# BIP-110 Related Articles

Less than 1% Support, Yet BIP-110 Forcibly Pushes Bitcoin Towards a Soft Fork?

The controversial Bitcoin Improvement Proposal (BIP-110), which seeks to limit non-financial data like Ordinals and NFTs in Bitcoin transactions, is approaching a critical "forced activation" window in early August. Despite having extremely low support—less than 1% from miners and about 15% from nodes, far below its 55% activation threshold—the proposal’s rules will be enforced by supporting nodes, potentially creating a chain split. Proponents, led by developer Luke Dashjr and his Ocean pool, argue it’s necessary to curb “spam” and refocus Bitcoin on its monetary role. However, major opponents like Adam Back, Jameson Lopp, and Michael Saylor contend that BIP-110 fails to solve core issues, risks stifling innovation, compromises Bitcoin's censorship-resistant nature, and could fragment the network. Analysts suggest the minority BIP-110 chain will likely fail to become the longest chain due to lack of hash power, potentially leading to its abandonment or a permanent, separate fork with limited economic viability.

marsbit07/18 12:12

Support Rate Less Than 1%, BIP-110 Still Pushes Bitcoin Towards a Soft Fork?

Title: BIP-110 Pushes Bitcoin Towards a Soft Fork Despite Less Than 1% Approval With its August mandatory activation window approaching, the controversial BIP-110 proposal is back in the spotlight. Proposed in December 2025 by Dathon Ohm and supported by Bitcoin Core developer Luke Dashjr, BIP-110 aims to impose a one-year limit on arbitrary/non-monetary data in Bitcoin transactions, primarily targeting large data storage like Ordinals and Bitcoin NFTs, to reduce network "spam" and refocus Bitcoin on its monetary function. However, the proposal faces overwhelming opposition. To activate, BIP-110 requires a 55% threshold, yet current miner support is below 1%. Of the 102,674 network nodes, only 14.64% (15,035) signal readiness to enforce it. Despite this lack of consensus, BIP-110 has a contentious "mandatory window" mechanism: if the threshold isn't met by block height 961,632, supporting nodes will begin rejecting non-compliant blocks from height 961,632 to 963,647, attempting to force activation by block 965,664. This could lead to a chain split in early August between a minority chain enforcing BIP-110 and the main chain. Proponents, led by Luke Dashjr (founder of Ocean mining pool), argue that inscriptions constitute an "attack" on Bitcoin, congesting block space and raising transaction fees, thereby undermining Bitcoin's primary use as money. They view BIP-110 not as a change but as a reversal of a harmful change. Opponents, including figures like Adam Back, Jameson Lopp, and Michael Saylor, contend that BIP-110 fails to solve the spam problem while creating new risks. They warn it could stifle future innovation (e.g., impacting BitVM), introduce transaction censorship—eroding Bitcoin's neutrality—and potentially cause a damaging chain split that fragments developer resources, hash power, and monetary consensus. They argue market-based fee pressure and block size limits already manage congestion effectively. Potential outcomes post-activation include: 1) The BIP-110 chain stalling due to insufficient hash power; 2) The BIP-110 chain becoming the longest chain if it gains majority miner support (though currently, Ocean holds only 2.6% of hash power vs. opponents like F2Pool at 13.6%); or 3) A persistent minority chain that remains economically unviable, potentially leading to a permanent fork. Most analysts and prediction markets deem BIP-110's success unlikely, with one market giving only a 10% probability that it will become the accepted longest chain by September 2026.

marsbit07/17 10:27

With Less Than 1% Support, Will BIP-110 Still Force a Bitcoin Soft Fork?

**English Summary:** Despite garnering minimal support (less than 1% from miners and around 14.6% of nodes), the controversial BIP-110 proposal is poised to enter its "forced activation" window in early August. Proposed in December 2025 by Dathon Ohm and backed by Bitcoin Core developer Luke Dashjr, BIP-110 aims to temporarily restrict non-monetary data (like Ordinals and Bitcoin NFTs) in transactions for one year to reduce network "spam" and refocus Bitcoin on its monetary function. The proposal's contentious mechanism means that supporting nodes will enforce the new rules starting at block height 965,664 (late August/early September), even without reaching the 55% activation threshold. This will likely cause a chain split between nodes enforcing BIP-110 and the main chain. **Supporters**, led by Luke Dashjr and his Ocean mining pool, view BIP-110 as a necessary correction to stop what they consider an "attack" on Bitcoin—the use of block space for data storage, which they argue drives up transaction fees and burdens nodes. They believe the stricter BIP-110 chain could eventually become the longest chain. **Opponents**, including figures like Adam Back, Jameson Lopp, and Michael Saylor, argue that BIP-110 fails to solve core issues while creating new risks. Their concerns include stifling future innovation (e.g., hindering BitVM), compromising Bitcoin's censorship-resistant and decentralized ethos, introducing potential chain-split uncertainties like double-spend risks, and fracturing the ecosystem's resources and consensus. They maintain the proposal addresses a cultural problem with a flawed technical solution and are confident it will fail economically. Potential outcomes post-activation range from the BIP-110 chain stalling due to insufficient miner support, to a sustained minority chain that struggles to attract economic activity, potentially leading to a permanent hard fork—an outcome Luke Dashjr currently opposes. Most analysts and prediction markets assign a low probability (around 10%) to BIP-110 successfully becoming the dominant Bitcoin chain.

Odaily星球日报07/17 10:10

‘We’re trying to defend Bitcoin’: Why BIP-110 is losing community support

Blockstream CEO Adam Back argues that Bitcoin Improvement Proposal 110 (BIP-110), a contentious soft fork, is misguided. He contends discussions are fueled by misconceptions about Bitcoin's architecture, not malicious intent, and that the proposal's proponents are often well-intentioned newcomers. BIP-110, implemented in December 2025, aims to restrict arbitrary data like Ordinals inscriptions to prevent network spam and preserve Bitcoin's primary function as peer-to-peer cash. Back acknowledges spam is an issue but believes Bitcoin's existing market-driven mechanisms—transaction fees, miner incentives, and decentralized consensus—already address it. He argues BIP-110 clashes with Bitcoin's permissionless ethos and that a fork based on it would likely fail due to a lack of community support and because it contradicts Bitcoin's foundational principles. Market dynamics show limited support for the proposal, with only 10 out of 2,016 blocks backing a temporary upgrade on July 4th. Concurrently, Ordinals activity has dropped to all-time lows, with fewer than 10,000 inscriptions daily. Bitcoin's price has also fallen 45% over the past year. Michael Saylor echoes Back's critical stance on BIP-110.

ambcrypto07/12 13:02

‘Can not be censored’- Bitcoin proposal to block Ordinals wins under 1% support

The Bitcoin Improvement Proposal BIP-110, a controversial soft fork designed to restrict non-financial data like Ordinals and Runes inscriptions to combat network spam, has decisively failed to gain sufficient miner support. By the July 4th deadline for miner activation, it received backing in less than 1% of the required 2,016-block period, far short of the 55% threshold needed. The proposal aimed to preserve Bitcoin's core function as a low-cost payment network by blocking memecoins and other data-heavy transactions, which supporters argue increase transfer costs. However, critics, including BitMEX Research and Blockstream CEO Adam Back, strongly opposed the measure. They warned it would break existing wallets, potentially lock over 1.7 million BTC, and fundamentally undermine Bitcoin's reliability and censorship-resistant nature. With negligible miner backing, the proposal's chance of activation in the upcoming user phase in August appears highly unlikely, highlighting a community division over network governance and functionality.

ambcrypto07/04 18:02

BIP-110 Controversy Intensifies: Bitcoin May Face Its Most Divisive Hard Fork Battle in Years

Bitcoin is approaching a critical block height of 961,632, which could activate the controversial BIP-110 proposal. This proposal aims to restrict the amount of non-financial data, such as inscriptions and other large data payloads, within Bitcoin transactions. Supporters, including some node operators and Bitcoin purists, argue that BIP-110 is necessary to preserve Bitcoin's core function as a monetary settlement layer by reducing network congestion and node operational burdens caused by non-essential data. They frame it as a correction to keep the network true to its original purpose. However, critics, including prominent figures like Blockstream's Adam Back and developer Jameson Lopp, warn that the proposal's implementation mechanism is dangerously flawed. They highlight that its low 55% miner signaling threshold, coupled with a contentious enforcement mechanism allowing nodes to unilaterally reject non-compliant blocks, significantly increases the risk of a chain split. Opponents argue this sets a dangerous precedent for transaction censorship, undermines Bitcoin's protocol neutrality, and creates excessive uncertainty for developers and businesses, especially since the rule is proposed as a temporary one-year measure. Market analysts, such as those from Bitfinex, suggest a full-scale network split is unlikely due to a lack of broad economic consensus. Major mining pools remain neutral, and adoption of the new rules is minimal. They view the situation more as a governance stress test. The primary risk is operational disruption: if a minority chain persists, major exchanges and custodians may need to temporarily suspend Bitcoin deposits and withdrawals to manage security and liquidity, potentially unsettling newer institutional investors. While BIP-110 is not expected to succeed in overtaking the main chain, its approach has ignited a significant debate about Bitcoin's governance, core values, and resilience.

Foresight News06/12 07:25

BIP-110 Could Split Bitcoin In New Soft Fork Fight, Jameson Lopp Warns

bitcoinist02/25 09:18

Bitcoin Community Erupts, BIP-110 Sparks Value Dispute Among OG's Attention

Bitcoin community is embroiled in a heated debate over BIP-110, a proposal aiming to restrict non-financial data such as Ordinals and Runes inscriptions via a soft fork. The initiative, led by developer Dathon Ohm, represents a push by "minimalists" against what they deem excessive data usage that threatens network performance and decentralization. A key point of contention is the proposal’s 55% activation threshold—significantly lower than Bitcoin’s traditional 95% miner approval requirement for consensus changes. Supporters argue it prevents minority veto power and defends against blockchain "spam," while opponents, including Adam Back and Michael Saylor, warn it risks chain splits, undermines immutability, and sets a dangerous precedent for future governance. The debate also touches on economic concerns: miners fear losing fee revenue from inscription transactions, while proponents claim current SegWit discounts unfairly subsidize non-monetary data. Node operators are already shifting client allegiance, with Bitcoin Knots gaining traction. Ultimately, BIP-110 raises fundamental questions about Bitcoin’s purpose: whether it should remain purely monetary or accommodate broader data use cases, balancing scalability, security, and decentralization.

marsbit02/25 08:58

BIP-110 Protocol: The Necessary Path to Bitcoin's Million-Dollar Milestone?

This article argues that Bitcoin's path to reaching a $1 million valuation depends on maintaining its core monetary promise: a fixed supply of 21 million coins enforced by a decentralized, permissionless node network. The author identifies a systemic attack on this network, enabled by a vulnerability (CVE-2023-50428) in Bitcoin Core that allows non-monetary data (like Ordinals inscriptions and BRC-20 tokens) to bypass spam filters via Taproot transactions. While Bitcoin Knots patched this, Bitcoin Core not only refused to fix it but also removed OP_RETURN size limits in version 30, further bloating the blockchain. The proposed solution, BIP-110, would filter out non-monetary data transactions (41.5% in a 10-day sample) without affecting any legitimate financial transactions, reclaiming 36% of block space. The author contends that prioritizing monetary use over non-monetary data storage is essential to preserve node accessibility, decentralization, and long-term credibility for institutional adoption. The article urges node operators to switch to Bitcoin Knots to enforce BIP-110 and protect Bitcoin's monetary integrity.

marsbit02/09 13:05