- BIP-110 could change Bitcoin’s rules without broad network consensus, sparking governance concerns.
- The proposal’s low support raises fears of a chain split and disruption for users and businesses.
- The debate highlights that Bitcoin’s future depends on social consensus, not just code.
Bitcoin is facing one of its biggest governance debates in years. A proposal called BIP-110 could activate soon even though only a small number of miners support it. That has sparked an important question: can Bitcoin change its rules without broad agreement?
What Is BIP-110?
BIP-110 is a proposed one-year soft fork that would limit how much non-payment data can be stored in Bitcoin transactions. The proposal mainly targets uses like Ordinals, BRC-20 tokens, and large OP_RETURN data, which take up block space without transferring BTC.
The proposal was written by pseudonymous developer Dathon Ohm, with technical input from Luke Dashjr.
Notably, BIP-110 seeks to keep Bitcoin focused on payments and reduce blockchain bloat. However, it could block valid transactions and give a small group of developers and node operators too much influence over Bitcoin’s rules.
The biggest controversy is how the upgrade would activate.
Instead of requiring the traditional 95% miner approval, BIP-110 lowers the threshold to 55%. If that still isn’t reached, nodes running the software would begin rejecting blocks from miners that don’t signal support. That mandatory phase is expected to begin around block 961,632 (roughly August 8–9, 2026).
So far, support has remained very low. For most of the summer, fewer than 1% of mined blocks signaled for BIP-110. After the Ocean mining pool enabled signaling by default, support rose to around 2–3%, still far below the activation target.
Why Consensus Matters
Bitcoin has no CEO or central authority. Rule changes succeed only after enough miners, node operators, businesses, and users adopt them. That’s why past Bitcoin upgrades needed overwhelming support before activating.
Notably, broad agreement helps prevent the network from splitting into two incompatible versions.
Without that agreement, some nodes may follow the new rules while others continue using the old ones. If both groups keep producing valid blocks under different rules, Bitcoin could split into two separate chains.
Several well-known Bitcoin figures have warned about this possibility. Adam Back, CEO of Blockstream, argues BIP-110 has almost no economic support and believes miners are unlikely to keep supporting a minority chain if it becomes unprofitable.
Michael Saylor, executive chairman of Strategy, has also criticized the proposal, saying it could weaken Bitcoin’s neutrality by allowing a minority to decide which transactions are valid.
Supporters disagree. Some believe users should prepare for the possibility of a split rather than assume BIP-110 will fail. Others have reviewed the proposal and decided not to support it while continuing to watch other changes being discussed in the Bitcoin ecosystem.
What Happens If Bitcoin Splits?
Bitcoin infrastructure company Start9 has warned users that a chain split is possible once mandatory signaling begins.
Different groups would face different risks.
- Miners could end up mining a chain with very little support, leading to slow block production or even a stalled network.
- Node operators will either run BIP-110 software or stick with the current rules.
- Exchanges and businesses may temporarily pause deposits and withdrawals due to replay attacks, in which the same transaction could be valid on both chains.
- Lightning Network users could face additional complications because Lightning depends on both participants agreeing on the underlying blockchain.
History provides one example. Bitcoin Cash split from Bitcoin in 2017 with far more miner and community support than BIP-110 currently has. Even so, the market continued treating Bitcoin as the main chain while Bitcoin Cash remained much smaller.
Related: Adam Back Calls BIP-110 ‘Technically Defective’ as Bitcoin Governance Debate Heats Up
Disclaimer: The information presented in this article is for informational and educational purposes only. The article does not constitute financial advice or advice of any kind. Coin Edition is not responsible for any losses incurred as a result of the utilization of content, products, or services mentioned. Readers are advised to exercise caution before taking any action related to the company.
