BTC BIP-110 chain split stalls quickly

TLDR

Bitcoin briefly split into two chains under the contentious BIP-110 rules, but the minority enforcing chain stalled after just two blocks, leaving the main Bitcoin network clearly dominant.

1. BIP-110 enforced a temporary anti spam soft fork that triggered a chain split at block 961632, with miners overwhelmingly continuing on the regular Bitcoin chain.
2. The BIP-110 chain produced only two blocks in roughly eight hours before stalling, falling dozens of blocks behind due to tiny hashpower and inherited mainnet difficulty.
3. Mainnet operations and major exchanges remain normal, but users should stay aware of replay and governance risks as BIP-110 backers discuss more radical moves like a proof of work change.

Deep Dive

1. What BIP-110 Did And How The Split Happened

BIP-110 is a proposed user activated soft fork that temporarily restricts certain non financial data in Bitcoin transactions, aimed at curbing Ordinals style inscriptions and perceived spam. Coverage from TokenPost and Crypto.news explains that it entered its mandatory signaling window at block 961632 with only about 2.5 percent of prior blocks signaling, far below the 55 percent lock in threshold.

At block 961632 on 8 Aug 2026, nodes enforcing BIP-110 began rejecting blocks that did not signal bit 4, producing a competing chain when Ocean and Roughnecks mined a BIP-110 compliant block while Antpool mined the regular version on the dominant chain. Multiple outlets confirm the split, including detailed monitoring from Crypto.news and Bitcoin.com.

2. Why The Enforcing Chain Stalled So Quickly

Reports from CryptoSlate and TradingView show the BIP-110 enforcing chain managed just two blocks, 961632 and 961633, in around eight hours before stalling, while the dominant chain rapidly advanced to heights like 961681 to 961731, leaving the fork dozens of blocks behind. With only roughly 2 to 3 percent of recent blocks signaling, the minority fork inherited Bitcoins difficulty of about 127 trillion but had almost no hashpower, so its block times stretched to roughly seven hours on average instead of ten minutes.

Yahoo Finance characterizes the fork as an anti spam chain that sputtered because it shared mainnet difficulty yet lacked miners, estimating it would take hundreds of days for the minority chain to reach its next difficulty adjustment at current support levels here. Critics like Michael Saylor and Adam Back argue this shows Bitcoins governance working as designed, with consensus staying on the main chain while a small minority experiments on a separate branch.

3. Risks, Next Moves And Governance Signals

Even with the BIP-110 chain stalled, technical risks exist. Crypto.news notes that transactions can be valid on both chains, creating replay risk if the minority branch ever regains life without clear separation, for example via different address formats or replay protection.

Bitcoin.com and Crypto.news also report that BIP-110 backers are debating a proof of work change on the minority chain as a contingency, with developers like Chris Guida preparing code to switch algorithms if miners refuse the soft fork here. That would turn the fork into an outright altcoin, with separate security and economic dynamics.

For governance, the episode shows that a user activated soft fork can still trigger a chain split, but without sustained miner and ecosystem backing it is unlikely to displace the dominant chain. Major exchanges such as Coinbase and Kraken reportedly continued normal operations on mainnet during the split, underscoring where liquidity and practical support remain.

Conclusion

The BIP-110 test demonstrated that a small group of node operators can create a minority fork, but without broad miner support that chain quickly stalls while Bitcoins mainnet continues normally. The split and its rapid collapse highlight both Bitcoins resilience to contentious proposals and the need for careful handling of replay and governance issues whenever soft forks are attempted.