TechFlow news, July 20, according to Decrypt, Strategy Executive Chairman Michael Saylor recently published a long article titled "110 Reasons BIP 110 Is a Bad Idea", comprehensively opposing the Bitcoin BIP-110 soft fork proposal.
BIP-110 aims to temporarily restrict non-financial data such as Ordinals and inscriptions from being on-chain by tightening consensus rules, with supporters (including developer Luke Dashjr and the Bitcoin Knots camp) defining it as an "anti-spam transaction" measure.
Saylor raised three core objections to this:
- Precedent risk: Bitcoin cannot identify data "intent", blocking a type of usage via consensus means will set a dangerous template for future innovations targeting privacy tools, stablecoin settlements, etc., "The restriction period is about one year, but the precedent exists permanently"
- Activation mechanism has hidden dangers: BIP-110 lowers the miner signaling threshold from 95% to 55%, and removes the proposal natural expiration option, current signaling rate is less than 1%, inconsistent execution may lead to network split
- Classification controversy: Saylor believes "spam" is not a consensus layer concept, dislike for a certain type of usage does not equal invalidity, "Bitcoin does not need guardians of purity, but guardians of neutrality"
Saylor's stance is consistent with Blockstream CEO Adam Back, Casa Co-founder Jameson Lopp, and Bitcoin advocate Samson Mow. The BIP-110 mandatory signaling window will open in August, with an activation target time of approximately September 1.
