BIP-110 proposal to restrict non-financial data on Bitcoin is dividing developers and miners as an activation deadline approaches.
Regulation & Gov ·
Bitcoin Improvement Proposal 110 would restrict several methods for embedding non-financial data in transactions, including limiting most outputs to 34 bytes, restoring an 83-byte cap on OP_RETURN outputs, and temporarily constraining Taproot features used for inscriptions. The proposal has drawn sharp disagreement among prominent figures: supporters argue it would reduce blockchain spam and reinforce Bitcoin's monetary role, while critics contend it would invalidate currently valid fee-paying transactions and establish a dangerous precedent for future censorship-based protocol changes. Strategy Executive Chairman Michael Saylor and Casa Chief Security Officer Jameson Lopp have each argued the risks outweigh the benefits, citing threats to censorship resistance and predictability.
As a soft fork, BIP-110 entered its mandatory signaling period in August with minimal miner backing—only 1% support recorded on the proposal's monitoring dashboard as of reporting. Blockstream CEO Adam Back has emphasized that Bitcoin's decentralized design resists top-down preference imposition, while developers like Luke Dashjr have supported the change. The dispute revives core governance questions that dominated the network during the Blocksize Wars, centering on how Bitcoin should evolve and who holds decision-making power.
The debate's resolution remains uncertain. Miner adoption has stalled far below typical activation thresholds, yet the proposal continues to generate engagement across developers, companies, and users—unresolved is whether grassroots support or technical consensus will ultimately shape the outcome.