7eed16a29a
The sweep (main's item 1): 199 tracked text files, 783 lines. The founder's full name, first name and possessive become "the founder" (sentence starts capitalised); the lowercase operating-system user name in WSL paths and commands becomes <user>; the second owner login becomes "the second owner login"; the three earlier businesses and the two other brands become "the other business", "the earlier entity", "the earlier business" and "another brand"; the Chrome profile rule names the igneum.network profile, not the profile's label. The standing commit login igneum-labs is not a founder term here: the fresh-repository step renames it in the history (docs/plans/history-rewrite.md, tools/repo/fresh-repo.sh). The patterns never appear in plain text in the tree (a plaintext list would be the hit): tools/ci/founder-strings.b64 (perl regex, tab, a sample per row) is read by tools/ci/founder-strings-check.sh (every tracked text file, perl, known-failed first: the self-test plants each row's sample in a fixture and the hit must name the file), by tools/community/discord-hooks.mjs (the guard's founder and business rows; the test takes its fixtures from the samples) and by tools/repo/fresh-repo.sh (the business names of the rewrite rules). site/forbidden-strings.txt carries the same patterns as b64: lines, decoded case-insensitive by site/scrub.mjs and tools/ci/launch-gates-check.mjs (whose fixture now plants an encoded made-up name). The check runs in the gate's tree checks on every merge. Not in this commit, by main's word: the 105 commit messages and 40 personal-identity commits that need the history rewrite (listed, not run), and the secrets found by gitleaks over the history (reported with owners). Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com>
8.5 KiB
The chip claim, public text (7 October 2026; REWRITTEN LAUNCH-FIRST 18:3x UK on the founder's "I thought we were making it 2.1 from launch?": the testnet and mainnet objects set program_class_v4_activation_daa to 0, so class v4 is live from genesis and the launch number is 2.1x to 3.9x on day one; the 5x to 9x is the class v3 baseline the work started from, stated only as that; the devnet's own activation height is a devnet fact only. Served since 11:03 UK on master 9162c847 with main's two cuts: no mention of the disclosure prize until the publish word, and row 17 in evidence.md's eight-column shape)
Three texts and one ledger row, written by the Counter ASIC lane, which owns the chip model. Every number carries its label: measured (a card or a chain we ran, with the date), modelled (arithmetic on cited parts), claimed (a vendor's figure, never measured by us), designed (a rule in a class, not yet measured). Sources: docs/analysis/chip-model-v3.md sections 5 and 6, docs/analysis/latency-shadow-2026-10-06.md, docs/plans/counter-asic-3-status.md, docs/analysis/attack-pass/f8-uniform.md and f4-weakday.md (branch attack-pass), docs/design/class-v5-stored-state.md, the datacentre and market-cap rows of 7 October (lanes 3 and the fleet), the cryptanalysis plan in docs/plans/funding.md.
1. The home page's chip line (replaces the hero sentence served since 6 October 16:21Z)
Built for graphics cards. At launch the strongest chip in our public model reaches 2.1x to 3.9x per joule against an RTX 5090, under class v4 from the first block. Class v5 then makes the dataset the chain's own state, so a chip that stores it or recomputes it is wrong on every item. Without class v4 the same chip would reach 5x to 9x. The model and every measurement are public.
2. The litepaper's chip section (replaces the paragraph that begins "The chip model: 5x to 9x per joule")
The chip model. We price the strongest chip we can design against an RTX 5090 and publish the arithmetic. Class v4 is live from the first block on the testnet and the mainnet (the ladder's rung 0 at genesis), so the launch number is the class v4 row. The honest card: an RTX 5090 mines class v3 at 136 MH/s on 350 W in the bench and 290 W in the app (measured, 6 October 2026); an Apple M5 Max at 27 MH/s on 21 W (measured, 6 October 2026); an H100 SXM at 249 MH/s, 98 percent of its random-read ceiling like the 5090, 1.78x the 5090's hash at 1.15x the tuned 5090's hash per watt and a third of the hash per rented dollar (measured, 7 October 2026), so datacentre silicon does not change the chip question. The CPU verifier takes 2.33 ms per warp of 32 hashes on one M5 Max core under class v4 (measured, 6 October 2026), against a gate of 10 ms.
| The chip and the class | Edge over an RTX 5090 per joule | Label and date |
|---|---|---|
| At launch: a memory-controller chip that stores the whole dataset, under class v4 (about 100,000 integer ops per hash in the latency shadow, so the chip carries a GPU-class datapath beside its memory) | 2.1x with a core as costly per op as the GPU's (k = 1); 3.9x with the core Bitmain claimed for its Antminer X9 (k about 0.33), a product withdrawn before any unit shipped | modelled on measured card watts, 6 October 2026; the X9 figure claimed, never measured |
| The same chip at the ladder's second rung (about 200,000 ops per hash), reached by miner signal | about 2.8x | modelled, 7 October 2026 |
| Any chip under class v5, where the dataset is the chain's own state | a stateless or stale chip is wrong on every item, so the stored-dataset chip and the recompute chip are removed as categories; the verifier pays 0.2 ms more per warp | designed, 7 October 2026 |
| A chip caching the hottest 0.1 percent of items (about 1 MB of SRAM) | bounded at 1.067x at the ceiling, 1.005x on about half the hours and 1.048x on 5 percent | measured census of 1,024 programs, 7 October 2026; the source rule in the next class |
| A per-day FPGA that recomputes the dataset with cheap multipliers on a weak day | at most 12 percent more hash rate on 12 days a century, nothing on the other days and nothing for any chip | measured census of 2^24 days, 7 October 2026; the rule in the next class |
| When a stored-dataset chip pays for itself | at about USD 100 M of market cap in the first two years, not before | modelled, 7 October 2026 |
| The baseline the work started from: the same chip under class v3, without the shadow (the Ethash class) | 5x to 9x (5.1x on GDDR7, 9.2x on eight HBM3 stacks; the Ethash chips of this class reached 2.1x to 4.8x) | modelled, 6 October 2026; the precedent measured by others, 2020 to 2022; never the launch state |
What a miner sees from this. Class v4 costs a 5090 about 80 W more for 0.2 percent of rate, an M5 Max 16 W more for 1.5 percent, an RX 9070 XT and an RTX 4070 nothing (all measured, 6 October 2026). The ladder that sets how much work rides in the shadow starts at rung 0 at genesis and climbs by miner signal; its third rung is inadmissible today because a server core verifies it in 10.85 ms, over the gate (measured, 7 October 2026). On the devnet, which started on class v3, class v4 arrives by miner signal at a published height (a devnet fact, not a launch one). The next test of the model is an internal adversarial pass, not an independent review: three lanes that have never worked on the hash code attack the mixer, the chained cache and the acceptance rule with only what an outsider has (the public kit, the frozen object, the spec, the harnesses) and publish the break or the bound they reach. The one outside check is staged and waits on its escrow and the publish word.
3. The miner page's line
Your card against the strongest chip we can price: an RTX 5090 at 136 MH/s on 350 W (measured 6 October 2026); at launch the chip reaches 2.1x to 3.9x per joule under class v4 (modelled on measured watts), and under class v5 it is wrong on every item because the dataset is the chain's own state (designed). Without class v4 it would be 5x to 9x. The model and the measurements are public.
4. The ledger row (docs/evidence.md row 17, in the table's eight columns as served)
| # | Claim | Where it is made | Status | Version or commit | Reproducible test | Result, date, machine | Independent verification |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 17 | The chip resistance claim: at launch the strongest chip in the public model reaches 2.1x (k = 1) to 3.9x (k about 0.33) per joule against an RTX 5090 under class v4, live from genesis on the testnet and the mainnet; the ladder's second rung brings it to about 2.8x; class v5 makes the dataset the chain's state so a stateless or stale chip is wrong on every item; the hot-set cache is bounded at 1.067x at the ceiling and the weak-day FPGA at 12 percent on 12 days a century, both routed to the next class; datacentre silicon does not change the question; a stored-dataset chip pays for itself only at about USD 100 M of market cap in two years; without class v4 the same chip would reach 5x to 9x (the class v3 baseline, the devnet's starting state, never the launch state) | the home page's chip line, the litepaper's chip section (/litepaper#chip-model), the miner page's line | tested by the team (every card, the verifier, the two attack-pass bounds, the H100), the chip itself modelled, class v5 and the ladder designed, the X9 core claimed and never measured | docs/analysis/chip-model-v3.md 5 and 6; docs/analysis/latency-shadow-2026-10-06.md; docs/plans/counter-asic-3-status.md; docs/analysis/attack-pass/f8-uniform.md, f4-weakday.md, docs/analysis/ca3-v4-uniform.md; docs/design/class-v5-stored-state.md; the H100 and market-cap rows of 7 October; docs/plans/cryptanalysis/in-house-pass.md (the internal adversarial pass) |
the chip model's arithmetic in its file; the card rows by the benchmark package; the attack-pass harnesses tools/attack/f8-uniform and the F4 census; the verifier by igneum-pow bench |
136 MH/s at 350 W (5090, bench) and 290 W (app); 27 MH/s at 21 W (M5 Max); 249 MH/s (H100 SXM) at 98 percent of its read ceiling, 1.78x hash, 1.15x MH/W, a third per rented dollar; 2.33 ms per warp; 2.1x, 3.9x, 2.8x at launch; 1.067x at the ceiling; 12 percent on 12 days a century; 10.85 ms at rung 3; USD 100 M; 5.1x to 9.2x the class v3 baseline; 6 and 7 October 2026, the M5 Max, PC 2's RTX 5090, PC 1's RX 9070 XT and RTX 4070, a rented H100 SXM, igneum-build-1 | none yet; the next test is the internal adversarial pass (three lanes new to the hash code, outsider inputs only, reports published whole), and the one outside check is staged and waits on its escrow and the publish word |