Check it yourself.

How to read the labels

A site publishing chain data is not automatically a source of it. Most are repeating something they read somewhere else, and the further a number travels the more chances it has to go wrong. So each entry says where its data actually comes from.

Chain

Runs a node. The number comes off the chain itself.

One hop

Reads someone else's node or API and presents it.

Primary

The document, the code, or the person's own words.

Commentary

Interpretation. Useful, but check it against the rows above.

Live chain status

Note that a normal block explorer cannot help you here. Explorers running Bitcoin Core rules follow the most-work chain and will not show you the RDTS tip at all. You need something reading a node that enforces consensusrules=rdts.

• 110explorer.comChain Self-describes as a read-only explorer over a local Bitcoin Knots RDTS node, with the mainnet tip pulled from public APIs for comparison only. That is the provenance statement you want to see. It was still completing initial block download when we last checked, so it may show no data yet.
• bip110.runChain Dashboard, timeline, consensus, node, blockspam, library, coalition, census and equipment. The most complete picture of what is happening anywhere, and the reason this site does not build a dashboard.
• bip110.org/monitorChain Live miner signaling status, difficulty period progress, and historical signaling rates, on the site attached to the BIP's own author.
• BIP-110 Fork MonitorOne hop Side-by-side Core versus Knots comparison, reading from mempool.space and bip110.run.
• BIP-110 CountdownOne hop Countdown and status view.

Primary sources

If a claim on this site is wrong, one of these is where you prove it.

• BIP-110, the text itselfPrimary Reduced Data Temporary Softfork, authored by Dathon Ohm, Layer: Consensus (soft fork), status Closed. Reading the header alone settles most of what gets argued about. There is no mention of proof-of-work or BLAKE2b anywhere in it.
• bip110.orgPrimary The proposal's own site, including a guide for switching chains. Distinct from bip110.run, and easy to confuse.
• Knots PR #359, the BLAKE2b hardforkPrimary The actual implementation, by Luke Dashjr, opened 15 August and still marked an unfinished draft not ready for review. Reshapes the block header, adds a 128-bit ASIC nonce space, and states that it "aims to be compatible with PoW hardware produced by several (6 IIRC) vendors." If you read one thing about the proof-of-work change, read this instead of any article about it.
• Luke Dashjr on Sia ASIC compatibilityPrimary 13 August: "Support for BLAKE2b also allows BLAKE2b-Sia miners, since the latter is a strict subset of the former. Disclaimer: Have not tested yet." The clearest statement anywhere on whether existing hardware applies. Note the disclaimer is his, not ours.
• Luke Dashjr on the September 1 targetPrimary 11 August, replying to a mining pool asking whether to start mining BLAKE2b right away: "Target is Sep 1. Need to write and properly test the code first... Until it's ready, SHA2 continues on." This is the origin of every "forks on September 1" headline you have read. Note what coverage dropped: the word target, and the entire condition after it.
• Luke Dashjr on the new PoW constructionPrimary 14 August, draft description of the hash input: prevblock, a 128-bit nonce, then the transaction hash. The hasher cannot see height, time or version, so ASICs cannot be made to expire. Explicitly labelled a draft.
• Bitcoin Knots releasesPrimary Release notes and binaries. 29.3.knots20260508 and newer ship RDTS directly; 29.3.knots20260507 is the same release without it. Running it is not enough on its own, you also set consensusrules=rdts in bitcoin.conf.
• Start9 on navigating RDTS activationCommentary Practical operator-facing writeup from a node vendor.

People worth reading directly

Their own words, not somebody's summary of them. Listing someone is not agreement with everything they say, and it is certainly not their endorsement of this site. Ordered by distance from the chain, not by follower count: the people who wrote the spec and the code, then the people mining and running the pool, then commentary.

• @LukeDashjrPrimaryWrote the 2017 proof-of-work change code the current contingency is rebased from. Removed as BIP editor on 10 August over conflict-of-interest concerns tied to BIP-110, which he did not author.
• @dathon_ohmPrimaryWrote BIP-110 itself. The specification is his, and so is bip110.org. When this site cites what the soft fork actually says, his words are the ones that settle it.
• @cguida6PrimaryChris Guida. Rebased the proof-of-work code onto a recent Knots codebase. The clearest public statements on what is and is not scheduled come from here.
• @Roughnecks110PrimaryMined the first BIP-110 signaling block at 961,632, and the blocks that extended the RDTS chain afterward.
• @Singekino_MinerPrimaryRuns Knots and mines to Ocean Pool through his own node via Datum, and posts practical walkthroughs, including how to rent hashpower and point it at a node you control. Publicly opposed to the BLAKE2b hardfork direction since 15 August, and listed anyway: the criterion here is node sovereignty, not agreement with us.
• @GrassFedBitcoinPrimaryBitcoin Mechanic, OCEAN's Head of Communications; the pool's own team page links this account. Pool and DATUM signaling, from inside the pool. Listed as "Softfork Mechanic" in bip110.run's coalition snapshot; the profile now reads "Hardfork Mechanic," which is its own status report on where this fight has moved.
• @hodlonautCommentaryCitizen journalist. Behind the CAPTURE investigation into Bitcoin Core governance, and won the defamation case Craig Wright brought against him.
• @mattkratterCommentaryBitcoin University. Takes no sponsorships. A model for how to do this without becoming an influencer.

This list is one-sided and says so. It collects people arguing that nodes and users define the rules rather than miners. Plenty of thoughtful people take the other view and you will have no trouble finding them; they are not here because this is not a neutral directory. Note that the people listed do not all agree with each other either, and that is deliberate. It is also short on purpose: we started with the handful we actually read and would rather grow it slowly than pad it. The public coalition list at bip110.run is where to find the whole crowd. If someone belongs here, tell us.

Models we are learning from

• SeedSignerPrimary Publishes the design and a parts list instead of selling hardware, and keeps a list of community vendors with no official endorsement, no preloaded software, and a voluntary expectation that sellers give something back. The clearest working example of building something useful in Bitcoin without becoming a shop or a shill. Their own writing is also candid that donations alone have not made the project sustainable.