# Kaine's Logs, Taproot, and the Selector Machine Theory

**URL:** https://forum.hypercore.one/t/kaines-logs-taproot-and-the-selector-machine-theory/926
**Category:** Development
**Created:** [May 30, 2026, 3:56pm UTC](https://forum.hypercore.one/t/kaines-logs-taproot-and-the-selector-machine-theory/926 "2026-05-30T15:56:26Z")
**Posts on this page:** 1
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![0x3639](https://forum.hypercore.one/user_avatar/forum.hypercore.one/0x3639/32/33_2.png) [@0x3639](https://forum.hypercore.one/u/0x3639)
#### Post date: [May 30, 2026, 3:56pm UTC](https://forum.hypercore.one/t/kaines-logs-taproot-and-the-selector-machine-theory/926/1 "2026-05-30T15:56:27Z")

</div>

What do we see in [video #3](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQCr_K5hf_8) from @weapymon? He’s “selecting” skin, hair, eyes, etc… What do selectors, taproot and kaine’s messages tell us about the unsolved puzzle.

 ![Screenshot 2026-05-30 at 10.33.25 AM](https://hypercore.nyc3.digitaloceanspaces.com/original/1X/9eadea3d9204fcd52f67043a92e408d9c982b45a.jpeg)

* * *

From the quotes surfaced over the years, the relevant Kaine statements were roughly:

## 1. Taproot Is Important For NoM

> “Also exciting times for Bitcoin, Taproot unlocked a very promising use case that will prove to be the foundation for new possibilities in NoM.”

This is the big one. Notice he didn’t say _Taproot helps Bitcoin_. He said _Taproot unlocks a foundation for NoM_. That implies he saw Taproot as enabling something NoM-specific.

* * *

## 2. Code Instead Of JPEGs

Someone interpreted the future as: put programs in `OP_RETURN` and run them on NoM.

Kaine replied:

> “That was the old way.”

Source: [Telegram: View @zenonnetwork](https://t.me/zenonnetwork/272182)

Then:

> “I think you can imagine what you can do if you store and transfer code instead of jpegs.”

Source: [Telegram: View @zenonnetwork](https://t.me/zenonnetwork/272170)

This is the quote that keeps bothering you, because he’s explicitly contrasting:

- **JPEG** — passive data
- **Code** — active behavior

* * *

## 3. CPU PoW vs ASIC PoW

Kaine:

> “The key is to balance both types of PoW.”

Then:

> “CPU PoW is important for txs. ASIC PoW can be merge-mined.”

Then later:

> “Replace SHA-3 with RandomX for Plasma. And ASIC friendly PoW can be obtained from merge-mining.”

This isn’t directly about Taproot, but it shows he was thinking in layers:

```plaintext
CPU work → transactions
ASIC work → security
NoM → orchestration

```

* * *

## 4. CivKit Could Be Implemented In Syrius

It’s another clue that Syrius was being viewed as more than a wallet — something closer to:

```plaintext
client + identity + marketplace + messaging + contracts

```

* * *

## What Makes The Taproot Quote Interesting

The phrase that stands out is still:

> “That was the old way.”

Because if someone says _store code in `OP_RETURN`_ and the response is _that’s the old way_, then the implication is: there is a newer, better mechanism.

And after Taproot, the obvious candidates are:

- commitments
- selectors
- revealed paths
- script branches
- activation conditions
- proofs

which is exactly why the puzzle reconstruction is interesting.

* * *

## The Strongest Version Of The Theory

Not:

- “The Taproot puzzle is Zenon code.”
- “The puzzle decodes to Syrius.”

But:

> The puzzle may be demonstrating the kind of object Kaine was talking about: a verifiable selector/activation artifact where Bitcoin commits to behavior rather than merely storing data.

That’s the point where the [reconstructed machine](https://github.com/TminusZ/zenon-developer-commons/blob/main/puzzle/zenon_taproot_partial_solve.md) and Kaine’s comments start overlapping in a meaningful way. The overlap isn’t the bytes themselves — it’s the architecture:

```plaintext
Taproot → selector
selector → active path
active path → activation
activation → external verifier

```

And that’s very different from the old model he explicitly dismissed:

```plaintext
OP_RETURN → store data → read data

```

The theory is:

> The Taproot puzzle is not a message and not a JPEG-style artifact. It is a compact code-like object: a selector machine that demonstrates how a Bitcoin Taproot commitment can point to, activate, or verify logic elsewhere.

Kaine’s hint was: _don’t store JPEGs; store and transfer code._ And when someone suggested `OP_RETURN`, he said: _that was the old way._

So the “new way” would be:

```plaintext
Bitcoin Taproot transaction
  → commits to code / rule / pointer / selector
  → one path becomes active
  → external verifier extracts the active path
  → NoM/Syrius/Sentinels use that proof to activate or interpret something

```

The puzzle fits that shape because it behaves like a [machine](https://github.com/TminusZ/zenon-developer-commons/blob/main/puzzle/zenon_taproot_machine_spec.md):

```plaintext
A, B, C, E fields
  → E selects G3
  → G3 produces kernel output 0x6b
  → G4 becomes the shared bridge/control cell
  → System B independently points back to G4

```

The important part is `G4 = 10 41 14`. Both systems converge on it, so G4 may be the “pointer/control word,” not a decoded sentence.

So the hypothesis becomes:

> The Taproot artifact may be an early demonstration of code-on-Bitcoin: not executable code inside Bitcoin, but a Bitcoin-anchored selector/pointer machine whose state can be verified externally.

In NoM terms:

```plaintext
Bitcoin = commitment / activation layer
Sentinels = proof / artifact serving layer
Syrius = client / verifier
NoM = execution / coordination environment

```

This would make the puzzle less like:

> “Find the hidden text.”

and more like:

> “Recognize the mechanism: Bitcoin can carry verifiable code pointers, not just images or data.”

That is exactly what Kaine seemed to be alluding to.