Lopp Takes a Stand Against BIP-110
Bitcoin developer and Casa co-founder Jameson Lopp escalated his criticism of Bitcoin Improvement Proposal 110 (BIP-110) in a post published on February 23. According to Lopp, the proposal is in reality an attempt to resolve a political and cultural dispute over transaction spam through changes to the consensus protocol — an approach he believes carries serious technical risks, according to Bitcoinist.
Lopp argues that BIP-110 is not only ill-suited to stop the behavior it targets, but that in the worst case, it could trigger a damaging split of the Bitcoin chain.
What Does BIP-110 Propose?
BIP-110 was designed by a developer under the pseudonym Dathon Ohm, with Bitcoin Core developer Luke Dashjr listed as co-author. The proposal contains seven specific changes to the consensus rules that together aim to limit the ability to store non-monetary data in Bitcoin transactions.
Among the most central changes are a 34-byte limit for new output scripts, a reintroduction of the 83-byte limit for OP_RETURN (which repealed a controversial extension in Bitcoin Core version 30), and a ban on OP_IF operations in Tapscript. Additionally, inscriptions via SegWit will be limited to 256 bytes, and the use of Taproot annex will be prohibited.
Proponents of the proposal claim that all known monetary use cases will remain fully operational after the changes take effect.
UASF and the Low Activation Threshold
One of the most controversial aspects of BIP-110 is its activation mechanism. The proposal utilizes a User-Activated Soft Fork (UASF) with a so-called "flag day," meaning a predetermined block height (around 987,424) rather than traditional miner signaling. In addition, the activation threshold is set to only 55% of the network's hash rate — a significantly lower threshold than the 95% that has historically been the norm for major protocol changes.
Critics point out that such a low threshold dramatically increases the risk of a chain split, as BIP-110 nodes will reject blocks that do not comply with the new rules.
Low Support Among Nodes and Miners
Figures from late January 2026 underscore how limited the support actually is. According to data referenced by Bitcoinist, only about 583 out of a total of 24,481 Bitcoin nodes signaled support for BIP-110 — equivalent to approximately 2.38 percent. Support primarily came from nodes running the alternative client Bitcoin Knots. None of the 20 largest mining pools had publicly signaled support as of January 25, 2026.
Divides the Bitcoin Community
The intensity of the debate is reminiscent of the block size war in 2017. Proponents of the proposal, often referred to as "minimalists," see BIP-110 as a necessary correction to preserve the network's decentralization and protect Bitcoin's role as a pure monetary system. Bitcoin advocate Matthew Kratter, according to the source material, described the growing data stream as "a parasitic plant, like ivy, choking a tree."
On the other hand, opponents — including Adam Back — warn that the proposal represents an attempt to force through changes without broad consensus. Back, according to the source, characterized BIP-110 as "a mob attack on Bitcoin's reputation." Opponents also fear that restrictions on arbitrary data could weaken the network's censorship resistance and predictability.
Lopp frames the proposal as a consensus layer response to a political and cultural dispute — and warns that it could cost Bitcoin more than it's worth.
What Happens Next?
With less than three percent node signaling and zero support from the largest mining pools, the chances of BIP-110 being activated as described in the original proposal appear very limited for now. Nevertheless, the debate illustrates a deeper and persistent tension within the Bitcoin community: who decides what the network should be used for, and what mechanisms are legitimate to enforce it?
