HackerReposA FIELD GUIDE TO OPEN SOURCE
ProSponsor the shelf♧ 0
← Back to top all-time
bitcoin-dot-org
Bitcoin.org
SCSS2015–2021
bitcoin-dot-org / Bitcoin.org

Bitcoin.org

Bitcoin.org Website

Web DevelopmentNetworkingFinance & Commerce
Explore on GitHubRead Hacker News discussions
18Distinct people
20Mentions
0Explicit recommenders
1.8KGitHub stars
REPOSITORY AT A GLANCE

What to know before exploring

What it is

Bitcoin.org Website

GitHub

Where it is used

No documented product use was verified in the last source check.

What people are saying

No recommendation phrase was found in the indexed comments.

No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.

Also in these discussions

Mentioned in the same Hacker News threads. That is not proof they are substitutes.

This week on Hacker News

Nov 7–Nov 14 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/14/2026, 3:56:07 PM UTC.

No direct repository links were found in the indexed HN discussions over the past seven days. Older discussions are available below.

Mentions over time

HN mentions by year20 dated mentions

Observed mentions: 2015-07-24 04:33:39 UTC to 2021-05-23 20:18:49 UTC.

02462015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 3 mentions; 3 submissions, 0 comments20152016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 3 mentions; 1 submissions, 2 comments2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 7 mentions; 1 submissions, 6 comments2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 3 mentions; 2 submissions, 1 comments20182019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 2 mentions; 2 submissions, 0 comments2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 2 mentions; 0 submissions, 2 comments2021

Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.

View mention counts and date ranges
UTC ranges include their start and exclude their end. Select a period to filter the source evidence.
PeriodStart (UTC)End (exclusive, UTC)MentionsSubmissionsComments
20152015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC330
20162016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC312
20172017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC716
20182018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC321
20192019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20202020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC220
20212021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC202

From the project README

An excerpt from the repository, fetched Nov 13, 2026.

Read the project’s introduction
Welcome to Bitcoin.org's Codebase Current Build Status: Live site: Bitcoin.org Report problems or help improve the site by opening a new issue or pull request. Earn Bitcoin for Contributing Open issues labeled with "Bounty" have bounties on them. Viewing the issue will reveal the value of the bounty. Submit a pull request resolving the issue along with an accompanying note or comment containing a bitcoin address and automatically receive a payment in the amount of the bounty if it gets merged. How to Participate The following quick guides will help you get started: Becoming a Contributor Working with GitHub Setting Up Your Environment Improving Developer Documentation Assisting with Translations Adding Exchanges Managing Wallets Adding Release Notes and Alerts Adding Blog Posts Miscellaneous / Other Code of Conduct Participation in this project is subject to a Code of Conduct. License This repository is released under the terms of the MIT license. See LICENSE for more information. The intellectual property rights in the files are owned by the respective authors. Some of the files can be licensed under MIT License (MIT) available on https://opensource.org/licenses/MIT or other licenses. Appropriate licensing information can be found in the header of the file or in the folder containing the file.
Read the full README on GitHub

What Hacker News says

20 sources
crazypython·May 23, 2021
Hi. Bitcoin.org contributor[0] here. You can start and run a fully validating Bitcoin node with 7GB of storage space and 128MB-256MB RAM. Download the official GUI Bitcoin software here[1]. Enable pruning to store just 7GB. This validates all blocks. The ability to prune older blockchain data is an inherent feature of blockchain, as explained by Satoshi himself: > Once the latest transaction in a coin is buried under enough blocks, the spent transactions before it can be discarded to save disk space. To facilitate this without breaking the block's hash, transactions are hashed in a Merkle Tree [7][2][5], with only the root included in the block's hash. Old blocks can then be compacted by stubbing off branches of the tree. The interior hashes do not need to be stored. Only the recent several days need to be stored for security, which allow
Read the rest
s Bitcoin to run very securely with just 7GB of space. [0]: https://github.com/bitcoin-dot-org/Bitcoin.org/pull/3624 [1]: https://bitcoincore.org/
In The Limits to Blockchain Scalability
nulagrithom·Jan 23, 2018
> What future does an asset have if people don't actually buy stuff with it? I look at it (maybe naively) like a solid gold bar. You're not going to walk in to a convenience store and pay with a bar of solid gold; you might flee the country with one though. Beyond that, I totally agree with your read on the post. Linking the pull request[0] was especially backhanded. It feels like there's some underlying frustration there that was expounded upon using good references and kind words. [0]: https://github.com/bitcoin-dot-org/bitcoin.org/pull/2010/fil...
In Ending Bitcoin Support
DavidShares·Dec 9, 2017
OP should probably link to another source for the original Bitcoin white paper, for example https://bitcoin.com/bitcoin.pdf The reason being is that the owners of Bitcoin.org are actively trying to rewrite the white paper even against the larger community’s wishes. I believe sometime in the near future the owners will go ahead with their plans anyways as they seem to do that when it comes to other issues too. Ref: https://github.com/bitcoin-dot-org/bitcoin.org/issues/1904#i... https://github.com/bitcoin-dot-org/bitcoin.org/issues/1325
In Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System (2008) [pdf]
etherael·Dec 9, 2017
That's because you're right and he's wrong. He's a well known bitcoin core apologist, and is just talking his political position. The original intended system design at scale had no need for non mining nodes. This revisionism is a long running and well known war, here is the core political bloc in question actually attempting to justify editing the white paper to push their perspective over reality. Cancerous stuff. https://github.com/bitcoin-dot-org/bitcoin.org/issues/1904
In Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System (2008) [pdf]
RandVal30142·Aug 15, 2017
> It's development has been taken over by a group of mentally unstable developers with weird personal agendas and beliefs. They literally want to edit Satoshi's bitcoin whitepaper[1]. One of the supporters of editing the paper is theymos, who runs the censored Reddit sub. I was banned there after reporting a violent user who was urging the torture of Jihan Wu[2] of Bitmain. Violent invective and hate directed towards races & nationalities somehow are not insta-moderated while mundane comments about Bitcoin itself get mod-queued forever? Its out of control there. That lot is not to be trusted. [1] https://github.com/bitcoin-dot-org/bitcoin.org/issues/1325 [2] http://archive.is/oDdq5
In What Goldman Is Telling Big Money Clients About Bitcoin
RandVal30142·Jul 23, 2017
>You can be killing it 24/7 Problem is they have -not- been killing it 24/7. This block size debate has been going on for years with Blockstream(Core) refusing to do anything about it aside from indirect fixes. Well before Bitcoin's 1MB blocks were full people were getting dismissed/deflected/denigrated due to bringing the subject up to the developers. As the issue climaxed earlier this year Blockstream only proposed SegWit as a fix[1]. Segwit isn't even related to the block size issue directly. It is more applicable to Blockstream's business plans for rolling out for-profit Lightning Network nodes that use Bitcoin as a settlement layer. So for years now Blockstream has done what? Threatened to edit[2] Satoshi's whitepaper while ignoring public consensus unless the public accepts their kludge of a 'fix?' Fire Core. They are overtly drivin
Read the rest
g Bitcoin away from the purpose it was created for, a "peer to peer electronic currency." They halted Bitcoin development after investment by AXA and others, turning their focus into creating for-profit products that use Bitcoin. Fire Core. [1] https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10028 [2] https://github.com/bitcoin-dot-org/bitcoin.org/issues/1325
In What did Bitcoin Core contributors ever do for us?
kanzure·Aug 18, 2016
So far, none of the others I have pinged about this has any info as to its veracity or background. Unlike most contributions to bitcoin.org, this one was pushed to the master branch without a corresponding pull request (a mechanism used to solicit review and feedback from others). https://github.com/bitcoin-dot-org/bitcoin.org/commit/5e0fd5... I suggest skepticism. We should be cautious of anyone skipping peer review processes, even for security incidents. Poor handling of these situations can lead to unintentional panic where panic of any kind is unhelpful to resolving issues. However, everyone should always be encouraged to check the signatures regardless of alerts, of course. Multiple signatures should always be checked, and not just Wladimir's signature. Use the gitian signatures repository to get other signatures, and always verify p
Read the rest
ublic key and signature data through multiple independent channels. gitian signatures repository: https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gitian.sigs GPG build verification steps: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/doc/release-p... gitian build steps: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/doc/gitian-bu... gnupg CVE-2016-6316 from today https://lists.gnupg.org/pipermail/gnupg-announce/2016q3/0003... Also, don't use gpg short ids. Always verify fingerprints. There are gpg short id matching keys floating around for some Bitcoin developers - for example, http://pgp.surfnet.nl:11371/pks/lookup?op=vindex&fingerprint... check out the revoked key. ( This reply is x-posted from https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/4y8m76/0130_binary... )
In Bitcoin 0.13.0 Binary Safety Warning

Showing the 15 most recent of 20 sources. Enable JavaScript to search and browse every indexed mention.

MAKE YOURSELF AT HOME

A few shortcuts

/
Search the collection
?
Open this guide
Esc
Close dialogs and navigation

Your saved repositories and interests stay in this browser.