Planned Changes for BIP-110: Bitcoin Community Support Still Very Low

In the latest developments within the Bitcoin ecosystem, adoption of Proposal Bitcoin Improvement 110 (BIP-110) shows a grim figure. According to recent reports, only 583 out of 24,481 Bitcoin nodes are running this planned change, representing support of just 2.38% of the total network. This data indicates that the proposed change via BIP-110 is still far from broad community consensus, with Bitcoin Knots currently being the main software implementation supporting this initiative.

Background: What Changes Are in BIP-110?

To understand why this planned change has received slow acceptance, we need to grasp its technical objectives. BIP-110 is designed to limit transaction output sizes to 34 bytes and cap the data capacity of OP_RETURN to a maximum of 83 bytes. This modification is planned to last for one year, with possible extensions or adjustments afterward, as described on the official proposal’s GitHub page.

These technical changes emerged in response to controversial developments that occurred a few months earlier. In October 2025, Bitcoin Core released version 30, which removed the previous OP_RETURN limit of 83 bytes. This decision, initially proposed in a pull request in April 2025, sparked a storm of criticism within the Bitcoin community.

Heated Debate on OP_RETURN and Spam

The removal of the OP_RETURN data limit became the center of controversy due to fundamental concerns about spam on the Bitcoin blockchain. Critics warned that without data limits, users could insert arbitrary data in large volumes, causing an explosion of junk information in the ledger that is supposed to be efficient.

Jameson Lopp, a prominent Bitcoin Core contributor, took a different stance from most of the community. He argued that OP_RETURN limits are ineffective in preventing spam, as spammers can use alternative methods. However, this view conflicts with the majority of Bitcoin supporters like Matthew Kratter, who compare the spam phenomenon to parasitic plants that sap energy from trees—in this case, increasing spam could harm Bitcoin’s structural integrity.

Long-Term Impact: Threats to Decentralization

Deeper concerns go beyond mere spam. Increasing arbitrary data on the blockchain directly raises storage requirements for each node running the Bitcoin network. This creates a complex dilemma: the larger the data size, the higher the hardware requirements needed to run nodes independently.

Bitcoin’s fundamental value proposition is enabling anyone to run a node on a standard consumer computer. However, if hardware requirements continue to rise, fewer individuals will be able to participate fully in the network. This scenario could push toward greater centralization, where only large institutions with advanced infrastructure can efficiently run nodes. This would fundamentally alter Bitcoin’s vision as a decentralized monetary network.

The Way Forward: Will the Planned Changes Be Accepted?

With BIP-110 adoption still very low at 2.38%, a big question hangs: will this planned change achieve the consensus needed for full implementation? The answer remains unclear. What is clear is that the Bitcoin community remains deeply divided on how best to balance efficiency, security, and the core value of decentralization in an evolving network.