⚡️BIP-110 should die.
The proposal crosses Bitcoin’s constitutional line by turning a faction’s judgment about acceptable transaction purpose into consensus law.
Once that precedent survives, every future coalition learns the same lesson: capture enough developers, miners, companies, or public opinion, manufacture an emergency, then rewrite neutrality in the name of protecting the network.
That is how political money is born.
Bitcoin’s deepest property is not merely the 21 million cap. It is the credible assurance that nobody can easily alter the rules governing property after capital enters. Scarcity without rule stability is fragile. Ownership without neutral settlement is conditional. A monetary constitution that changes whenever a powerful faction declares a use illegitimate eventually becomes another discretionary system.
The data-storage externality is real. Nodes carry costs that individual users may not fully pay. Bitcoin must still address measurable burdens through fees, relay policy, technical efficiency, and conservative engineering. The network cannot begin judging what bytes mean. The moment consensus distinguishes virtuous transactions from undesirable transactions, miners stop serving a market and begin enforcing an ideology.
Saylor sees the danger clearly because this is Bitcoin’s post-victory phase.
External attacks strengthened the network. Bans failed. Ridicule failed. Competing coins failed to capture its monetary consensus. Institutional adoption now introduces the subtler threat: ownership and influence concentrating around custodians, mining pools, ETF issuers, exchanges, treasury companies, regulated intermediaries, and security consortiums.
Bitcoin remains decentralized in code while economic power around the code becomes increasingly centralized.
That is the real terrain.
The institutions entering Bitcoin will initially swear loyalty to neutrality. Later they will discover regulatory obligations, reputational concerns, national-security demands, sanctioned addresses, prohibited content, environmental mandates, and “systemic risks.” Each exception will arrive as a narrow necessity. Every narrow necessity will create infrastructure for the next exception.
The capture sequence is predictable:
First, undesirable behavior is identified.
Then neutrality is framed as irresponsibility.
Then restrictions are presented as temporary protection.
Then dissenters are accused of endangering adoption.
Then the exception becomes precedent.
Then Bitcoin still exists, but ownership increasingly requires permission.
BIP-110 is dangerous because its activation design tries to manufacture inevitability before genuine consensus exists. A contentious cultural dispute does not justify coercive signaling, bundled restrictions, uncertain compatibility costs, or chain-split risk. The technical flaws found around late upgrades make the entire exercise even more reckless.
Bitcoin has reached the stage where the people claiming to protect it may become more dangerous than the people trying to destroy it.
The enemy at the gate could not rewrite the ledger.
The faction inside the walls might persuade participants to rewrite it themselves.
Bitcoin survives victory only if every proposed exception encounters a culture strong enough to ask one question:
Does this preserve neutral, voluntary, permissionless property, or does it give somebody new power over somebody else’s transaction?
BIP-110 gives a faction new power.
Reject it.
I’ll soon be sponsoring a bill to withhold federal money from municipalities and police departments that deploy Flock (and other style) cameras to surveil law abiding citizens.
@thebitcoinyogi - I'm having issues claiming the 10k sats from the Sound HSA Summer Challenge. The error is "Error: Invalid pay service params" when I click 'Complete challenge now'.
Any chance you could help me out please? 🙏
Donald Trump's plan to stop the chemical, physical and emotional mutilation of America's youth.
1. "Revoke Joe Biden's cruel policies on so-called gender-affirming care."
2. "Sign a new executive order instructing every federal agency to cease all programs that promote the concept of s*x and gender transition at any age."
3. "Ask Congress to permanently stop federal taxpayer dollars from being used to promote or pay for these procedures and pass a law prohibiting child s*xual mutilation in all 50 states."
4. "Declare that any hospital or healthcare provider that participates in the chemical or physical mutilation of minor youth will no longer meet federal health and safety standards for Medicaid and Medicare and will be terminated from the program immediately."
5. "Support the creation of a private right of action for victims to sue doctors who have unforgivably performed these procedures on minor children."
6. "The DOJ will investigate big pharma and the big hospital networks to determine whether they have deliberately covered up horrific long-term side effects of s*x transitions in order to get rich at the expense of vulnerable patients."
7. "Investigate whether big pharma or others have illegally marketed hormones and puberty blockers, which are in no way licensed or approved for this use."
8. "Inform states and school districts that if any teacher or school official suggests to a child that they could be trapped in the wrong body, they will be faced with severe consequences."
9. "Promote positive education about the nuclear family, the roles of mothers and fathers, and celebrating rather than erasing the things that make men and women different and unique."
10. "Ask Congress to pass a bill establishing that the only genders recognized by the United States government are male and female, and they are assigned at birth."
11. "Protect the rights of parents from being forced to allow their minor child to assume a gender which is new and an identity without the parent's consent."
In 1997, CNN - through its reporter Peter Arnett - interviewed Osama bin Laden about why he declared "jihad against the US"
That's what journalists have always done.
Now Erin Burnett insinuates Tucker Carlson is a traitor for interviewing Putin: the decay of US journalism.