Over the past weeks, I’ve been quietly observing the situation around $qubic and the claim that they had surpassed 50% of $XMR Monero’s hashrate. I decided not to take any public position until I had enough data and could make up my own mind. What follows is my personal assessment of what actually happened and what I believe the Monero community should learn from it.

TLDR: $qubic never actually reached 51% hashrate. They used selfish mining and psychological game theory to create the illusion of dominance and pressure $XMR miners into defecting.

More 👇 Qubic publicly asserted that it had achieved more than 50% of Monero’s hashrate. With this claim came a clear threat: since they supposedly controlled the majority of the network, any miner not joining their pool would see their blocks orphaned and their profitability decline. The message was simple and designed to trigger panic: “we already won. Switch to us now, before you start losing money.”

But what actually happened because when actual blockchain data is examined, that claim falls apart.

At the time of the announcement, Qubic was hashing at roughly 2.5 GH/s, while the total Monero network was around 6.5 GH/s. That places Qubic somewhere between 35% and 38% of total hashrate. A bit later, their share even slipped back down closer to 30%.

To verify this more precisely, an independent audit was done over a one-day period between block heights 3475510 and 3476208 (G to @desheshai for this). Out of 699 blocks, exactly 250 could be cryptographically tied to a Qubic-controlled wallet which represents 35.7% of the block production.

Interestingly, Qubic did manage to produce more than 50% of the blocks during short windows of time BUT this was due to selfish mining and variance, NOT because they had majority control. Selfish mining is a known strategy where a miner withholds their blocks and strategically releases them in order to invalidate honest blocks. The net result is that a miner with, say, 35% of the hashrate can momentarily appear to control 50% or more of the finalized chain blocks.

So yes, they occasionally mined more than half the blocks but NO, they never had 51% of the actual hashrate (which is what matters).

🇫🇷 {1/15} De nombreuses personnes ont été surprises par l'affaire " $UST ".

Je ne vais pas revenir dessus, d'autres le font déjà très bien.

Le secteur des cryptomonnaies connaît-t-il un « Black Swan » ? 🇫🇷 {2/15} Le dernier "Bullrun" des cryptomonnaies a vu l'émergence de nouveaux projets au marketing toujours plus poussé.

La guerre n'était pas à qui créait le plus de valeur mais à qui pouvait se montrer le plus et vendre du rêve.

C'est un copier-coller du passé.