BIP-110 flatlines: 10-of-2,016 blocks signal, hashrate support under 1% vs 55% bar

A miner-activated soft fork proposal known as BIP-110, designed to curb non-financial data such as Ordinals and Runes from Bitcoin’s network, has drawn support from less than 1% of the network’s hashrate as of July 4, its final signaling deadline. Only 10 out of 2,016 blocks signaled backing for the change, far short of the 55% threshold required within a single 2,016-block period for activation, according to AMBCrypto.

The weak turnout leaves the proposal’s fate uncertain ahead of a separate user-activated window planned for August, when Bitcoin users would get another chance to push the upgrade forward despite the miner community’s apparent indifference.

What BIP-110 aimed to change

BIP-110 was introduced by a pseudonymous developer known as Dathon Ohm with the goal of restricting non-financial data embedded in Bitcoin transactions. In practice, this would target Ordinals and Runes protocols, which allow users to inscribe images, videos or large blocks of text onto the Bitcoin blockchain.

Supporters of the proposal, including Bitcoin protocol developer Luke Dashjr, argued the soft fork would help preserve Bitcoin’s core function as a low-cost, peer-to-peer payment network. Their concern is that inscription-based memecoins and data-heavy transactions inflate transaction fees and clutter block space, undermining Bitcoin’s original monetary use case.

Critics warn of broken wallets and censorship risk

Opponents of BIP-110 have raised sharper objections. BitMEX Research warned that the proposal could break existing wallet functionality and effectively ban roughly 1.7 million BTC from being transferred, stating: “Bitcoin has never banned existing transaction formats like this before. This essentially breaks Bitcoin as a reliable money and something people can depend on.”

Blockstream CEO Adam Back, another vocal critic, pushed back against the soft fork’s premise, arguing that Bitcoin’s resistance to censorship is central to its design. He wrote: “Same logic for Bitcoin: it’s also similarly hard to censor. Why do you think anyone cares about your pro-censorship views?”

David Bailey, founder of the Bitcoin Conference and treasury firm Nakamoto, framed the proposal’s failure to gain traction as a positive signal for the network. He described the effort as “a multi-year campaign of information warfare led by Bitcoin’s most eccentric developer” and called its collapse “incredibly bullish for Bitcoin,” characterizing the initiative as a “hostile takeover attempt.”

What comes next

With miner signaling now closed and support negligible, attention shifts to August, when the proposal could still be pushed through via a user-activated soft fork rather than one initiated by miners. Given the near-total lack of miner backing so far, it remains unclear whether enough Bitcoin users and node operators will rally behind BIP-110 to force its adoption.

The debate underscores a persistent fault line within the Bitcoin community over how to balance network efficiency and monetary purity against the protocol’s foundational commitment to permissionless, uncensorable use.