AnswersPublished20 sources
Luke Dashjr’s Proposed Bitcoin Fork: Why It Replaces SHA-256d With BLAKE2b
Luke Dashjr’s project is a proposed BLAKE2b breakaway chain targeted for September 1, 2026—not a generally adopted upgrade to Bitcoin. Replacing SHA 256d would make existing Bitcoin SHA 256 ASICs unusable on the new chain and is intended to make CPU and GPU mining more practical, but changing the algorithm does not...
Published byEdited with GPT-5.6 LunaImages generated with GPT Image 1.5
Research answer
Key takeaways
- Luke Dashjr’s project is a proposed BLAKE2b breakaway chain targeted for September 1, 2026—not a generally adopted upgrade to Bitcoin.
- Replacing SHA 256d would make existing Bitcoin SHA 256 ASICs unusable on the new chain and is intended to make CPU and GPU mining more practical, but changing the algorithm does not guarantee decentralized mining.
- The launch remains conditional, with no demonstrated major exchange, wallet, or Lightning support and unresolved concerns about replay protection.
AI Prompt
openai.comCreate a landscape editorial hero image for this Studio Global article: What is the Bitcoin hard fork backed by Luke Dashjr that is scheduled to launch on September 1, 2026, including its replacement of SHA-256d. Article summary: The project is best described as a proposed **BLAKE2b breakaway chain** backed by Luke Dashjr and other former BIP-110 supporters—not an upgrade to the Bitcoin network that Bitcoin users or miners generally adopted. It w. Topic tags: general, general web, user generated. Style: premium digital editorial illustration, source-backed research mood, clean composition, high detail, modern web publication hero. Use reference image context only for broad subject, composition, and topical grounding; do not copy the exact image. Avoid: logos, brand marks, copyrighted characters, real person likenesses, fake screenshots, UI text, readable text, watermarks, charts with fak
The project associated with Luke Dashjr is best understood as a proposed BLAKE2b breakaway chain, not a change that Bitcoin’s main network has adopted. Its backers have targeted September 1, 2026, following the collapse of the earlier BIP-110 minority chain, which produced only two blocks before stalling. 1
2
What would change?
The proposed fork would replace Bitcoin’s SHA-256d proof-of-work with BLAKE2b. That would put it on a separate consensus path: Bitcoin mining equipment built for SHA-256 cannot mine the new chain under the proposed rules. Supporters argue that BLAKE2b could reduce the advantage of established Bitcoin ASIC miners and make mining more accessible to general-purpose CPUs and GPUs. 1
3
4
That design also means the project should not be treated as “Bitcoin replacing SHA-256d.” It would be a distinct network with its own security, miners, liquidity, software support, and market acceptance.
How it grew out of BIP-110
BIP-110, formally described as the Reduced Data Temporary Softfork, sought to restrict certain non-financial uses of Bitcoin block space, including data associated with inscriptions and related protocols. The proposal failed to win the miner support required for activation: reporting put signaling at about 2.53%, well below its stated 55% threshold. 5
When mandatory signaling began, BIP-110 nodes rejected blocks that did not follow its rules. The resulting minority branch split at block 961,632, mined blocks 961,632 and 961,633, and then effectively stopped advancing while the overwhelming majority of hashpower remained on the established Bitcoin chain. 1
5
The BLAKE2b plan is an attempt to avoid depending on those existing SHA-256 miners. In practical terms, however, it changes a failed Bitcoin consensus campaign into a new altcoin-style network whose security and adoption must be built separately.
Why supporters criticize Bitcoin’s mining model
Dashjr and other supporters have criticized ASICBoost and the concentration of block-template control in large mining pools. Their stated goal is to weaken incumbent hardware advantages and encourage more decentralized block construction. 4
That rationale remains contested. A proof-of-work change can alter which hardware has an advantage, but it does not by itself prove that mining, transaction selection, or block-template production will become decentralized. The new chain would still need independent miners, reliable software, and economic users.
Launch plans and the Bitcoin Knots rehearsal
Reporting in late August described a planned August 30 rehearsal in Bitcoin Knots. The test was intended to establish a final SHA-256 block before switching the proposed chain to BLAKE2b; a successful rehearsal could be followed by a release preserving the chain for the targeted September 1 launch. 3
4
The schedule was not fully settled in the available reporting. One report said the code had been merged into a Bitcoin Knots branch but that a final client and activation height had not yet been published. 5 A rehearsal or release candidate therefore would demonstrate implementation progress—not that the network will launch successfully, attract durable hashpower, or become economically usable.
Dashjr’s departure from OCEAN and CONVOY
Following the BIP-110 fallout, a joint statement said Dashjr separated from OCEAN, resigning as chairman, chief technology officer, and director, with the company repurchasing his equity. The statement also said he would pursue a new mining venture called CONVOY, framed around decentralizing Bitcoin mining. 24
The available evidence does not establish CONVOY as an operating mining pool or confirm its final role in the BLAKE2b chain. It is therefore more accurate to describe it as a proposed venture than as proof of an established mining ecosystem.
What holders should know about support and replay risk
There was no demonstrated commitment from a major exchange, wallet provider, or Lightning implementation in the available reporting. 7
13 That means holders should not assume that any resulting fork asset will be safely tradable, supported by standard wallets, or usable in Bitcoin payment infrastructure.
Replay protection is another unresolved issue. Public reporting raised concerns that transactions could be valid on both chains if transaction formats remain compatible and the fork does not implement effective replay protection. 16 No authoritative final technical specification in the available evidence confirms how the project will address that risk.
Until wallet providers document their chain-handling and replay-protection procedures, users should avoid moving coins around a fork event based on unverified instructions. A balance appearing on a second chain does not automatically make it safe to spend or transfer.
What criticism means for the outlook
The central criticism is a governance and coordination problem: a small group of developers or node operators cannot make the broader Bitcoin economy recognize a new rule set simply by publishing software. Miners, exchanges, wallets, businesses, and users must independently choose to support the chain. Reporting has documented criticism of the proposal and its arguments from figures including Ripple CTO emeritus David Schwartz. 7
9
The project’s prospects are uncertain. BIP-110’s two-block stall is strong evidence that the backers faced a serious adoption problem, but it does not mathematically prove that a new BLAKE2b network cannot operate. 1
5 Its outcome will depend on whether it attracts independent hashpower, stable software, liquidity, wallet support, and users.
For now, the clearest description is a proposed Bitcoin-derived BLAKE2b chain, not a Bitcoin upgrade. The September 1 date is a target, and the meaningful test will be sustained independent adoption after launch—not merely whether the software produces an initial block.
Studio Global AI
Continue your research
This page includes a source-backed answer you can continue inside Studio Global.
People also ask
What is the short answer to "Luke Dashjr’s Proposed Bitcoin Fork: Why It Replaces SHA-256d With BLAKE2b"?
Luke Dashjr’s project is a proposed BLAKE2b breakaway chain targeted for September 1, 2026—not a generally adopted upgrade to Bitcoin.
What are the key points to validate first?
Luke Dashjr’s project is a proposed BLAKE2b breakaway chain targeted for September 1, 2026—not a generally adopted upgrade to Bitcoin. Replacing SHA 256d would make existing Bitcoin SHA 256 ASICs unusable on the new chain and is intended to make CPU and GPU mining more practical, but changing the algorithm does not guarantee decentralized mining.
What should I do next in practice?
The launch remains conditional, with no demonstrated major exchange, wallet, or Lightning support and unresolved concerns about replay protection.