Adam Back and Michael Saylor, prominent figures in the Bitcoin ecosystem, opposed BIP 110, which aims to restrict certain transactions on the network. Both argue that its adoption could undermine the fundamental principles of Bitcoin and set a dangerous precedent.
Adam Back, co-founder of Blockstream and inventor of Hashcash, argued that BIP 110 is an attempt to audit user transactions. According to Back, the proposal contradicts Bitcoin’s principles of decentralization, permissionless use, and censorship resistance.
Back also warned that if the proposal is not moved forward without sufficient network-wide support, it could lead to a Bitcoin chain split, or fork. He said it was wrong to block transactions that comply with Bitcoin network rules based on their content.
Related news Serious allegations of manipulation surround an Altcoin: its value has almost completely evaporated
Strategy Chairman Michael Saylor also opposed BIP 110, saying the proposal directly turned a debate over spam into a change in consensus rules.
Saylor pointed out that BIP 110 would invalidate certain transfers that are currently valid and subject to transaction fees under existing rules. Arguing that such a move could set an extremely dangerous precedent for the Bitcoin network, Saylor said: “There are 110 things more dangerous than spam for Bitcoin. »
According to Saylor, the community needs to focus its energy not on limiting the transactions that can be carried out on the network, but on the more fundamental security and centralization risks that threaten Bitcoin.
*This does not constitute investment advice.
