Recently, discussions in the community regarding the BIP-110 proposal have gradually intensified. This proposal suggests to temporarily limit the size of certain data fields at the consensus layer to correct incentive distortions caused by the standardization supporting arbitrary data, and to refocus priorities on enhancing Bitcoin's functionality as a currency.

We believe that such discussions exemplify the strength of Bitcoin as a decentralized consensus system. Over the past decade, the Bitcoin network has consistently allowed for the coexistence of different ideologies and technical paths. From the SegWit2x controversy in 2017 to the subsequent Bitcoin Cash fork, the system has shown the ability to continue evolving amid disagreements.

Currently, the node signaling percentage for BIP-110 shows an upward trend. According to public data:

• January 25, 2026: 2.98% (729 / 24482 nodes)
• February 23, 2026: 7.99% (1995 / 24981 nodes)

BIP-110 Ready Nodes

This means an increase of about 5% within a month. There remains uncertainty as to whether the proposal can ultimately reach the activation threshold, requiring continued observation.

In this context, we believe that products and services within the Bitcoin ecosystem should be technically prepared for various possible outcomes, rather than making judgments based on emotional stances or predetermined outcomes.

Fractal's Original Design Intent and Role Positioning

One of the core design goals of Fractal Bitcoin is to provide an environment that can support more complex states and data expressions without changing the consensus rules of the Bitcoin mainnet.

If the mainnet imposes stricter restrictions on certain data types at the consensus layer in the future, Fractal can serve as a technically compatible layer, providing an alternative path for asset state continuity.

As we previously discussed in our prior discussions:

For Ordinals, censorship on Bitcoin has always been a concrete and explicit risk. If one day Bitcoin maintainers take a stance that “Ordinals are spam and should be blocked in future versions,” Fractal Bitcoin can retain all inscriptions from the Bitcoin mainnet with minimal additional data expenditure, corresponding to only 1/38 of the data scale of the former.

It is important to emphasize:

• Fractal is not an alternative fork
• It is also not a confrontational response to mainnet decisions
• It does not presume any specific governance outcome

Its role is more similar to a "buffer layer," providing continuity assurance for assets at different stages of consensus evolution.

Possible Scenarios Regarding "Temporary Restrictions"

BIP-110 is described as a temporary restriction lasting one year.

In this context, if related assets are constrained on the mainnet, Fractal can serve as a temporary hosting environment; if the restrictions are lifted after a year, assets can also return to the mainnet.

The specific technical implementation path still has further research and optimization space, but the principles are clear:

• Do not disrupt mainnet consensus
• Do not force migration
• Do not create market panic
• Only provide optional solutions

Our Position

As ecosystem participants, we respect the consensus results that Bitcoin ultimately forms.

Regardless of the direction of BIP-110, the healthy development of the ecosystem should not be built on opposition, but rather on technical readiness and rational discussion.

The existence of Fractal is not to create divisions, but to provide a technological buffer space when disagreements arise.

免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。