Community Trust ScoreVerified
Michael Saylor went public with a 110-point critique of BIP-110. That’s not a typo — one hundred and ten separate objections to a single Bitcoin proposal. And miners are basically running out of time to figure out where they stand.
BIP-110 is a proposed soft fork that would place a one-year restriction on arbitrary-data uses inside Bitcoin scripts. The stated goal is protecting node resources — cutting down on what critics of the status quo call data-storage abuse on the base layer. Supporters say it’s a reasonable, temporary guardrail. Saylor doesn’t buy it. His core argument is that the proposal sets a dangerous precedent, potentially invalidating transactions that are currently valid under Bitcoin’s rules. He keeps coming back to the importance of neutral base-layer rules and open markets — the idea that Bitcoin’s power comes precisely from not having gatekeepers deciding which script uses are acceptable. It’s a principled position, and it’s getting attention. But attention and signaling blocks are two different things.
The Signaling Numbers Are Brutal
As of July 20, only 11 blocks out of 1,236 monitored are signaling support for BIP-110. That’s 0.89%. The required threshold is 1,109 signaling blocks. So the gap isn’t close — it’s enormous. The next difficulty period, running from block heights 959,616 to 961,631, is the last ordinary window to hit that number. Missing it doesn’t kill BIP-110 outright, but it triggers something arguably worse: mandatory signaling. That phase could kick in around August 8, and that’s where things get genuinely messy.
Mandatory signaling means miners would have to show explicit support or risk having their blocks rejected by nodes enforcing the new rules. Mining pools can’t just sit on the fence anymore. They’d have to pick a side, and picking the wrong side — or picking it too late — could mean wasted hashrate and rejected blocks. That’s real money.
And the current numbers make clear that most miners haven’t picked a side at all. Maybe they’re waiting. Maybe they don’t think BIP-110 will get traction. Maybe they’re hoping someone else makes the call first. Unclear. But the window is closing fast.
Chain Split Risk Is Real
If miners don’t coordinate, Bitcoin could split into competing chain histories. That’s not speculation — it’s the mechanical outcome of a contentious fork where different nodes enforce different rules. And a split would immediately land on the desks of every exchange and wallet operator in the space.
Exchanges would need to decide which chain to support. That means decisions about deposit processing, withdrawal confirmation, and which version of a transaction they treat as final. It’s operationally brutal. Users would face confusion about whether their funds are on the “right” chain. Businesses that process Bitcoin payments would need to adjust confirmation logic. None of this is trivial, and none of it is cheap.
Wallet developers and node operators are already looking at their Taproot and Miniscript paths — the specific areas BIP-110 would affect. The proposal’s activation window would last roughly 52,416 blocks, which works out to approximately one year. That’s not forever, but it’s long enough that anyone running infrastructure needs to actually plan for it rather than assume the situation resolves itself.
The honest read right now is that coordination seems unlikely given where the numbers sit. 0.89% signaling with a threshold above 1,100 blocks isn’t a gap you close in a few days without a serious, organized push from major mining pools. And so far, that push hasn’t materialized publicly.
What Economic Actors Do Next
Exchanges and businesses aren’t just passive observers here. Economic actors — the entities that move real volume through Bitcoin — can influence which chain survives a split simply by deciding where they route transactions and what they treat as settled. That’s leverage. Whether they use it, and how fast they move, probably shapes the outcome more than any individual miner’s signaling decision.
Saylor’s critique has amplified the debate. But amplifying debate and changing the technical trajectory are different things. The miners and node operators hold the actual levers. And right now, the dominant signal from miners is silence — which, in a mandatory-signaling scenario, won’t be an option much longer.
Block height 961,631 is coming. After that, the ordinary path is gone.
Hub: Bitcoin price, news, and analysis
Frequently Asked Questions
What is BIP-110 and what does it actually do?
BIP-110 is a proposed Bitcoin soft fork that would temporarily restrict certain arbitrary-data script uses for approximately one year — roughly 52,416 blocks — with the stated aim of protecting node resources.
What happens if miners don’t hit the signaling threshold by block 961,631?
Missing the ordinary threshold triggers a mandatory signaling phase, potentially starting around August 8, where miners must show explicit support or risk having their blocks rejected by nodes enforcing BIP-110’s rules.
