MicroStrategy’s Saylor Says BIP 110 is More Dangerous Than Bitcoin’s Data Problem
Michael Saylor is urging Bitcoin builders to reject BIP 110, a plan he says treats an actual downside with one thing extra harmful.
The MicroStrategy chairman posted his critique on X, arguing that Bitcoin Improvement Proposal 110 (BIP 110), nicknamed the “Reduced Data Temporary Softfork,” trades away protocol neutrality for a short lived, largely symbolic win.
A BIP is merely a proper proposal to alter Bitcoin’s core guidelines, and this one would briefly limit how sure transactions are constructed to curb knowledge storage on the blockchain.
Bitcoin’s Shared Goal, a Different Remedy
Saylor says he shares the authors’ targets. He desires to guard node operators from pointless prices, hold funds inexpensive, and push Bitcoin towards being a sound cash somewhat than a general-purpose storage system.
Still, he insists the seven consensus restrictions punish legitimate, fee-paying transactions for one purpose: unpopular content material. The proposal would cap script sizes, limit Taproot management blocks, and bar spending of undefined witness variations.
Saylor calls these adjustments a blunt proxy for a value no one has truly measured.
The plan reached “Complete” standing below BIP 3 in June, a label that indicators writer readiness somewhat than neighborhood settlement. It grandfathers unspent outputs created earlier than activation, a safeguard Saylor calls vital however incomplete.
His stance echoes Adam Back’s blunt takedown of BIP 110, which predicts the push stalls inside weeks of obligatory signaling.
Bitcoin’s Upgrade Paths at Risk
Saylor’s sharpest warning targets Bitcoin’s future optionality. Bitcoin’s code reserves sure unused technical choices so future upgrades can increase with out breaking something already working. BIP 110 would shut a few of these reserved choices, together with ones tied to BitVM, an experimental technique for constructing complicated agreements on Bitcoin and not using a trusted intermediary.
It would additionally tighten the depth of sure transaction constructions, limiting how complicated some setups can change into.
Saylor’s core grievance is that these seven adjustments are offered as a single bundle. Supporters can not again the narrower rule most agree on with out additionally accepting six others that some could reject.
Saylor raised comparable concerns about protocol drift earlier than, framing formidable rule adjustments as a larger menace than the issues they aim.
Neutrality Over Social Pressure
Saylor wrote in closing:
“Bitcoin doesn’t want guardians of purity. It wants guardians of neutrality,” Saylor wrote in closing.
The proposal’s 55% miner-signaling threshold sits effectively beneath BIP 9’s common 95%. That decrease bar considerations Saylor as a result of it eases the trail for a contentious change whereas dropping the usual failure state. The deployment window lasts roughly a 12 months, after which a brand new EXPIRED state ends it if assist by no means corporations up.
He favors charges and a voluntary relay coverage, instruments that already ration block area with out judging a transaction’s goal. This view sits alongside his broader bull case for Bitcoin, constructed on mounted provide and the institutional attraction outlined in his corporate adoption thesis.
Whether BIP 110 gathers sufficient assist to activate stays unsettled. Critics like Peter Schiff hold attacking Bitcoin’s fundamentals from a wholly totally different angle.
For now, the controversy splits builders who again slim technical guardrails from those that see BIP 110 as protocol overreach. Developers face a alternative: pursue measurable fixes, or undertake a bundled restriction Saylor calls a harmful precedent.
The put up MicroStrategy’s Saylor Says BIP 110 is More Dangerous Than Bitcoin’s Data Problem appeared first on BeInCrypto.
