Protocol
The Fork Went Through, and the Timeline Spent the Day Deciding Whether to Grieve
BIP110's soft-fork bid died at the signaling stage; its backers split off anyway with a new proof-of-work — and by evening the argument had moved from whether it would happen to what a chain split actually costs.
The obituary came from Contra, filed late Monday night: BIP 110’s dead. 2.6% signaling against a 55% bar. Not close.
His post-mortem went further than the vote count. Dashjr wrote it. Ocean backed it by default. Then Ocean’s own DATUM system let a miner on its own pool mine right past it, no signal, no problem. The guy’s decentralization tool decentralized right past the guy.
And then the departure itself: Now he’s out. Chairman, CTO, director, all of it. Equity bought back.
The rejected rule did not stay rejected — it left. By Tuesday the BIP110 faithful were running their own chain with a changed proof-of-work, and the evidence was scattered across the day like debris: daum3ns pointed people at a CPU miner for it, Paul Allen relayed that BIPcoin difficulty increases by 300%
, Stacker News carried word of a BIP110-to-BTC swap site — filed, pointedly, under a humor board — and Garth asked the only practical question anyone had: Is XBT the agreed ticker?
Logen's greeting was three words: Welcome to the chain split
.
Most of the room shrugged. TheBitcoinManual spoke for the majority position: I got no issue with people wanting to fork, just don't see how it's going to solve the issue they're trying to resolve. If someone finds a way to embed data in this forked chain, they're back to square 1
. Jack Spirko, a miner tired of being cast in a conspiracy, put it flatly: I mine, I could have switched, instead I did nothing. I can assure you there was no back room meeting.
The dissent worth reading came from Jack K, whose gloomier take drew 2,121 sats — the day's fifth-largest zap. It’s probably a good time to have another 80%+ downturn.
he wrote. To me, a chainsplit is very very bearish short term.
In a longer note he argued the damage is not measured in hash: The main chain still has essentially all of its mining power, but it has objectively lost part of the physical system that previously represented one synchronized history.
His summary: The hash didn’t meaningfully divide. The redundant memory of bits divided.
His plan, meanwhile, was pure pragmatism: I will be asking to be paid in both chains. Few.