Summary
- A minority Bitcoin chain emerged from BIP-110 on Saturday at block 961,632, but managed to mine only two blocks in about eight hours before stalling, significantly lagging behind the main network.
- This fork inherited Bitcoin's difficulty setting but had minimal hashpower, with only approximately 2.53% of recent blocks expressing support, well below the required 55% for activation.
- BIP-110 aimed to temporarily prevent non-financial data, such as Ordinals inscriptions, from being included in transactions, a move that critics like Michael Saylor warn could set a perilous precedent.
The ongoing debate surrounding a contentious Bitcoin network proposal culminated in a chain split over the weekend. However, the new Bitcoin fork faltered almost immediately, managing to mine just two blocks in around eight hours before it came to a halt.
The fork was initiated due to Bitcoin Improvement Proposal BIP-110, which its proponents argued would shield the network from unwanted spam and the potential legal issues associated with hosting non-financial data. Conversely, many in the Bitcoin community viewed it as a form of censorship.
The split occurred at block 961,632, as nodes running BIP-110 software began to reject blocks that did not show support for the proposal. A block mined by AntPool was accepted by the main network but rejected by BIP-110 nodes, while a miner from the Ocean pool created the block that the minority chain followed.
As hours passed, the splinter chain fell significantly behind, trailing by dozens of blocks while the main Bitcoin network continued to produce a block approximately every ten minutes.
The delay is attributed to a mining difficulty adjustment issue that the fork cannot easily resolve. Bitcoin adjusts its mining difficulty every 2,016 blocks, and this new chain inherited the existing difficulty setting while possessing only a fraction of the computing power—about 2.53% of recent blocks supported the proposal, which is far below the 55% threshold needed for activation without a split. At its current pace, the chain would require roughly 350 days to reach its next difficulty adjustment, compared to about two weeks for Bitcoin, leading to block intervals of several hours.
BIP-110, as previously reported by Decrypt, is designed as a soft-fork proposal to temporarily prohibit users from embedding non-financial data such as images and text in Bitcoin transactions. Proponents argue that this practice, which gained popularity through Ordinals inscriptions, congests the network and increases transaction fees for standard payments.
Opponents contend that anyone paying for block space should have the right to use it as they wish and that allowing miners and node operators to control transactions undermines Bitcoin's censorship resistance. Michael Saylor, a notable critic, has cautioned that changing consensus over a spam dispute could set a dangerous precedent.
On early Sunday morning, Saylor remarked on X: "Bitcoin worked exactly as designed. BIP-110 was free to fork, and the network was free not to follow. The outcome was clear: approximately 99.85% of Bitcoin's hash power remained with Bitcoin. The BIP-110 branch mined only two blocks and is already over 80 blocks behind."
Bitcoin worked exactly as designed. BIP-110 was free to fork, and the network was free not to follow. The result was decisive: about 99.85% of Bitcoin's hashpower stayed with Bitcoin. The BIP-110 branch mined only two blocks and is already more than 80 blocks behind.
— Michael Saylor (@saylor) August 9, 2026
Jameson Lopp, a prominent Bitcoin supporter and co-founder of the Bitcoin security firm Casa, echoed Saylor's sentiments, stating he would not "welcome back" or unblock any BIP-110 supporters. He expressed that they had shown themselves to be influenced by misleading information and had, in many cases, harassed those dedicated to supporting and enhancing Bitcoin.
I won't be "welcoming back" or unblocking any BIP-110 supporters.
They proved themselves to be susceptible to delusional propaganda from folks emanating reality distortion fields. In many cases they spewed vitriol and harassed the very people who have devoted their lives to…
— Jameson Lopp (@lopp) August 9, 2026
Another complication for holders of the fork's coins is that both chains process identical transactions, meaning a sale on the minority chain could be replayed on Bitcoin, potentially providing the buyer with actual BTC from the same seller. The required signaling period will close at block 963,647, a target the chain is unlikely to reach.