Dogecoin: No Whitepaper, No Supply Cap, and a Decade in the Top Ten
Dogecoin has no whitepaper, no company, and no cap on its supply — a decade-old test of whether Bitcoin's scarcity is what a market actually pays for.
Keyword reference — entries that mention this term in body prose.
17 entries reference this keyword in body prose.
Bitcoin Institute ↔ Jackson Palmer, Billy Markus
Dogecoin has no whitepaper, no company, and no cap on its supply — a decade-old test of whether Bitcoin's scarcity is what a market actually pays for.
Bitcoin Institute ↔ Vitalik Buterin
No supply cap, a fee burn that can push issuance negative, and a 2022 switch from mining to staking — Ethereum's own design documents, read against Bitcoin's fixed 21 million.
Bitcoin Institute ↔ Roger Ver, Jihan Wu, Amaury Séchet
Bitcoin Cash inherited Bitcoin's ledger and 21 million cap at the 2017 fork, then split twice more under implementation teams with no single founder to arbitrate.
Bitcoin Institute ↔ Craig Wright
No block-size limit, one company's reference client, and five 51%-attack reorgs in a single year — Bitcoin SV's design record, measured against the 'original protocol' it set out to restore.
Bitcoin Institute ↔ Satoshi Nakamoto
Satoshi's ~1.1M BTC sit still while companies, ETFs, and nation-states build stacks of their own. A sourced map of who holds the 21 million — and why the biggest whales still have no names.
Satoshi's difficulty retarget has an off-by-one: it measures 2,015 blocks instead of 2,016. A hashrate majority can exploit it via timestamp manipulation. The Great Consensus Cleanup proposes a fix.
Bitcoin Institute ↔ Satoshi Nakamoto
How the Bitcoin ecosystem layers above and around the base chain: Lightning payment channels, federated sidechains, L1 envelope extensions, and mining pool architectures.
Bitcoin Institute ↔ Satoshi Nakamoto
How Bitcoin Core persists blocks, maintains the UTXO set, indexes chain state, manages the mempool, prunes historical data, and bootstraps via assumeUTXO.
Bitcoin Institute ↔ Satoshi Nakamoto
How Bitcoin nodes find each other, exchange transactions and blocks, and resist network-level attacks across the P2P gossip layer.
Bitcoin Institute ↔ Satoshi Nakamoto
How Bitcoin blocks are structured, how Merkle trees commit transactions to block headers, and how the most-work chain selection rule resolves forks.
Bitcoin Institute ↔ Satoshi Nakamoto, Wei Dai, Adam Back, Vitalik Buterin
Bitcoin chose a hard 21M cap; b-money (1998) proposed elastic supply; fiat runs central-bank discretion. The cypherpunk debate, Wei Dai's 2013 regret, and 15 years of cryptocurrency variants.
Bitcoin Institute ↔ Satoshi Nakamoto, Wei Dai, Adam Back
What Satoshi's design assumed about a fee-only future, and the documented debate over whether transaction fees alone can sustain proof-of-work security after the block subsidy ends around 2140.
Bitcoin Institute ↔ Satoshi Nakamoto, Jeff Garzik, Gavin Andresen, knightmb
Structural reading of the 2010-08-15 overflow incident — soft-fork rescue mechanics, why a 5-hour response was only achievable then, transaction-shape forensics, and the centralization paradox.
Bitcoin Institute ↔ Mike Hearn, Gavin Andresen, Wladimir van der Laan, Peter Todd, Gregory Maxwell, Adam Back, Roger Ver, Jihan Wu, Mike Belshe, Vitalik Buterin, Daniel Larimer, Satoshi Nakamoto
Why Bitcoin's 2015-2017 fork wars ran as identity contests, not OSS disputes: the post-2011 authority vacuum, the economic weight on rule choices, and the three layers that bound code to currency.
Bitcoin Institute ↔ Amaury Séchet
French software engineer. Bitcoin Core contributor from ~2015, founded Bitcoin ABC, led the 2017 BCH hard fork, defended BCH in the 2018 BSV hash war, led the 2020 split into eCash.
Bitcoin Institute ↔ Wladimir van der Laan, Mike Hearn, Peter Todd, Gavin Andresen, Satoshi Nakamoto
Editorial reading of how the 2014 'Bitcoin Core' rebrand reshaped Bitcoin's authority vocabulary — PR #3408 internal disagreement, the 2015-2017 fork episodes, and Hearn's 2025 retrospective regret.
Bitcoin Institute ↔ Satoshi Nakamoto, Adam Back, Wei Dai, Eric Hughes, Timothy May, Hal Finney, Nick Szabo
Editorial reading of Satoshi's relationship to cypherpunk, from three primary observations: he didn't know b-money, Wei Dai testified Satoshi was "not previously active," alignment with Hughes 1993.