Dathon Ohm / BIP-110

ATTENTION. THIS IS NOT A DRILL. BIP-110 mandatory signaling begins at block height 961632 (in about 6580 blocks or about 45 days from now). All miners must begin signaling readiness for BIP-110 (versionbit 4) by that time, or their blocks will be discarded as invalid. (1/8)

Run a BIP110-ready node today and join the thousands of other node operators defending Bitcoin's identity and purpose as decentralized money. See bip110.org for details.

With just 3842 blocks (~26 days) left until blocks not signaling readiness for BIP-110 start being rejected, support for BIP-110 has never been stronger and shows no signs of slowing down.

@jasonsvoboda This post is 100% lies. You clearly did not read my thread at all, because it does not contain the content you quoted.

Knots/BIP-110 is an attempt to hijack Bitcoin development under the guise of spam deterrence using various mistruths and emotional manipulation tactics. Statements like Dathon's below, fearmongering that it's "Bitcoin's last stand" or the "Death of Bitcoin" if you don't support it, the "Us vs Them" tribal framing -- it is straight out of the propaganda playbook. You can disagree with Core's decision on how to handle arbitrary data, but it was a consensus decision backed by over 30 developers after debate (including changes to Peter Todd's original submission). This pits one individual's vision against a collaborative group process. Which brings me to the hijack. Both Knots and BIP-110 are maintained by single developers with no other credited contributors on their GitHub repos (don't trust, verify -- go check the Contributors section). Shifting from Bitcoin Core's team of maintainers plus 1,000+ historical contributors to solo-led forks introduces significant centralization and security concerns. All of this for an insoluble technical problem to boot hence the "temporary" nonsense. If it could be done, do you not think Luke would have found something in the 13+ years he has worked on it since Satoshi Dice? But hey, it was fun while it lasted, wasn't it?

@BitcoinScoresby If a large and growing portion of the Bitcoin economy is promising to reject certain blocks at a future height, it is very likely that all nodes will reject those same blocks by the time that height is reached. This mechanism was proven in 2017 with BIP-148.

@dathon_ohm Calling the minority of the network running RDTS "The Bitcoin Network" is a bit presumptuous.

ATTENTION. IN ONE MONTH, THE BITCOIN NETWORK WILL START REJECTING BLOCKS THAT DO NOT SIGNAL READINESS FOR BIP-110, A SOFTFORK TO REJECT THE ARBITRARY DATA STORAGE USE CASE, THEREBY REAFFIRMING THAT BITCOIN IS MONEY. (1/)

@murchandamus @BitcoinScoresby Hi Murch - As you know, Bitcoin Cash was a hardfork, while BIP-110 is a softfork, so BIP-110 is much closer to Segwit/BIP-148 than Bitcoin Cash.

@BitcoinScoresby @dathon_ohm Same shit, different decade: x.com/murchandamus/s…

@_colourorange It seems we are holding steady at around 1% signaling. I expect miners to flip the bit rather suddenly, once the pressure from the node operator community becomes overwhelming.

as of block 957527, 11 out of 1362 blocks (0.8%) have signaled for BIP110 extrapolating this to the entire signaling period, we can expect signaling period 15 to reach a whopping 16 signaling blocks, an all-time high previously set by signaling period 13 wickedsmartbitcoin.com/bip110_signali…

@cryptoquick @kelo6102 I don't think we are in disagreement.

@dathon_ohm @kelo6102 You have it backwards, brother. It is they who have officially sanctioned 110 by complying with the protocol!

With only 4236 blocks (~29 days) left until non-BIP110-signaling blocks become invalid, BIP-110's hashrate continues to climb to new all-time highs, as Bitcoin's movement to reject arbitrary data attains unstoppable momentum.

@bitnorbert @BlueDavid It is a very small and targeted protocol change, but its effect will be to return Bitcoin to 2022, with respect to data spam. I think it would be a stretch to say it is "not a protocol change".

@dathon_ohm @BlueDavid So you support the view that BIP-110 is not a protocol change?

What Lyn seems to be missing is that BIP110 is not a protocol change, but a correction to fix the mess that Core has done. We are getting Bitcoin to be how it was in 2022.

@BTCnotWW3 @dotkrueger Your support is appreciated 🙏

Signal support and run a one click node here bip110.org @dathon_ohm @dotkrueger I don't have many followers, but you have my sppport!

In Mar '25 the Bitcoin Core devs changed bitcoin to allow large files. That is an attack vector from govt. E.g. Kiddie porn on all nodes which would make the node runner liable. BIP-110 resticts data and ensures Bitcoin stays as money. #bip110

@TheBoozles @LukeDashjr @FlyTheElephant1 There is a fork of Bitcoin Core 31 that includes RDTS. It is missing some peering features that make a UASF smoother. I won't make an official release unless that's done, and I may not have time soon. But feel free to test and give feedback.

@LukeDashjr @FlyTheElephant1 Didn't @dathon_ohm post a Core version of some sort a while ago?

I've been hearing a lot of panic from the core side about node centralization because of BIP110 and I would like to make something very clear: YOU CAN RUN BIP110 ON CORE TOO.

@foisee @kelo6102 It is indeed concerning that Core 30 has officially sanctioned at least two separate methods of arbitrary data storage on Bitcoin.

@dathon_ohm @kelo6102 Sanctions on bitcoin, sounds awesome.

@flaming_hodl @LukeDashjr You are correct that what you heard is a misunderstanding, at best. (At worst, it's simply a lie.) Readiness for BIP-110 continues to accelerate as the community upgrades to BIP110-enforcing nodes, and no disruptions are expected, since there is no opposition.

I heard in a space recently someone said BIP-110 will be delayed by the main proponents (@dathon_ohm and @LukeDashjr ) because of lack of support. How can they misunderstand this movement that bad? There can't be a delay at this stage, it's locked in and ready for launch.

@DibalikCrypto2 💪

@dathon_ohm #BIP110 ready!

@lmqevp Looking good 💪 Yes, you will need to consent to the new consensus rules in order to use your node. There is also a build option to implicitly accept the RDTS rules if you want to build from source.

@dathon_ohm $ bitcoin-cli --version Bitcoin Knots RPC client version v29.3.knots20260508 And don't forget to activate the RDTS. You'll be prompted by the GUI, but if you aren't using one, you must add consensusrules=rdts in the [main] section of bitcoin.conf

ATTENTION. THIS IS NOT A DRILL. BIP-110 mandatory signaling begins at block height 961632 (in about 6580 blocks or about 45 days from now). All miners must begin signaling readiness for BIP-110 (versionbit 4) by that time, or their blocks will be discarded as invalid. (1/8)

@GrassFedBitcoin > 5. Can spammers find ways to spam Bitcoin that BIP-110 does nothing about? Not really, due to second-order effects: proper maintenance of node software means spam filters will be kept up to date.

Facts to get comfortable with for the next month: 1. Is BIP-110 going to have a positive effect at reducing *institutionalized* usage of Bitcoin as a data storage platform? Yes 2. Is that the reason many people support it? Yes 3. Is that the primary motivation for BIP-110? No 4. What is the primary motivation? Disabling methods of data storage specifically opened or cited as "already possible" with Core v30 5. Can spammers find ways to spam Bitcoin that BIP-110 does nothing about? Yes 6. Is spam better fought at the policy level with sensible defaults in the reference implementation of Bitcoin? Yes 7. Are consensus changes like BIP-110 ever going to be a good substitute for that? No 8. Can we ever stop spam completely? No 9. Can we ever give up trying to reduce it? No

@cryptoquick @EllenBTC21M Thank you for your support, Hunter! 🙏

@dathon_ohm @EllenBTC21M So happy for you dude We have the truth on our side Our mission is righteous We will expose all the fucking liars and retards and it will be so glorious and beautiful

@kelo6102 @cryptoquick Any new scheme would not be officially sanctioned.

cant ordinals just patch a new envelope scheme? doesnt it do nothing for runes, and runes are like more then 90% of the current arbitrary data in the past few months? also seems like there havent really been much large opreturns, tho wouldnt it be the ideal place. i just dont see how it actually rejects arbitrary data if arbitrary data can easily go around it.

@kelo6102 By invalidating all officially sanctioned methods of storing files larger than 256 bytes for one year.

@dathon_ohm how does bip110 reject arbitrary data?

Keep upgrading those nodes to the latest Knots and signal for BIP-110!