Bitcoin Nears Chain Split as BIP-110 Rebels Defy Global Hashpower

Bitcoin is closing in on a possible chain split after block 961,632 as BIP-110 backers prepare to enforce rules that barely register across the network’s computing power.

The real fight is not simply over the restrictions, but over the activation method chosen by supporters. BIP-110 sets a 55% miner signaling threshold, far below the roughly 95% level associated with several earlier Bitcoin upgrades. It also tells enforcing nodes to reject nonsignaling blocks after block 961,632, even if those blocks carry nearly all of the network’s computing power. That distinction matters because code can enforce a rule, but it cannot manufacture hashpower, liquidity or economic legitimacy.

With support hovering near 2.5%, that minority chain could crawl at first, producing blocks far slower than Bitcoin’s normal rhythm of roughly one every 10 minutes. Mining difficulty would eventually reset, but before that adjustment, confirmations could take hours or even longer. The dominant Bitcoin chain should continue processing blocks without any meaningful interruption.

Bitcoin holders could technically own coins on both chains because each side would share the same history before the split. That technical duplication does not create demand. A forked coin still needs functioning wallets, committed miners, exchange listings, custody support, developers, and willing buyers before it becomes anything beyond copied ledger entries.

“Every morning I wake up, open the X app, search for ‘BIP-110,’ and block a few people with the term in their names before breakfast.”

Major centralized exchanges have issued almost no public guidance on BIP-110, and none have committed to listing a separate token. With nearly every dollar of economic activity expected to stay on the main chain, exchanges have little incentive to secure, list, or maintain a fringe asset.

“ATTN: Hardblock stackers BIP-110 activation is expected around 7–8 August. We may temporarily pause buying, selling, deposits and withdrawals while monitoring the network. If you plan to move to self-custody, consider doing so – with care – sooner than later. Please RT or send to a friend – especially if they’re a Hardblock customer.”

Public announcements from large international exchanges (Coinbase, Binance, Kraken, etc.), major custodians (Bitgo, Fireblocks, Anchorage, etc.), or other large infrastructure players have stayed very quiet.

That silence looks nothing like 2017, when exchanges regularly published detailed instructions before Bitcoin forks. Platforms halted deposits and withdrawals, prepared fresh trading pairs, and walked customers through claiming duplicated coins. Those operational headaches were justified when rival chains arrived with credible miners, active communities, and obvious speculative demand.

Blackrock’s spot bitcoin ETF and Strategy’s corporate treasury embody a holder class that barely existed during the original fork mania. These institutions will not automatically recognize a minority asset. Custody contracts, regulatory requirements, and security controls may block clients or shareholders from receiving forked tokens, even when the underlying private keys technically control matching balances.

The first hard checkpoint is block 961,632, when BIP-110 nodes are scheduled to reject nonsignaling blocks. Block 963,648 marks the final possible lock-in point under the proposal’s mandatory route, while the full data limits could activate at block 965,664 on any chain that successfully secures lock-in.

For ordinary holders using BTC or leaving funds with major exchanges, no action is presently required. Anyone chasing coins on a minority chain would face replay hazards, unstable wallets, poor infrastructure, and possible private-key exposure. Similar claims during the 2017 fork cycle often delivered rewards worth far less than the security risk required to collect them.