The controversy surrounding the Bitcoin Upgrading proposal BIP-110 is still fermenting. Proponents would like to see interim consensus adjustments to limit the inclusion of non-financial data to ease the chain congestion brought about by Ordinals and Runes, while opponents feared that such changes would touch upon the long-held principle of stability of bitcoin.

Dashjr claims that he is no longer fit to withdraw

When the Bitcoin developer Luke Dashjr recently responded to external requests, he said that BIP-110 was “too late to cancel”. He also clarified that President Strategy Michael Saylor had not made a public statement on the proposal.

Dashjr is one of the main supporters of this soft fork and maintains Bitcoin Knots client. In his view, the current proposal might not be the end. If the Bitcoin Core team is not able to come up with a more complete treatment in the coming year, then a longer-term soft fork arrangement may be required.

Proposal focused on non-financial data writing

The core objective of BIP-110 is to limit the use of data in the chain. Proponents argue that applications such as Ordinals and Runes include a large amount of non-financial data in bitcoin blocks, crowding out cyberspace and pushing up data storage pressure at nodes.

  • Proposal name: BIP-110
  • Focus of debate: Whether to restrict the inclusion of non-financial data
  • Main background: Ordinals and Runes bring in congestion disputes

Saylor's emphasis on a less modulated deal.

At the same time, Sailor has recently re-emphasized in a public article that the long-term success of Bitcoin depends on the non-changeability of the agreement. In his view, the important evolution of Bitcoin over the next decade was not to add more functions but to minimize changes.

According to him, Bitcoin was not a science and technology growth unit or a software platform that relied on continuous functional competition. Any modification at the level of the agreement should have a very high threshold of proof.

Saylor also mentioned that halving would tighten supply and that it would be institutional capital inflows that would really determine the trajectory of network growth. He also warned, however, that over-leveraging could lead to “paper bitcoin” and thus to greater system risk.

At the heart of this debate is whether Bitcoin should be more active in cleaning up non-financial uses or continue to keep the agreement change threshold very high. BIP-110 will also be a new node for observing differences in Bitcoin development routes.