Qubic Says Dogecoin Mining Build Is Underway, Revives 51% Attack Fears

bitcoinistPublished on 2026-01-23Last updated on 2026-01-23

Abstract

Qubic has announced the development of a Dogecoin mining integration after a community vote selected DOGE. This move transitions the project from its previous "attention" narrative around Monero into implementation, raising renewed concerns about 51% attacks. Qubic emphasized that integrating ASIC hardware into its useful Proof-of-Work (uPoW) model requires significant engineering and protocol work, but could bring scale by incorporating Dogecoin's large mining economy. The announcement revisits security debates sparked in August 2025 when Qubic claimed a Monero "takeover demonstration" with over 51% hashrate dominance, though subsequent research found its control peaked at 23–34%. Unlike Monero's CPU-based mining, Dogecoin uses Scrypt and has merged mining with Litecoin, making a brute-force 51% attack economically challenging. Research firm 21Shares estimated it would cost billions in hardware and millions daily in electricity. A more plausible risk is Qubic incentivizing existing Scrypt miners to redirect hashpower through its system—a "vampire mining" approach.

Qubic says it is now building a Dogecoin mining integration, a step that moves the project’s post-Monero “attention” narrative into an implementation phase and reopens a familiar set of security questions around majority-hashrate risk.

In an X post shared Thursday, Qubic wrote: “The community didn’t hesitate. The vote was decisive: DOGE won with 301 votes. This isn’t a plug-and-play upgrade. Integrating ASIC hardware into uPoW requires real engineering, deep protocol work, and time to do it right. But the upside is significant. DOGE represents one of the largest and most established mining economies in crypto. Bringing it into Qubic’s useful Proof-of-Work model extends uPoW beyond theory, into scale. [...] Development is underway. This is just the beginning of what is to come.”

Could Dogecoin Suffer A 51% Attack?

The announcement lands with baggage. In August 2025, Qubic ran what it publicly described as a Monero “takeover demonstration,” claiming it had achieved “over 51% hashrate dominance” during parts of the experiment and reporting a brief chain disruption that included a six-block reorganization and orphaned blocks.
That episode became a lightning rod for the broader PoW security debate: how quickly external incentives can concentrate hashpower, and how markets react when “51%” enters the conversation.

Subsequent research challenged the strongest interpretation of those claims. A December 2025 paper reconstructing Qubic-attributed activity on Monero describes the operation as an advertised “selfish mining campaign,” finding Qubic’s hashrate share rising into the 23–34% range in detected intervals, while “sustained 51% control is never observed.”

Dogecoin’s mining economy is structurally unlike Monero’s CPU-oriented RandomX landscape. Dogecoin uses Scrypt and has, since 2014, supported merged mining alongside Litecoin, an architecture that has historically helped bolster its security budget by tapping into a broader Scrypt ASIC miner base.

That hardware reality is central to Qubic’s own messaging. The project said “integrating ASIC hardware into uPoW requires real engineering, deep protocol work, and time to do it right,” explicitly acknowledging that this is not a simple pool launch.

It is also where most of the immediate 51% attack fears run into friction. In an August 2025 research note, published when Qubic first began floating Dogecoin as the “next” network after Monero, 21Shares argued that a brute-force Dogecoin majority would be economically prohibitive, estimating that Qubic would need to match and then exceed roughly 2.78 PH/s, implying about $2.85 billion in hardware plus roughly $2.5 million per day in electricity (before logistics).

The more plausible risk vector, if any, is not Qubic buying its way to majority hashrate, but whether it can engineer incentives and integrations that convince existing Scrypt ASIC operators to route meaningful hashpower through a Qubic-mediated setup, an approach 21Shares characterized as “vampire mining.”

At press time, DOGE traded at $0.12521.

DOGE price, 1-week chart | Source: DOGEUSDT on TradingView.com

Related Questions

QWhat is Qubic currently building and which cryptocurrency does it involve?

AQubic is currently building a Dogecoin mining integration.

QWhat security concern is reignited by Qubic's announcement of Dogecoin mining integration?

AThe announcement reignites fears of a potential 51% attack on the Dogecoin network.

QWhat was the outcome of Qubic's previous 'takeover demonstration' on the Monero network according to subsequent research?

ASubsequent research found that Qubic's hashrate share on Monero reached 23-34% in detected intervals, but sustained 51% control was never observed, challenging the strongest claims of the demonstration.

QWhy does 21Shares argue that a brute-force 51% attack on Dogecoin would be economically prohibitive for Qubic?

A21Shares argued it would be economically prohibitive because Qubic would need to acquire roughly $2.85 billion in hardware and spend about $2.5 million per day on electricity to match the required hashrate.

QWhat is the more plausible risk vector for a Dogecoin 51% attack, as opposed to a brute-force approach?

AThe more plausible risk vector is not a brute-force purchase of hardware, but rather Qubic engineering incentives to convince existing Scrypt ASIC operators to route their hashpower through a Qubic-mediated setup, an approach termed 'vampire mining'.

Related Reads

The Essence of AI Layoffs: Why More AI Adoption Leads to More Corporate Anxiety?

The author, awaiting potential inclusion on an 8000-person layoff list, analyzes the true nature of recent "AI-driven" layoffs. They argue that while AI use, particularly tools like Claude for code generation, has skyrocketed and boosted developer output (e.g., 2-5x more code commits), this has not translated into proportional business growth or revenue. The core issue is a misalignment between increased "Input" (code) and tangible "Outcomes" (user value, revenue). AI acts as a costly B2B SaaS, inflating operational expenses without guaranteed returns. Two key problems emerge: 1) The friction that once filtered out bad ideas is gone, as AI allows cheap pursuit of even weak concepts. 2) Organizational "alignment tax"—the difficulty of coordinating across teams—becomes crippling when development velocity outpaces consensus-building. Thus, layoffs serve two immediate purposes: 1) To offset ballooning AI costs (Token consumption) and maintain cash flow, as rising input costs without outcome growth destroys unit economics. 2) To reduce organizational bloat and alignment friction by simply removing teams, thereby speeding up execution in the short term. Therefore, these layoffs are fundamentally caused by AI, even if AI doesn't directly replace roles. They represent a painful correction until companies learn to convert AI-driven productivity into real business outcomes and streamline organizational coordination to match the new pace of work. The cycle will continue until this learning curve is mastered.

marsbit38m ago

The Essence of AI Layoffs: Why More AI Adoption Leads to More Corporate Anxiety?

marsbit38m ago

Can the Solana Foundation and Google's Collaboration on Pay.sh Bridge the Payment Link Between Web2 and Web3 in the Agent Economy?

Solana Foundation, in collaboration with Google Cloud, has launched Pay.sh, a payment gateway designed to bridge the gap between AI agents and enterprise-grade service infrastructure. The initiative aims to solve a key bottleneck in the "agent economy": existing payment systems are ill-suited for autonomous AI agents. Traditional methods like credit cards require human verification, while newer on-chain protocols like x402 and MPP create a separate, Web3-native system that raises barriers for service providers. Pay.sh functions as a universal payment layer. It allows users to fund a Solana wallet via credit card or stablecoin, which then acts as an identity and payment proxy for AI agents. When an agent needs to access a paid API service (e.g., Google Cloud, Alibaba Cloud), Pay.sh handles the transaction seamlessly. It leverages the HTTP 402 status code ("Payment Required") to initiate payments, intelligently choosing between one-time transfers (x402-style) or session-based authorizations (MPC-style) based on the service's billing model. This spares agents from manual account registration and API key management. A key feature for service providers is low integration effort. They can adopt Pay.sh by providing a declarative configuration file, enabling features like tiered pricing, free tiers, and automatic revenue splitting to multiple addresses (e.g., for royalties, cloud costs). Providers can also list their APIs in a central Pay Skill Registry for agent discovery. The collaboration with Google Cloud provides crucial infrastructure for API proxying, traffic routing, and compliance logging, aiming to keep agent activities within regulated boundaries. By connecting Web2 services with Web3 payment rails, Pay.sh positions the Solana wallet as a foundational identity and payment tool for AI agents, potentially driving more transaction volume to the Solana ecosystem. However, the report notes challenges. The service registry currently lacks robust vetting, risking exposure to unauthorized or malicious third-party APIs. Pay.sh also inherits security and compatibility risks from its underlying payment protocols (x402, MPC). Furthermore, adoption may be hindered by varying regional data privacy and payment compliance regulations among API providers. Despite these hurdles, Pay.sh represents a significant step towards integrating Web2 and Web3 for autonomous agent commerce.

marsbit45m ago

Can the Solana Foundation and Google's Collaboration on Pay.sh Bridge the Payment Link Between Web2 and Web3 in the Agent Economy?

marsbit45m ago

Bitcoin's Bull-Bear Cycle Indicator Turns Positive for the First Time in 7 Months: End of Bear Market or False Breakout?

Bitcoin's "Bull-Bear Market Cycle Indicator" from CryptoQuant has turned positive for the first time since October 2025. This gauge, based on the P&L Index relative to its 365-day moving average, suggests a potential shift from a bear market phase. Concurrently, the Bull Score Index rose to a neutral reading of 50 in late April. The indicator's move into positive territory follows a roughly 35% price rebound from a low near $60,000 in February to above $81,000. The recovery over approximately three months was faster than the 12-month period observed during the 2022 bear market. However, analysts caution against premature optimism, citing a historical precedent from March 2022. Back then, the Bull Score Index briefly hit 50, but it proved to be a false signal as Bitcoin's price subsequently plunged further. Structural differences exist in the current cycle, including consistent inflows into spot Bitcoin ETFs and an increase in large holder addresses. Yet, some models, referencing the four-year halving cycle, suggest a potential deeper bottom near $50,000 might still be possible around late 2026. In summary, while on-chain data shows marked improvement and the worst panic may be over, market participants remain cautious. A convincing trend reversal confirmation likely requires Bitcoin to sustainably break above key resistance, such as the 200-day moving average near $82,000.

marsbit52m ago

Bitcoin's Bull-Bear Cycle Indicator Turns Positive for the First Time in 7 Months: End of Bear Market or False Breakout?

marsbit52m ago

How to Automate Any Workflow with Claude Skills (Complete Tutorial)

This is a comprehensive guide to mastering Claude Skills, a feature for creating permanent, reusable instruction sets that automate specific workflows. Unlike simple saved prompts, Skills function like trained employees, delivering consistent, high-quality outputs by defining the entire task process, standards, error handling, and output format. The guide is structured in four phases: **Phase 1: Installation (5 minutes).** Skills are folders containing a `SKILL.md` file. The user is instructed to find a relevant Skill online, install it, test it on a real task, and compare its performance to one-off prompts. **Phase 2: Building Your First Custom Skill.** Start by rigorously defining the Skill's purpose, trigger phrases, and providing a concrete example of perfect output. The `SKILL.md` file has two parts: a YAML frontmatter with a specific name/description/triggers, and a detailed, step-by-step workflow written in natural language with examples and quality standards. **Phase 3: Testing & Optimization for Production.** Test the Skill in three scenarios: 1) a standard, common task; 2) edge cases with missing or conflicting data; and 3) a pressure test with maximum complexity. Any failure indicates a needed instruction. Implement a weekly optimization cycle to continuously refine the Skill based on real usage. **Phase 4: Building a Complete Skill Library.** The goal is to create a team of Skills for all repetitive tasks. Examples are given for industries like real estate, marketing, finance, consulting, and e-commerce. The user should list their tasks, prioritize them, and build one new Skill per week, maintaining a master document to track their library. The conclusion emphasizes the compounding time savings: ten Skills saving 30 minutes each per week reclaims over 260 hours (6.5 work weeks) per year, fundamentally transforming one's work system.

marsbit1h ago

How to Automate Any Workflow with Claude Skills (Complete Tutorial)

marsbit1h ago

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片