As of July 13, no major mining pool has "signaled" support for the soft fork under BIP-110. In the current period, support remains around 1%, according to monitoring data.
What does BIP-110 propose?
The proposal suggests a temporary limit on the amount of data in bitcoin transactions not related to payments. The document restricts OP_RETURN, blocks most data fragments larger than 256 bytes, and introduces bans on certain script formats used for data storage.
Activation occurs through a user-activated soft fork: nodes apply the new rule regardless of miner consent. The support threshold for miners is reduced to 55% instead of the standard 95%.
Miner support is calculated within two-week difficulty adjustment periods—every 2,016 blocks. In none of them has it exceeded 1%. Among node operators, the indicator remains at a few percent—almost entirely due to the alternative software Bitcoin Knots, rather than the main Bitcoin Core.
The current period covers blocks #957,600 to #959,615, and the voluntary activation threshold expires at block height #961,632 in the next period—this will occur in early August.
Even if miners do not reach the required percentage of support, the fork will still activate—presumably in September, but only for those nodes that choose to support the new rules. Such nodes will form a separate, smaller chain, while the rest of the network will continue to operate as before.
Saylor and Back: Criticism from different sides
Against the backdrop of minimal support, the initiative was criticized by Strategy founder Michael Saylor and Blockstream co-founder Adam Back.
Saylor wrote that "there are 110 things more dangerous than spam for bitcoin." In his opinion, the proposal turns a dispute into a consensus change capable of invalidating some already conducted transactions with paid fees. He called this the main threat to the network of the first cryptocurrency.
Back directly addressed supporters of BIP-110. He noted that he understands their desire to protect the network from spam but disagrees with the proposed method.
According to the expert, the mission of digital gold is to build a free market based on sound currency, not controlled by any single network participant. The absence of a central authority means that no player has the right to impose their views on permissible transactions on others. Only one's own software can be changed—others remain beyond influence.
Back also highlighted the role of consensus among developers, comparing it to the standard-setting process in the IETF. According to him, no programmer can push a change through the network without the consent of hundreds of other ecosystem participants who carefully scrutinize every technical decision. It is this process of collective review that protects the first cryptocurrency from hasty changes, the specialist emphasized.
"Bitcoin respectfully tells you 'no,'" he concluded.
Back added that those who disagree retain the right to unite and create their own fork, but "bitcoin will not join it."
Analytical commentary: BIP-110, despite good intentions, has faced stiff resistance from key industry figures. This is a clear example of how, in a decentralized network, any change, even with good intentions, can be perceived as a threat to its fundamental principles. The lack of support from miners and criticism from heavyweights like Saylor and Back virtually guarantee that this soft fork will remain merely an experiment for a small group of enthusiasts, rather than becoming part of the mainstream. The market will likely not notice this event.