Strategy founder Michael Saylor has sharply criticized the Bitcoin improvement proposal BIP-110. In his extensive essay titled "110 Reasons Why BIP-110 Is a Bad Idea," the businessman did not merely list the technical shortcomings of the initiative but presented a systemic view of the fundamental principles that, in his opinion, this proposal jeopardizes.
Saylor emphasized that BIP-110 violates the key principle of protocol neutrality. Introducing strict restrictions on certain types of transactions, in his view, creates a dangerous precedent where a group of developers or miners can impose their will on other network participants. This contradicts the very essence of a decentralized system, where rules should be the same for everyone.
The businessman highlighted the need for hard consensus—where changes are adopted only with absolute community support. Any compromises on this issue, Saylor argues, lead to network splits and loss of trust. He also spoke in defense of open markets and freedom of innovation, stating that BIP-110, by limiting opportunities for experimentation at the protocol level, suppresses ecosystem development.
The Strategy founder urged the community not to succumb to arguments about "increasing efficiency" at the cost of centralization. In his view, Bitcoin's true value lies precisely in its immutability and predictability, not in transaction processing speed at any cost.
Analyst's comment: Saylor's position here is crystal clear and, in my opinion, absolutely correct. Bitcoin is first and foremost a safe-haven asset, whose value rests on trust in the immutability of its code. Any attempt to "improve" it by reducing decentralization is a step backward. The market is already voting with its feet: if someone needs faster and cheaper transactions—there are sidechains, the Lightning Network, and altcoins. Changing the base layer for this purpose means undermining the foundation of the entire system.