CoinDesk news, Michael Saylor opposes BIP 110, saying the proposal could endanger Bitcoin’s neutrality. He pointed out that BIP 110 proposes introducing temporary consensus limits, which may restrict currently effective transaction functionality and change Bitcoin’s consensus layer. Saylor emphasized that Bitcoin should rely on neutral rules, open markets, and permissionless innovation, rather than consensus limits. He questioned whether BIP 110 provides measurable evidence of improved decentralization and fees, and believes network resources should be managed through mechanisms such as resource pricing, relay policies, and Layer 2 development, instead of modifying Bitcoin’s fundamental consensus rules.

BTC0.68%
View Original
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
  • Reward
  • 3
  • Repost
  • Share
Comment
Add a comment
Add a comment
ParachuteFund
· 16h ago
Can’t we first run it on the testnet for a year or so to see the actual effects and then decide? Just talking about neutrality isn’t enough to convince people.
View OriginalReply0
CrossChainSaver
· 16h ago
Saylor’s concerns are well-founded—changing the consensus layer can easily plant landmines. Better to move slowly than to mess with the foundation.
View OriginalReply0
LiquidityProvider
· 17h ago
BIP 110 sounds like putting a “tightening headband” on Bitcoin—once neutrality is compromised, what’s the difference from those regulated coins?
View OriginalReply0
  • Pinned