Adam Back and Michael Saylor Push Back Against BIP 110 Proposal, Here's Why

Key highlights:

• Adam Back and Michael Saylor strongly oppose the Bitcoin Improvement Proposal 110 (BIP-110)
• Both say that the proposal could undermine Bitcoins core principles of decentralization and censorship resistance
• Bitcoin developer Luke Dashjr is a key supporter of the proposal

The Bitcoin Improvement Proposal 110 (BIP-110) has sparked a heated debate in the crypto industry, with Adam Back and Michael Saylor emerging as the key critics. Both industry leaders have publicly opposed the BIP-110 proposal, claiming that it could undermine Bitcoins core principles.

Notably, this new Bitcoin proposal is designed to temporarily limit certain types of data stored on the BTC blockchain. The move is to reduce spam and preserve the network‘s monetary purpose. But critics argue that the improvement proposal could weaken the Bitcoin network’s neutrality, paving the way to future censorship.

Discover more

digital currencies

Economics

News

Bitcoin BIP-110 faces criticism from Adam Back and Michael Saylor

Blockstream co-founder Adam Back and Strategy founder Michael Saylor have expressed their disagreement with the latest Bitcoin proposal called the BIP-110. While the Bitcoin Improvement Proposal 110 aims to limit the network transactions, the crypto leaders argue that it could weaken the blockchains censorship resistance.

According to Adam Back, the proposal can impose control over how people use Bitcoin. By restricting transactions, it could dismantle the ecosystems existing consensus rules. Back believes that it could affect the core principles of decentralization, censorship resistance, and permissionless access. He also warned that proceeding with the proposal could create a division in the community, with supporters and opposers creating separate chains.

On the filter fork topic.

I dont usually have time, but this morning listened to one of the twitter spaces from earlier in the week, with some well meaning relative bitcoin newcomers, that humanized them, and their concerns and thoughts for why they thought that made it…

Michael Saylor, one of the largest advocates of Bitcoin, claimed that the proposal could set a dangerous precedent for the network. Supporting Backs arguments, Saylor noted that the BIP-110 proposal is a consensus-level rule change. He added that, as it could restrict some valid, fee-paying transactions that are currently accepted, it poses greater risks to Bitcoin than the spam issues the proposal aims to address. The Strategy founder stated,

“BIP 110 turns a spam dispute into a consensus change that would invalidate some currently valid, fee-paying transactions. That precedent is the danger. We should save our energy for threats that really matter.”

At the same time, Bitcoin developer Luke Dashjr is one of the major supporters of BIP-110. He stated, “Its too late to cancel BIP110.” He believes that as the network currently allows the addition of non-financial data, it increases storage requirements, making the operations more expensive.

Why has BIP-110 become controversial？

BIP-110, also known as the Reduced Data Temporary Softfork, aims to launch new consensus rules for the Bitcoin network. As per reports, the proposal limits the amount of non-financial data, including images, inscriptions, etc in Bitcoin transactions.

Advocates believe that the move could reduce unnecessary data stored on the blockchain. Thus, it could help BTC to focus more on its role as a digital asset. The rule also added that existing coins (UTXOs) created before the upgrade will not be affected. However, the proposal has faced sharp criticism from several industry experts, besides Michael Saylor and Adam Back.

Notably, the BIP-110 was discovered by a pseudonymous developer. Thus, the anonymity gives little credibility and accountability to the proposal. Thus, it has received little support from Bitcoin miners as well. Some critics also stated that the proposed limits could be bypassed and may unintentionally impact a few valid transactions.