A minority Bitcoin chain split by BIP-110 supporters mined just two blocks over eight hours before stalling at 2.53% mining support, far below the 55% needed to activate. The fork inherited main-chain difficulty and faces roughly 350 days until it can adjust, making revival unlikely while replay risks persist for anyone trying to trade fork coins.
BIP-110, or Bitcoin Improvement Proposal 110, is a soft fork that would temporarily ban non-financial data including images and text embedded in Bitcoin transactions for one year, or 52,416 blocks. Supporters pushed the proposal as a user-activated soft fork after miners signaled support at just 2.53%, well short of the 55% threshold required for standard BIP-9 activation. When the mandatory signaling period began at block 961,632 around 19:35 UTC on August 7, 2026, a small group of BIP-110 supporters split their nodes from the main chain. The fork mined its first block around 6 a.m. UTC on August 9, followed by a second roughly eight hours later, then stalled completely. As of that same morning, the main Bitcoin chain had reached block 961,681, advancing 48 blocks in the time the fork produced just two.
BIP-110 would ban non-financial data in Bitcoin transactions for roughly one year.
Only 2.53% of miners signaled support, far below the 55% needed for activation without a fork.
The fork mined just two blocks in about eight hours before stalling at block 961,634.
Both chains accept identical transactions, creating replay risk for anyone selling fork coins.
Block difficulty adjustment could take around 350 days at current hash rates, compared with 14 days on mainnet.
What BIP-110 proposes and why it split
BIP-110 is a consensus change that would temporarily restrict several data-carrying constructions on Bitcoin for 52,416 blocks, roughly one year. According to the BIP-110 specification, the rules invalidate new output scriptPubKeys exceeding 34 bytes, OP_PUSHDATA payloads over 256 bytes, witness stacks with Taproot annexes, Taproot control blocks larger than 257 bytes, and Tapscripts using OP_SUCCESS or OP_IF/OP_NOTIF opcodes. UTXOs created before activation are grandfathered, so existing coins remain spendable under the old rules. Supporters argue the changes reduce congestion and lower costs for payment transactions by removing what they describe as non-financial data abuse that diverts development focus away from Bitcoin's monetary function.
The fork was always unlikely to succeed. According to CoinDesk reporting, miner support for BIP-110 never exceeded 2.5% during the two-week signaling window that ended at block 963,647. Prominent Bitcoin figures including Strategy chairman Michael Saylor and Blockstream CEO Adam Back publicly opposed the proposal, as reported by CoinDesk on July 19, 2026. BIP-110 supporters framed the effort as a user-activated soft fork, pointing to the 2017 activation of SegWit via BIP-148 as precedent where node operators forced activation without sufficient miner support. The analogy drew criticism given the difference in technical complexity and community consensus around each upgrade.
How the fork stalled mechanically
Bitcoin recalculates mining difficulty every 2,016 blocks, targeting a ten-minute block interval. The breakaway chain inherited the main network's current difficulty setting but commands only a tiny fraction of total hashing power. According to the BIP-110 situation monitor operated by Orange Surf, the fork would need approximately 350 days to complete enough blocks for a difficulty adjustment at the pace observed after the first two blocks. By comparison, the main Bitcoin network adjusts difficulty every 2,016 blocks, roughly every 14 days. The fork cannot become viable through difficulty reduction alone within any reasonable timeframe, and no additional miners have signaled intent to join it.
AntPool mined the first block that the main chain accepted but BIP-110 nodes rejected, according to CoinDesk. A miner operating under the name Ocean produced the alternative block that the breakaway chain adopted. Both AntPool and Ocean are mining pools, meaning many individual operators combine their hardware and share rewards rather than mining as solo operators. No other major pools have announced support for the fork chain.
Replay risk for holders
Both the main Bitcoin chain and the BIP-110 fork accept identical transactions because the fork has not yet diverged its consensus rules at a depth that would invalidate main-chain transactions. According to CoinDesk reporting on August 8, this creates a replay attack vector: a transaction signed to send fork coins can be rebroadcast on the main Bitcoin network, where it is also valid. A buyer receiving fork coins could broadcast that same signed transaction on the main chain and collect real BTC, leaving the seller with nothing on either chain. The attack does not drain an entire wallet, only the specific coins used in the signed transaction, but it requires paying transaction fees on both chains.
Developers have warned that built-in replay protection may not arrive until at least early September, according to the same CoinDesk report. Until the chains diverge sufficiently to make replay impossible, the safest action for holders is to leave their coins untouched rather than attempt to sell or trade the fork version. The stall on the fork chain, producing only one block every several hours, further complicates any attempt to move or trade fork coins, since confirmations arrive too slowly to be practical for commerce.
Why this matters for Bitcoin governance
BIP-110 represents one of the most contentious attempts at user-activated soft fork activation in Bitcoin's recent history. The 2017 SegWit activation through BIP-148 succeeded because the technical change was narrowly scoped, widely understood, and supported by a broad coalition of node operators, miners, and exchanges. BIP-110 lacks that coalition. The opposition from major figures in the Bitcoin ecosystem, combined with the near-zero miner support, suggests the proposal does not represent a broad consensus even among those who favor restricting data on the Bitcoin network.
The fork itself, despite having virtually no economic or technical momentum, still demonstrates that a determined minority can create an alternate Bitcoin chain. Whether that chain survives depends on whether any economic activity emerges around it. So far, no exchange has listed a BIP-110 fork token, and no significant trading volume has appeared. The replay risk remains the most tangible consequence for everyday Bitcoin holders, who may receive fork coins through airdrops or wallet updates without realizing they now hold assets on two chains with unresolved spending rules.
Conclusion
The BIP-110 fork produced two blocks in eight hours and then stopped, confirming that without majority miner support and without replay protection, a minority chain has no viable path to activation or economic activity. The episode reinforces that user-activated soft forks require not just technical willingness but broad ecosystem coordination, and that Bitcoin's difficulty adjustment mechanism makes it exceptionally difficult for a low-hashrate fork to reach self-sustaining block times.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is BIP-110?
BIP-110 is a Bitcoin soft fork proposal that would temporarily ban non-financial data such as images and text in transactions for roughly one year, or 52,416 blocks, by invalidating several data-carrying script constructions at the consensus level.
Why did the BIP-110 fork fail?
The fork failed because only 2.53% of miners signaled support, far below the 55% threshold required for BIP-9 activation. Without sufficient hashing power, the fork inherited main-chain difficulty and could only produce blocks hours apart, making it economically nonviable.
What is a replay attack in this context?
A replay attack occurs when a transaction signed to spend fork coins is also valid on the main Bitcoin chain. Since both chains currently accept identical transactions, a buyer could rebroadcast a fork-coin sale on mainnet and collect real BTC, leaving the seller with nothing.
When does the mandatory signaling period end?
The mandatory signaling window for BIP-110 runs from block 961,632 to block 963,647. At the current pace on the fork chain, that deadline will pass without the required 55% signaling, confirming the fork will not activate on mainnet.
Is there any path for the fork to recover?
The fork would need to attract significant new mining hash rate or wait approximately 350 days for a difficulty adjustment. Neither outcome appears likely given the lack of exchange listings, trading volume, or miner announcements supporting the chain.
Top comments (0)