According to @BitMEXResearch, the Bitcoin and quantum risk debate is pretty much unchanged since 2011, source: @BitMEXResearch. According to @BitMEXResearch, they have no idea if quantum technology itself has meaningfully developed since 2011, source: @BitMEXResearch. According to @BitMEXResearch, Bitcoin post-quantum cryptography techniques have improved considerably since 2011, source: @BitMEXResearch. According to @BitMEXResearch, the thread focuses on the potential risks quantum computers could pose to Bitcoin and how Bitcoin could mitigate that risk, noting this debate is nothing new, source: @BitMEXResearch. According to @BitMEXResearch, the discussion cites the 2008 Post-Quantum Cryptography work by Daniel Bernstein and others as background to the long-running conversation on mitigation, source: @BitMEXResearch.

According to @BitMEXResearch, adopting post-quantum cryptography too early in Bitcoin could have missed more efficient schemes, citing a Dec 11, 2025 proposal by n1ckler with signatures around 350 bytes (source: BitMEX Research tweet Dec 23, 2025; delvingbitcoin.org SHRINCS thread Dec 11, 2025). The proposal thread titled SHRINCS: 324-byte stateful post-quantum signatures with static backups documents a design targeting 324-byte stateful PQ signatures with static backups (source: delvingbitcoin.org SHRINCS thread Dec 11, 2025). Smaller signatures directly reduce per-input virtual size, which determines transaction fees and blockspace usage on Bitcoin where fees are priced by vbytes (source: BIP 141 SegWit; Bitcoin Core fee policy documentation). For traders, this signals that future PQ pathways may impose less overhead on capacity and fee markets than previously assumed, keeping BTC network cost projections tied to ongoing cryptography R&D rather than imminent protocol changes (source: BitMEX Research tweet Dec 23, 2025; delvingbitcoin.org SHRINCS thread Dec 11, 2025).

According to @BitMEXResearch, Armoury wallet founder Alan Reiner joined the discussion and said he is a bit of an expert on the topic, adding that in his view the technology would take many decades to develop, giving the industry time to prepare accordingly, source: BitMEX Research on X, Dec 23, 2025. The source did not specify any immediate market impact or near-term action items, framing the timeline as long term within a 13-post thread (9/13), source: BitMEX Research on X, Dec 23, 2025.

According to @BitMEXResearch, Bitcoin developer Pieter Wuille joined the discussion to explain which coins could be at risk from quantum computing, highlighting that risk assessment is an active topic in the community (source: @BitMEXResearch on X, Dec 23, 2025). @BitMEXResearch reported that user sgravina expressed skepticism about quantum computing capabilities, noting the oft-cited claim that the most impressive factorization achieved was 5 x 3 = 15, a talking point the thread says persists (source: @BitMEXResearch on X, Dec 23, 2025). For traders, the thread indicates ongoing debate around quantum-security risk narratives tied to BTC, which market participants track as potential headline-driven sentiment catalysts (source: @BitMEXResearch on X, Dec 23, 2025).

According to @BitMEXResearch, a participant identified as “neotrino” expressed concern about Bitcoin’s current ECDSA and urged a move to post-quantum algorithms, warning the US government could break ECDSA within five years. Source: @BitMEXResearch on X, Dec 23, 2025, status 2003589479853097229. For traders, this post flags a perceived five-year threat window to ECDSA used in Bitcoin, making developer discussions on post-quantum migration a potential headline catalyst to monitor. Source: @BitMEXResearch on X, Dec 23, 2025, status 2003589479853097229.

According to @BitMEXResearch, in December 2011 D-Wave announced that a 128-bit quantum computer would be available soon, which again sparked concern among Bitcoiners, highlighting headline-driven sentiment risk for BTC security that traders monitor. Source: @BitMEXResearch on X, Dec 23, 2025.

According to @BitMEXResearch, Bitnod.es has launched a live system tracking UASF BIP-110 miner activation flags in real time. Source: BitMEX Research (X, Dec 16, 2025). According to @BitMEXResearch, no blocks have flagged the activation bit so far, implying a current signaling rate of 0%. Source: BitMEX Research (X, Dec 16, 2025). According to @BitMEXResearch, traders can monitor the Bitnod.es dashboard to detect any change in signaling that would update the on-chain activation status for BIP-110. Source: BitMEX Research (X, Dec 16, 2025).

According to @BitMEXResearch, a 64 byte Bitcoin transaction can be confused with an intermediate hashing step in Bitcoin’s Merkle tree because both are 64 bytes, creating a vulnerability that can be exploited (source: @BitMEXResearch on X, Dec 9, 2025). According to @BitMEXResearch, the research also reviews a proposed fix to prevent this ambiguity (source: @BitMEXResearch on X, Dec 9, 2025).

According to @BitMEXResearch, a Dec 5, 2025 post contrasts the accessibility of The Bitcoin Standard with the harder read Human Action, framing today’s Bitcoin developer economics reading as easier (source: @BitMEXResearch on X, Dec 5, 2025). The post provides no BTC price targets, on-chain metrics, exchange flow data, or protocol updates, indicating sentiment commentary rather than market guidance (source: @BitMEXResearch on X, Dec 5, 2025). The post links to Roger Ver’s 2019 tweet for context and introduces no new market information for BTC or development roadmaps (source: @BitMEXResearch on X; x.com/rogerkver/status/1119212864152064000).

According to @BitMEXResearch, the team resurfaced criticism that Bitcoin Core developers do not understand economics, citing an older post by Roger Ver to underscore ongoing ideological divides in Bitcoin governance (source: https://twitter.com/BitMEXResearch/status/1996925944259281103; source: https://x.com/rogerkver/status/1119212864152064000). For traders, this is a sentiment-led headline with no new Bitcoin Improvement Proposal, code change, or roadmap item referenced, indicating no direct protocol or fee-market catalyst at this time (source: https://twitter.com/BitMEXResearch/status/1996925944259281103; source: https://x.com/rogerkver/status/1119212864152064000). Monitor BTC order books, funding, and spreads for short-term reactions to governance discourse, but base decisions on verifiable signals since the cited content is opinion rather than a technical update (source: https://twitter.com/BitMEXResearch/status/1996925944259281103).

According to BitMEX Research, Bitnod.es data shows Bitcoin Knots’ share among live BTC node peers has declined to 8.4% as of Nov 26, 2025 (source: BitMEX Research on X citing Bitnod.es). According to BitMEX Research, this marks a drop since the site’s launch at the start of November 2025 (source: BitMEX Research on X).

According to @BitMEXResearch, a new research article examines Stretch (STRC), a novel MSTR debt-type instrument designed for price stability by varying its dividend rate each month based on the debt’s market price, source: BitMEX Research tweet on Nov 14, 2025 https://twitter.com/BitMEXResearch/status/1989384339151622414. The mechanism explicitly ties the monthly dividend rate to STRC’s market price to maintain stability, source: BitMEX Research tweet on Nov 14, 2025 https://twitter.com/BitMEXResearch/status/1989384339151622414. BitMEX Research linked the full article for more details on STRC’s structure and design, source: BitMEX Research tweet on Nov 14, 2025 https://twitter.com/BitMEXResearch/status/1989384339151622414 https://t.co/IVcQJbX2TU.

According to @BitMEXResearch, they have not studied NFTs in depth and have limited interest, emphasizing that NFTs are generally bad investments, source: @BitMEXResearch on X, Nov 14, 2025. They add that NFTs being put on Bitcoin is not a concern for them and that critics should ignore NFTs rather than push for restrictions, source: @BitMEXResearch on X, Nov 14, 2025. They state NFTs will fall in value and see no point in technical measures to deter or prevent NFTs, signaling a clearly bearish stance on NFT valuations that traders tracking Bitcoin-based NFT activity should note, source: @BitMEXResearch on X, Nov 14, 2025.

According to BitMEX Research, Bitnod.es now reports 1,576 live Bitcoin node peers and climbing as of Nov 7, 2025 (source: BitMEX Research). The figure reflects the current live BTC node peer count visible via Bitnod.es as reported in the update (source: BitMEX Research).

According to @BitMEXResearch, so‑called anti‑spam chains are likely to attract the most spam, inflating on‑chain activity metrics that traders often use for momentum and fee‑sensitivity signals; source: @BitMEXResearch, Nov 6, 2025. According to Coin Metrics network data, Bitcoin Cash (BCH) has historically processed fewer transactions than Bitcoin (BTC), supporting the comparison noted by @BitMEXResearch and highlighting the risk of misreading demand on lower‑usage chains; source: Coin Metrics network data, 2024; @BitMEXResearch, Nov 6, 2025.

According to @BitMEXResearch, the account stated "Last chance to buy over $100k" in a post dated Nov 4, 2025, drawing attention to the $100,000 threshold for buyers (source: BitMEX Research on X, Nov 4, 2025). Traders can treat $100,000 as a key observation level and monitor buy-side depth, liquidity sweeps, and funding conditions if price trades above that mark to gauge momentum and risk, based on the statement’s emphasis on the $100k level (source: BitMEX Research on X, Nov 4, 2025).

According to BitMEX Research, the team launched a basic website that tracks the reported Bitcoin clients used by the live active peers of some of their nodes, providing a dataset derived from their nodes’ connected peers rather than a full network crawl (source: BitMEX Research on X, Nov 4, 2025). BitMEX Research stated this approach differs from Bitnodes, which crawls the network to identify all reachable nodes, so figures from the two methods are not directly comparable (source: BitMEX Research on X, Nov 4, 2025). For trading desks monitoring BTC network infrastructure, this offers an additional reference point for observing client usage distributions based on peer-reported data from BitMEX Research’s nodes (source: BitMEX Research on X, Nov 4, 2025).

According to @BitMEXResearch, a Bitcoin transaction dated 5 Nov 2013 is identified as mined by Luke Dashjr, with a direct on-chain explorer link provided for verification, source: BitMEX Research; mempool.space. According to @BitMEXResearch, the shared reference points to transaction ID d29c9c0e8e4d2a9790922af73f0b8d51f0bd4bb19940d9cf910ead8fbe85bc9b for independent checks of the timestamp and related block, source: BitMEX Research; mempool.space. According to @BitMEXResearch, the post does not report any BTC movement, exchange deposit, or selling activity related to this historical item and serves as an attribution record only, source: BitMEX Research.

According to BitMEX Research, Bitcoin Knots and Bitcoin Core were largely written by the same developers, making Knots an ineffective protest client against Core. Source: BitMEX Research on X, Oct 17, 2025. BitMEX Research points to its 2018 report Competing with Bitcoin Core, arguing that replacing Core is structurally difficult due to shared code and contributor overlap. Source: BitMEX Research, 2018. The comparison to the prior large blocker effort to 'fire Core' underscores governance cohesion across implementations, a context traders can use when evaluating BTC fork-risk headlines and client-diversity narratives. Source: BitMEX Research on X, Oct 17, 2025. Net takeaway for BTC trading: narratives claiming Knots can displace Core lack technical basis per the cited analysis, informing governance risk assessment for BTC. Source: BitMEX Research, 2018; BitMEX Research on X, Oct 17, 2025.

According to @FarsideUK, Farside Investors posted the term OP_RETURN and linked to a BitMEX Research post on Oct 17, 2025. Source: Farside Investors on X and BitMEX Research on X. OP_RETURN is a Bitcoin script opcode that stores arbitrary data in transactions and makes those outputs provably unspendable, influencing blockspace usage and the UTXO set. Source: Bitcoin.org Developer Guide and Bitcoin Wiki. Higher OP_RETURN usage increases average transaction size and can push fee rates higher, affecting short-term BTC transaction costs and miner fee revenue. Source: Bitcoin Optech Newsletter and Bitcoin.org fee market documentation. For trading, monitor mempool congestion and fee-rate bands to time BTC transfers and evaluate miner revenue sensitivity during periods of elevated OP_RETURN-driven activity. Source: mempool.space metrics and Bitcoin Optech analyses.