BIP-110 Fork Stalls After Two Blocks as Miner Support Collapses to 2.53%

Two blocks in eight hours. That is the entire output of the BIP-110 enforcing fork as of Sunday, August 9, 2026, a number that tells you everything about where miner sentiment stands on this proposed Bitcoin protocol change.

Miner support for BIP-110 sits at 2.53%, a figure so far below the 55% threshold required for activation that the fork has effectively flatlined before it started. The branch remains pinned at Bitcoin's full mining difficulty, a brutal position for a chain with almost no hashpower behind it. Under normal conditions, a chain mining at full Bitcoin difficulty with a fraction of a percent of the network's hashrate would produce blocks at a glacial pace. That is precisely what is happening here.

The mechanics are straightforward: an enforcing fork requires miners to signal support and, eventually, to direct their hashrate toward the new chain. Without that hashpower, block times stretch from Bitcoin's target of roughly ten minutes into hours. Two blocks in eight hours implies an effective block time of around four hours, consistent with a chain capturing well under 1% of the network's total hashrate in practice, regardless of what the signaling numbers show on paper.

"The enforcing fork remains stuck at Bitcoin's full mining difficulty as mandatory signaling proceeds with little hashpower support."

Bitcoin's consensus mechanism has a long memory for moments like this. The 2017 SegWit2x attempt, which had the backing of a significant portion of the mining industry and major exchanges, ultimately collapsed when it became clear that node operators and developers would not follow. Bitcoin Cash launched that same year with more genuine miner support than BIP-110 is showing now, and even that fork has spent nearly a decade as a minority chain. BIP-110 is not even clearing that bar at the starting line.

The failure cuts both ways analytically. Critics of Bitcoin's governance model will note that the network's high activation thresholds make meaningful protocol upgrades difficult to push through, regardless of their technical merit. Proponents of BIP-110 could argue that miner signaling in the early hours of a fork launch is not the final word, and that support could consolidate if developers or large economic actors publicly back the change. Historically, though, forks that fail to generate momentum in the first 24 to 48 hours rarely recover. The economic incentives for miners to stay on the dominant chain are simply too strong once it becomes clear a fork lacks broad consensus.

For now, BIP-110 looks like another entry in Bitcoin's growing list of failed contentious forks. The network's resistance to changes that lack genuine supermajority support is a feature to most Bitcoin holders and a frustration to those who believe the protocol needs updating. What Sunday's data makes clear is that whoever proposed BIP-110 did not do the coalition-building work required to move Bitcoin's most important constituency: the miners who secure the chain.