuses new people... I've kinda given up on attracting brand spanking new users, which is a big reason of why we parted ways with FreeBitcoins.com (registered in 2010 shortly after Gavin launched his "Free Bitcoins" service, before $1 or the Silk Road).

I got sick of exchanges holding up my funds or introducing new "rules".  Shit should just work IMO (though my view has laxed on that with certain shitcoins).  Especially when staying in the cryptocurrency realm.  No account freezes, no this and that, but this lingering Testnet attack intrigued me.  Attacking Bitcoin is interesting to me.  Blowing Altcoins off the map is rude, but funny.  Testnet is acceptable, and that's the wild west feel of a tech product finding itself (ish).

A lot of our influence came from Dooglus.  Keeping him as a user and/or happy enough for us to be linkable on Just-dice.com.  Not pissing Dooglus off is higher on my list than not pissing any current developer of Bitcoin off.    Dooglus sits around these days in his underwear, and I'm not a 20-year-old ambitious monster anymore.  I've not made dooglus cranky in ~10 years and life is good not biting a hand that feeds you.  However, I've maintained my freedoms as well since I had when I came into Bitcoin.  I consider myself a friendly shark, an ally in fact, but I don't want to get called a scammer on a mailing list that I'm too stupid to participate in. (I absolutely and beyond accept that I do not belong on a mailing list with Sjor.  He's a nuke bomb guy, I'm a trench monkey.  Big fucking difference, both important. )

We built this website for y'all to play ball in.  I grew up on "If you build it, he will come".  We've been in this corn field by ourselves for a very long time working.  My intent was to work with "Satoshi" and this is where I've found myself.  

Perhaps we got off on the wrong foot, so to say--

I'm sure a lot of this was my fault.  I apologize for being rude.  Doing well for Bitcoin means a lot to me, which I'm sure does to all of you as well.

generally only that trade in the current testnet screws up some people's ability to use it for testing.

I strongly feel that trading a current testnet will better prepare participants for mainnet in a similar but different setting.

Having this more aggressive feel will highlight points of Testnet that should be reconsidered.  Such as the 20 minute blocks difficulty.  This rule presents no value to a tester preparing for Bitcoin and this twist to the game makes an altcoin feel to the decentralized sport of mining.  This miner didn't invest in the most expensive new equipment on the market or anything in fact, they are using a rented miner and a bit of logic.  It's hard for me not to think that is kind of cool.  Dude is killing blocks with a Windows 98 in 2025 (I poke fun at them for causing me so many issues, they are good people/sports, I am 100% sure they have ZERO intent on hurting anything.  They are purely here for Bitcoin). Is this best for Testnet?  I do not believe so. Will it make Testnet better for people preparing for Mainnet?  Absolutely.


Someone said Testnet 3 was hard for developers to get, but for ~$3000 in Bitcoin, we spooked up 80,000 v3 Testnet for them in <1 week.  This allowed 500 v3 TBTC to be sent to the faucet which now anyone in the world can have access to.  How much did I buy?  Zero.  The markets still breathed back after the slaps, it's cool.  Meaning, if you premined 10 million and dumped them @ 1 satoshi, we would have moved around half your stash in <3 days.

Notice how no one panicked, no one cared about the price tanking 300 sats to 7 sats.  I think this is the quiet that only exists in laboratories and libraries.  People with their nose to the stone with Bitcoin in their mind as the goal.  This is just the ePeen Contest.  Being Michael Saylor in Bitcoin Testnet:



No one cares, or should care.  It's fucking Testnet!

(e.g. when people promoting them make a nuisance of themselves).

I know it doesn't seem like it, but I'm *really* trying not to be a nuisance.  

I compare it to the OP_Return bullshit, Cintrea has a way of doing it... they weren't trying to be a nuisance, their methods work, why fight them?  It's probably more profitable to accept there is a work around and flow with it.  This is a common mindset in Bitcoin and appears to be healthy to me.

The bullshit has been bullshat, now we need to figure out which way this ship is pointed with Bitcoin being the best it can be in mind.

When it comes to testnet developers want a valueless alternative to bitcoin for testing so that doing arbitrary nonsense doesn't have accounting/legal/tax/etc. implications or friction from having to buy stuff, or churn from people hovering up all the coins they can to sell them for a few cents -- and they're just gonna continue to do whatever it takes to get to that for their own use (which is more possible than you might realize because for this purpose there isn't so much a hard requirement for the result to be open/inclusive/etc.) of course no one else is obligated to use their test thing.  I suspect if there weren't needs to test mining across the internet signet+regtest would have just replaced testnet completely in Bitcoin Core by now.

Testnet is important for more than just the mining compared to Signet and regtest.

Sadly, people don't care about why Testnet is important... the frequency I get asked to list a Signet market is astounding.  I fear my care for decentralization and customers' care for access to these strange coins do not align.  I'm not sure how much bad stuff could happen to me in Signet or who the centralized authority would be that could punish us, but I'm not exactly itching to find out!!   it isn't very Bitcoiny.

Friction is going to happen for people.  Esp the poor bastards using faucets... the name of the game in faucets is friction.

If we can eliminate that friction at pennies on the dollar cost per hour, by god, it should be done.  If reducing that friction helps people who have time to faucet, win/win.  The trade activity from v3 this week allowed the faucet to gain 500 v3 TBTC.  Which is 100,000 faucet hits for us to distribute.  So the seller walks away with ~$3000 in BTC, the buyers have coins to test with, the faucet has free coins for developers, and I got my little pocket change for allowing it to happen in our arena.  Every part of that transaction feels good to me. Sustainability without resorting to shitcoinery tactics is the high road IMO.  

Maybe there is a place in the market for another altcoin which is just "bitcoin but not bitcoin".  I'm kinda dubious in that there are just so many obvious improvements that haven't been done in Bitcoin due to the tremendous conservatism that goes along with being widely used and valuable.  Sure, it's possible to do worse than bitcoin and a great many altcoins do, but it's also possible to do better in many unobjectionable and safe ways.  But if there is demand for just a clone, I don't think testnet (of any version) is the best way to get there.  Particularly because Bitcoin Core has been designed in a way that makes it extremely easy to make a fork that just changes the chain parameters.

This isn't the race for number one.  Testnet is not about being better or worse, or the next ETF or anything of that nature.  Testnet is a worthless glimpse of what is to come to Bitcoin.  Completely worthless at this stage.  It's like trying to get a mushroom trip off of just spores.  The spores are worthless until they are mixed with the right medium.  Bitcoin is the medium for magic.  

I've not met a Testnet user in my ~3 years of doing this that even remotely thought Testnet was a Bitcoin competitor.  It's refreshing coming from the Shitcoin world.

It's a completely different train of thought.  Testnet is realllllly fucking weird.


Stwenhao,  

Introducing bugs with the anticipation to fuck users over is beyond unacceptable.  In any capacity.  If a few pennies can expose that, then I think it is further evidence that Bitcoin is rock solid because we have sharks in these waters testing and sniffing for pocket change.

[BayAreaCoins]

"I want to emphasize that this type of threat is not theoretical.
Court-Confirmed Fraudster Craig Wright did in fact sue us in an effort to
recover alleged stolen coins.  If courts perceive a history of Bitcoin Core
developers actively trying to prevent "undesirable" transactions, then there is
a very real chance for courts to order Bitcoin Core developers to do things
like freeze addresses, even though if anyone posted such a pull request it
would be ineffectual because people wouldn't choose to run it. Still the order
would be highly disruptive to people and the project. The community should want
every protection available to prevent future court actions like that from being
considered, issued or succeeding. A history of actively trying to prevent
"undesirable" transactions does not help."

I agree with this.

I think this is *really* important when considering the next moves with Bitcoin Testnet.

[stwenhao]

I think this is *really* important when considering the next moves with Bitcoin Testnet.

It doesn't matter that much, as long as testnet is a separate chain. If mining test coins would be possible, by mining weaker mainnet blocks (for example like P2Pool did in the past), then it could matter to some extent. But as long as additional testnet rules are clearly separated from mainnet rules, it is not the case.

Also, historically, testnet "censored" much less transactions than mainnet, because it allowed confirming non-standard transactions by default. And even today, you have configuration options, which could allow you to do much more things on testnet, than you can do on mainnet (for example: you cannot aceept non-standard transactions on mainnet, without recompiling the source code, or using some custom way of changing your block templates).

So, for testnets, it doesn't matter that much, because there are more things, that are valid in testnets, which you simply cannot repeat on mainnet.