BIP-110 proposes a soft fork to cap on-chain non-monetary data, requiring only 55% hashrate for activation. The proposal has triggered the most intense community division since 2017, with supporters calling for correction and Adam Back denouncing a mob attack.
The fight over BIP-110 and BIP-444 has grown beyond Ordinals, exposing a broader clash over Bitcoin’s neutrality, fee market, censorship resistance, and governance norms.
The debate over BIP-110 and BIP-444 has grown beyond Ordinals and block space, exposing a deeper conflict over Bitcoin’s neutrality, fee market, censorship resistance, and governance norms.
The dispute around BIP-110 and BIP-444 has grown beyond Ordinals congestion into a broader battle over Bitcoin’s neutrality, fee market, censorship resistance, and governance model.
The dispute around BIP-110 and BIP-444 has grown beyond Ordinals congestion concerns into a larger debate over Bitcoin’s neutrality, fee market, censorship resistance, and governance model.
The debate around BIP-110 and BIP-444 has evolved beyond Ordinals into a broader dispute over whether Bitcoin should remain a neutral, permissionless data layer or become a more curated financial ledger.
