As of July 13, none of the major mining pools have shown support for the soft fork proposed under BIP-110. In the current difficulty adjustment period, the level of miner support remains at around 1%. This is an almost complete disregard for the initiative, which seeks to change the rules for processing transactions in the Bitcoin network.
BIP-110 proposes a temporary limit on the amount of non-payment-related data in Bitcoin transactions. The document restricts the use of OP_RETURN, blocks most data fragments larger than 256 bytes, and introduces bans on several script formats used to store arbitrary information. Activation occurs through a soft fork, where nodes apply the new rules regardless of miner consent — the support threshold for miners is lowered to 55% instead of the standard 95%.
Miner support is calculated within two-week difficulty adjustment periods — each consisting of 2016 blocks. In none of these periods has the indicator exceeded 1%. Among node operators, the situation is slightly better: support hovers at a few percent, almost entirely due to the alternative Bitcoin Knots client 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 — which will occur in early August. Even if miners do not reach the required percentage, 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 main network will continue operating as before.
Saylor and Back oppose: 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 stated that "there are 110 things more dangerous than spam for Bitcoin." He emphasized that the proposal turns a dispute into a consensus change, potentially invalidating some already completed transactions with paid fees. In his view, this poses the main threat to the network.
Adam 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 him, Bitcoin's mission is to build a free market based on sound currency, not controlled by any single participant. The absence of a central authority means no player has the right to impose their views on permissible transactions on others. One can only change their own software — others remain beyond influence.
Back also highlighted the role of consensus among developers, comparing it to the standard-setting process in the IETF. No programmer can push a change through the network without the consent of hundreds of other ecosystem participants who carefully scrutinize every technical decision. "Bitcoin respectfully tells you 'no,'" he summarized, adding that those who disagree retain the right to create their own fork, but "Bitcoin will not join it."
Cryptalist expert opinion: The current situation with BIP-110 clearly demonstrates how resilient the consensus in the Bitcoin network is. Even with a reduced support threshold, the initiative failed to gain the trust of miners, indicating a deep reluctance within the community to compromise on changes to fundamental rules. Instead of fighting "spam" through a soft fork, network participants prefer to maintain protocol invariance, which, in my view, is a more mature and far-sighted approach for Bitcoin's long-term stability.