Your signal. Your price.
Unlike upgrades like SegWit or Taproot, which establish rules for unclaimed script space, BIP 110 is an invasive soft fork designed to restrict active user behavior. This fundamental difference alters the social dynamics of user-activated soft fork enforcement.
Peter Wuille suggested using variable commitment styles to integrate post-quantum witness data. This approach avoids introducing a third transaction identifier, allowing unupgraded nodes to process transaction traffic using standard SegWit witness commitments.
Simon Dixon recounts the 2017 block war involving Barry Silbert's Digital Currency Group and the New York Agreement, which advocated for SegWit 2X, a move Bank To The Future opposed by supporting the user-activated soft fork.
Dixon describes the current debate around BIP 110 as Bitcoin's "second block war," or potentially fourth/fifth when including earlier debates like Bitcoin XT, Bitcoin Classic, and the 2017 block war over SegWit2X.
Dixon highlights the 2017 New York Agreement, where venture capitalists like Barry Silbert (Digital Currency Group) tried to centralize Bitcoin companies around SegWit2X, opposing the user-activated soft fork.