Adam Back criticizes BIP-110 supporters after failed Bitcoin fork

cryptonews11-03 18:18

Blockstream CEO Adam Back has renewed his criticism of Bitcoin Improvement Proposal 110 (BIP-110), arguing that attempts to impose controversial network changes have repeatedly failed to gain market ...

Source Link

Disclaimer: Investing carries risk. This is not financial advice. The above content should not be regarded as an offer, recommendation, or solicitation on acquiring or disposing of any financial products, any associated discussions, comments, or posts by author or other users should not be considered as such either. It is solely for general information purpose only, which does not consider your own investment objectives, financial situations or needs. TTM assumes no responsibility or warranty for the accuracy and completeness of the information, investors should do their own research and may seek professional advice before investing.

Comments

We need your insight to fill this gap

Leave a comment

{"i18n":{"language":"en_US"},"isChannel":false,"data":{"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/2680744146?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","thumbnail":"","is_english":true,"pubTime":"2026-11-03 18:18","share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","id":"2680744146","market":"hk","top_or_hot":-1,"title":"Adam Back criticizes BIP-110 supporters after failed Bitcoin fork","media":"cryptonews","content":"<div>\n<p>Blockstream CEO Adam Back has renewed his criticism of Bitcoin Improvement Proposal 110 (BIP-110), arguing that attempts to impose controversial network changes have repeatedly failed to gain market ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://crypto.news/adam-back-bip-110-bitcoin-fork-supporters/\">Source Link</a>\n\n</div>\n","source":"crypto_news_highlight","html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Adam Back criticizes BIP-110 supporters after failed Bitcoin fork</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nAdam Back criticizes BIP-110 supporters after failed Bitcoin fork\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2026-11-03 18:18 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://crypto.news/adam-back-bip-110-bitcoin-fork-supporters/><strong>cryptonews</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Blockstream CEO Adam Back has renewed his criticism of Bitcoin Improvement Proposal 110 (BIP-110), arguing that attempts to impose controversial network changes have repeatedly failed to gain market ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://crypto.news/adam-back-bip-110-bitcoin-fork-supporters/\">Source Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","isBrief":false,"type":0,"news_type":1,"symbol":"BTC","symbol_name":"Grayscale Bitcoin Mini Trust","start_time":0,"source_url":"https://crypto.news/adam-back-bip-110-bitcoin-fork-supporters/","article_id":"2680744146","we_media_id":null,"thumbnails":[],"rights":{"source":"crypto_news_highlight","url":"https://crypto.news/adam-back-bip-110-bitcoin-fork-supporters/","rn_cache_url":null,"directOrigin":true},"url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2680744146","pubTimestamp":1793701082,"columns":[],"sourceInfo":{"source_id":"crypto_news_highlight","name":"Crypto News"},"weMediaInfo":null,"summary":"Blockstream CEO Adam Back has renewed his criticism of Bitcoin Improvement Proposal 110 , arguing that attempts to impose controversial network changes have repeatedly failed to gain market support.Blockstream CEO Adam Back has renewed his criticism of BIP-110 supporters, arguing that attempts to force Bitcoin rule changes face market rejection.The proposal triggered a minority blockchain split in August after failing to secure sufficient miner support.November 3 data showed only eight observed Bitcoin nodes enforcing BIP-110, with no recent miner signaling.In a November 3 post on X, Back referenced earlier commentary from Bitcoin advocate Francis Pouliot while addressing supporters of the proposed Bitcoin fork.Adam Back rejects attempts to change Bitcoin rules. Back’s latest comments followed renewed discussion about BIP-110, a proposal designed to restrict certain forms of non-financial data on Bitcoin.Back further claimed that BIP-110 “failed the first gate hard” because of what he ","collect":0,"end_time":0,"defaultTopTitle":"crypto.news","property":[],"viewcount":null,"language":"en","relate_stocks":{"BTC":"Grayscale Bitcoin Mini Trust","CBXO":"Calamos Bitcoin 90 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - October","BAGY":"Amplify Bitcoin Max Income Covered Call ETF","BFAP":"FT Vest Bitcoin Strategy Floor15 ETF - April","BTCC":"Grayscale Bitcoin HIGH Income ETF","CBXY":"Calamos Bitcoin 90 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - July","CBOA":"Calamos Bitcoin Structured Alt Protection ETF - April","DFII":"FT Cboe Vest Bitcoin Strategy & Target Income ETF","CBOJ":"Calamos Bitcoin Structured Alt Protection ETF - January","XBTY":"GraniteShares YieldBOOST Bitcoin ETF","CBTA":"Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF – April","BCCC":"Global X Bitcoin Covered Call ETF","DEFI":"比特币期货ETF-Hashdex","BITY":"Amplify Bitcoin 2% Monthly Option Income ETF","CBOO":"Calamos Bitcoin Structured Alt Protection ETF - October","CBTO":"Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - October","QBF":"Innovator Uncapped Bitcoin 20 Floor ETF - Quarterly","CBTY":"Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - July","BFJL":"FT Vest Bitcoin Strategy Floor15 ETF - July","CBXA":"Calamos Bitcoin 90 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF – April","BTCW":"比特币ETF-Wisdom Tree","EZBC":"比特币ETF-Franklin","CBOY":"Calamos Bitcoin Structured Alt Protection ETF - July","CBXJ":"Calamos Bitcoin 90 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January","BITO":"比特币期货ETF-ProShares","BPI":"Grayscale Bitcoin Premium Income ETF"},"translate_title":"比特币分叉失败后，Adam Back 批评 BIP-110 支持者","themeId":null,"isJumpTheme":false,"ttsUrl":null,"symbols_score_info":{"CBXA":0.6,"CBXO":0.6,"QBF":0.6,"BAGY":0.6,"EZBC":0.6,"BTC":0.6,"CBTO":0.6,"CBXY":0.6,"CBTA":0.6,"CBTY":0.6,"BITY":0.6,"CBXJ":0.6,"CBOA":0.6,"BTCW":0.6,"CBOO":0.6,"DFII":0.6,"BPI":0.6,"DEFI":0.6,"BCCC":0.6,"BITO":0.6,"CBOJ":0.6,"XBTY":0.6,"BFJL":0.6,"BFAP":0.6,"CBOY":0.6,"BTCC":0.6},"content_text":"Blockstream CEO Adam Back has renewed his criticism of Bitcoin Improvement Proposal 110 (BIP-110), arguing that attempts to impose controversial network changes have repeatedly failed to gain market support.\n\n\nSummary\n\n\n\nBlockstream CEO Adam Back has renewed his criticism of BIP-110 supporters, arguing that attempts to force Bitcoin rule changes face market rejection.\nBIP-110 proposed temporary restrictions on non-financial data stored in Bitcoin transactions.\nThe proposal triggered a minority blockchain split in August after failing to secure sufficient miner support.\nNovember 3 data showed only eight observed Bitcoin nodes enforcing BIP-110, with no recent miner signaling.\nSupporters argue the restrictions would reduce blockchain storage demands, while critics question their effect on Bitcoin’s neutrality.\n\n\n\nIn a November 3 post on X, Back referenced earlier commentary from Bitcoin advocate Francis Pouliot while addressing supporters of the proposed Bitcoin fork.\n“Attempts to impose your views on bitcoin get market rejected,” Back wrote, pointing to previous disputes over Bitcoin’s rules.\nHe described Pouliot’s commentary as a “masterclass on bitcoin reality” and said discussions about Bitcoin’s established rules were intended to help people understand immutability.\n\nprior fork context for bip110 fork supporters: @francispouliot_ masterclass on bitcoin reality. yet again: attempts to impose your views on bitcoin get market rejected. @_podconf memes about BIG BITCOIN are well meaning: for you to understand immutabilityhttps://t.co/a02AI62DE8— Adam Back (@adam3us) November 3, 2026\n\nAdam Back rejects attempts to change Bitcoin rules\nBack’s latest comments followed renewed discussion about BIP-110, a proposal designed to restrict certain forms of non-financial data on Bitcoin.\nResponding to the debate, Back argued that the dispute concerned more than the data being stored.\n\n“It’s not necessarily about the payload,” he wrote in a separate post.\n\nHe argued that the market would resist efforts to override consensus, even when supporters believed their proposed changes were beneficial.\nBack further claimed that BIP-110 “failed the first gate hard” because of what he described as serious technical problems.\nThe criticism continued a position he adopted earlier this year, when he warned that the proposal could divide Bitcoin’s network.\nIn July, crypto.news reported opposition from Adam Back and Strategy executive chairman Michael Saylor.\nBoth questioned whether restrictions on particular transaction types justified changing Bitcoin’s consensus rules.\nWhat does BIP-110 propose for Bitcoin?\nBIP-110, formally titled the Reduced Data Temporary Softfork, was authored by developer Dathon Ohm.\nThe published proposal sought to introduce additional restrictions on arbitrary data stored within Bitcoin transactions for approximately one year.\nIts rules would limit standard transaction output scripts to 34 bytes, with an exception allowing OP_RETURN outputs of up to 83 bytes.\nOther provisions would restrict certain data fields to 256 bytes and introduce additional limitations affecting Taproot transactions.\nSupporters argued that inscriptions and other non-financial data place unnecessary storage demands on Bitcoin nodes.\nTheir position was that restricting such activity could reduce operating costs and preserve Bitcoin’s use as a payment network.\nDeveloper Luke Dashjr, associated with Bitcoin Knots and the OCEAN mining pool, was among the proposal’s prominent supporters.\nHowever, opponents argued that changing consensus rules to reject particular transactions could undermine Bitcoin’s neutrality.\nThe proposal’s official status is now listed as Closed.\nBIP-110 failed to secure miner support\nThe dispute moved beyond technical discussions in August when BIP-110 supporters attempted to activate their preferred rules.\nThe proposal required 55% miner signaling for voluntary activation. However, only 2.53% of blocks supported it during the relevant signaling period.\nOn August 8, nodes enforcing BIP-110 rejected a block accepted by the main Bitcoin network, creating a separate chain.\nThe minority branch produced two blocks before falling behind the established network.\nCoverage of the Bitcoin chain split showed that the new branch struggled to attract enough mining power to continue producing blocks regularly.\nFollowing the split, supporters discussed changing the minority network’s proof-of-work algorithm to BLAKE2b.\nThe proposed alternative mining system would no longer depend on Bitcoin’s existing SHA-256 mining arrangements.\nHow many Bitcoin nodes still support BIP-110?\nRecent network measurements show limited adoption of BIP-110’s enforcement software.\nData published by bitdis.org on November 3 recorded eight enforcing nodes among 18,870 observed nodes, representing approximately 0.04%.\nThe same monitoring service recorded zero BIP-110 signaling blocks among 649 blocks mined during the current difficulty period.\nThese measurements do not represent a complete count of every privately operated node, but they provide a snapshot of publicly observable participation.\nBitcoin Core accounted for nearly 90% of the monitored nodes, while Bitcoin Knots represented approximately 10%.\nRunning Bitcoin Knots does not automatically mean a node supports BIP-110, since the software offers different configurations.\nThe latest figures differ considerably from earlier periods when several hundred nodes reportedly ran BIP-110-compatible software.\nBack’s renewed criticism followed the proposal’s failure to establish a competing chain with meaningful mining support.\nIn another historical post from July 2023, which he resurfaced during the debate, Back described contentious Bitcoin forks as repeated challenges to the network’s immutability.\nHe accompanied the renewed discussion with a brief observation: “Time is a flat circle.”\n\n\n\n\n\n                Read more:\n            \n\n                Why is XRP price stuck at $1.25 despite nearly 8,000 new wallets?","kind":"highlight","is_publish_news":true,"is_publish_highlight":false,"is_publish_live":false,"is_publish_wemedia":false,"editions":null,"column":"","sentiment":"0","news_tag":"","news_rank":0,"isVideo":false,"video":null,"symbols":[],"gpt_button":0,"need_auth":false,"need_login_tip":false,"code":"91000000","status":"200"},"commentList":[],"isCommentEnd":true,"newsSizeData":{"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"favoriteSize":0,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false},"APP":{"userAgent":"Mozilla/5.0 AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko; compatible; ClaudeBot/1.0; +claudebot@anthropic.com)","isDev":false,"isTTM":true,"isLaohu8Offline":false,"tenantId":"TBGLOBAL","deviceId":"web-server-community-laohu8-v3","version":"4.52.1","shortVersion":"4.52.1","platform":"web","vendor":"web","appName":"ttm","isIOS":false,"isAndroid":false,"isTiger":false,"isTHS":false,"isWeiXin":false,"isWeiXinMini":false,"isWeiBo":false,"isQQ":false,"isBaiduSwan":false,"isBaiduBox":false,"isDingTalk":false,"isToutiao":false,"isOnePlus":false,"isHuaWei":false,"isXiaomi":false,"isXiaomiWebView":false,"isOppo":false,"isVivo":false,"isSamsung":false,"isMobile":false},"href":"/m/news/2680744146","isCrawlerRequest":true}