If Bitcoin is not optimized for financial activity, people will transact off chain using trusted third parties, and the blockchain will increasingly consist of junk data no one wants to store. The assertion that Bitcoiners will out-price spammers is contrary to all evidence.

Half and half is not cream.

Of course BIP-110 can fail. For the exact same reason that Bitcoin itself can fail. Users failing to meaningfully enforce its rules on a widespread enough basis. That is all Bitcoin is and making that the priority is the motivation for the BIP in the first place. Don't burden decentralized verification with anything else. *Ever*.

Prompting Grok to save me time reading/rebutting Lopp's hit piece against BIP-110. Pretty decent summary.

According to bitnodes(.)io 7.8% of nodes are BIP-110. Luke's stats have it more like 5.7%. I'm sure some nodes have been spun up for appearances (equally sure that's true of Core nodes). I think it's fair to say there's already some genuine grass roots support for BIP-110 whilst virtually zero from companies/miners. It remains to be seen whether that's sufficient to draw in others. One thing of note is that if it came the other way around (no grassroots support, but big companies and miners all pushing for it) that'd be a far greater red flag and I'm glad it's happening the way it is.

Hence BIP-110 View quoted note →

BIP-110 fixes taproot. Until now it has making Bitcoin less efficient at being money due to the OP_IF nonsense. We have been consuming the same resources and facilitating *less* monetary activity as a result of taproot. The alternative ways of stashing data it provides will be largely parried by the second order consequences of successful activation of BIP-110. Vid 👇