11:20 AM ▪
4
min read ▪ by
A new controversy is rocking the Bitcoin ecosystem. Aimed at limiting certain data recorded on the blockchain, the BIP-110 proposal provokes an open confrontation between developers and historical figures of the network. This protocol modification, designed to limit the growth of inscriptions associated with Ordinals and Runes, is drawing strong criticism. Among them, Adam Back, a pioneer of the cypherpunk movement, denounces the truth “regression” for bitcoins. Behind this technical debate lies a central question: how far can Bitcoin evolve without betraying its core principles?
In short
- The BIP-110 proposal is reigniting tensions in the Bitcoin community as it seeks to limit certain data being written to the blockchain, particularly those related to Ordinals and Runs.
- Adam Back strongly criticizes this protocol change, considering it a technical regression that could disrupt the software ecosystem built around Bitcoin.
- Several technical risks have been raised, including potentially freezing certain UTXOs, incompatibility with Miniscript, and disabling some features in the Bitcoin scripting language.
- The controversy highlights the growing differences in Bitcoin’s development, between efforts to limit certain uses and defense of the protocol’s neutrality.
BIP-110: proposal to restrict certain Bitcoin data
The BIP-110 proposal, submitted in December 2025 by Dathon Ohm, a developer, aims to reduce the presence of arbitrary data recorded on the Bitcoin blockchain. The initiative specifically focuses on certain uses enabled by the Ordinals and Runes protocols, which enable the integration of different types of content directly into transactions. To achieve this, the text proposes the introduction of a temporary soft fork lasting twelve months to filter certain transactions directly at the consensus level.
The proposal quickly drew critical reactions in the Bitcoin community. Adam Back, CEO of Blockstream and a historical figure quoted in Satoshi Nakamoto’s white paper, expressed his disapproval in a particularly strong way.
On the social network X states: “BIP-110 is an intentional real regression. It breaks userspace. This proposal freezes UTXOs, breaks Miniscript, disables OP_IF, and removes mechanisms to allow protocol updates. And the temporary soft fork is completely absurd.”
Several fundamental technical problems could arise in his analysis:
- Potential freezing of some existing UTXOs, rendering some funds unusable;
- Risk of breaking with Miniscript, a tool used to create more secure Bitcoin scripts;
- Disabling the OP_IF instruction, a key element of the Bitcoin scripting language;
- Removal of certain log development mechanisms that would limit future updates.
According to Adam Back, these changes would not be a simple technical adjustment, but a true protocol regression that will likely disrupt the software ecosystem built around Bitcoin.
Growing opposition to technical and administrative risks
In addition to Adam Back’s criticism, several influential figures in the Bitcoin ecosystem have voiced their disapproval of BIP-110. Developers and historical actors such as Jameson Lopp or Wang Chun also warned against the technical consequences of this proposal. In particular, critics cite the risk of some existing UTXOs becoming unusable, which could lead to freezing of certain funds or making certain transactions impossible.
The proposal also raises concerns about log management. The proposed mechanism ensures activation with 55% support, while Bitcoin soft forks traditionally require a much wider consensus of almost 95%. The difference has fueled fears of a rupture within the community, with some observers suggesting that the threshold could cause the network to split if a significant portion of participants refuse to accept the change.
Maximize your Cointribune experience with our “Read and Earn” program! Earn points for every article you read and get access to exclusive rewards. Register now and start reaping the benefits.
A graduate of Sciences Po Toulouse and holder of the blockchain consultant certification issued by Alyra, I joined the Cointribune adventure in 2019. Convinced of the potential of blockchain to transform many sectors of the economy, I committed myself to raising awareness and informing the general public about this ever-evolving ecosystem. My goal is to enable everyone to better understand blockchain and take advantage of the opportunities it offers. I strive every day to provide an objective analysis of current events, decipher market trends, convey the latest technological innovations, and put into perspective the economic and social issues of this ongoing revolution.
DISCLAIMER OF LIABILITY
The views, thoughts and opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author and should not be construed as investment advice. Before making any investment decision, do your own research.
