A new civil war is brewing over what belongs in a Bitcoin block. BIP-110 proposes a purge of 'spam' like Ordinals and inscriptions, a hard fork to keep the chain lean for monetary transactions alone.
Michael Saylor and Adam Back reject the fork outright. According to analysis on Bitcoin And | Bitcoin & Economic News, they argue such a move would ruin Bitcoin's network credibility and violate its permissionless ethos. They view the proposal as a quest to police how others use the network, a fundamental departure from its design.
"They view the proposal as a quest to police how others use the network."
- Bitcoin And | Bitcoin & Economic News
The debate has generated social media noise, but the market remains silent. Miner support for the change sits at zero percent as the August deadline for the proposed 'user-activated soft fork' approaches. The consensus mechanism appears resistant to the forced change, upholding the principle that Bitcoin's rules are set by code, not by committee.
The resistance from core figures signals that, for now, Bitcoin's blocks will remain a canvas for both money and data, governed by the same immutable rules.
